Full Version: Jwm As In Puppy?
OESF Forums > Distros, Development, and Model Specific Forums > Distro Support and Discussion > Ubuntu
Has anyone considered running jwm in jaunty? I tried it with default settings from the icewm menu, and it clearly needed some keymapping and tweaks, but I seem to recall that jwm is actually lighter than ice, and might be worth the effort.
JWM is about the same heaviness as IceWM, IIRC. It also lacks some things (like full-screen maximization), leading me to dump it.
If you want light, go EvilWM. You need to edit the source to reconfigure keybindings, but it works wonders.
Also know that some of the heaviness/slowness you may be feeling is due to Ubuntu not using Zaurus-friendly optimizations.
Hope that helps.
If you want light, go EvilWM. You need to edit the source to reconfigure keybindings, but it works wonders.
Also know that some of the heaviness/slowness you may be feeling is due to Ubuntu not using Zaurus-friendly optimizations.
Hope that helps.
QUOTE(Capn_Fish @ Apr 21 2009, 10:52 AM) 
JWM is about the same heaviness as IceWM, IIRC. It also lacks some things (like full-screen maximization), leading me to dump it.
If you want light, go EvilWM. You need to edit the source to reconfigure keybindings, but it works wonders.
Also know that some of the heaviness/slowness you may be feeling is due to Ubuntu not using Zaurus-friendly optimizations.
Hope that helps.
If you want light, go EvilWM. You need to edit the source to reconfigure keybindings, but it works wonders.
Also know that some of the heaviness/slowness you may be feeling is due to Ubuntu not using Zaurus-friendly optimizations.
Hope that helps.
Ice is fine, I simply seemed to recall jwm being actually lighter and looking pretty similar.Quite possibly I am mistaken.
I wouldn't mind desktop icons and better matching of input with the Z though
I don't think either IceWM or JWM has desktop icons. You could use something like PCManFM to do it, which shouldn't eat TOO much memory.
I may be wrong about my RAM usage/lightness comparisons, but I seem to recall that JWM, IceWM, and EvilWM actually used similar amounts of RAM (as reported by top). Fluxbox was ever so slightly heavier. Like I said, the speed differences are likely more due to lack of optimization and/or what tasks are running at the time.
What do you mean by "better matching of input with the Z?"
I may be wrong about my RAM usage/lightness comparisons, but I seem to recall that JWM, IceWM, and EvilWM actually used similar amounts of RAM (as reported by top). Fluxbox was ever so slightly heavier. Like I said, the speed differences are likely more due to lack of optimization and/or what tasks are running at the time.
What do you mean by "better matching of input with the Z?"
QUOTE(Capn_Fish @ Apr 22 2009, 03:17 PM)
I don't think either IceWM or JWM has desktop icons. You could use something like PCManFM to do it, which shouldn't eat TOO much memory.
I may be wrong about my RAM usage/lightness comparisons, but I seem to recall that JWM, IceWM, and EvilWM actually used similar amounts of RAM (as reported by top). Fluxbox was ever so slightly heavier. Like I said, the speed differences are likely more due to lack of optimization and/or what tasks are running at the time.
What do you mean by "better matching of input with the Z?"
I may be wrong about my RAM usage/lightness comparisons, but I seem to recall that JWM, IceWM, and EvilWM actually used similar amounts of RAM (as reported by top). Fluxbox was ever so slightly heavier. Like I said, the speed differences are likely more due to lack of optimization and/or what tasks are running at the time.
What do you mean by "better matching of input with the Z?"
I didn't think JWM supported icons, just mentioning it as something handy.
Better input matching meant menu keymapping, ability to use the "screen buttons," that sort of thing. I'm sure much of it can be done manually.
Well, having the menu hotkeyed would require a program that interfaces with the menubar/WM (eg, Fluxbox's fluxbox-remote) or some WM hotkey file (eg, ~/.fluxbox/keys). I don't think JWM has that (I haven't looked recently, though), and I have no clue about IceWM.
The silkscreen keys are another thing altogether. I believe Angstrom supports them, so if you use their kernel, they should at least give X events. From there it's just a keymapping process.
The silkscreen keys are another thing altogether. I believe Angstrom supports them, so if you use their kernel, they should at least give X events. From there it's just a keymapping process.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.