Re: Gateway4?

[Rafael Vicaría Alloza <rafael.vicaria%ibm.net@localhost>]

Hello Ignatios,

On Tuesday, 15-Jun-99, 20:18:05, 
Ignatios Souvatzis <is%jocelyn.rhein.de@localhost> wrote about:
Re: Gateway4?:

> On Mon, Jun 14, 1999 at 10:59:24PM +0200, Rafael Vicaría Alloza wrote:
>> Hello Ignatios,

>> On Sunday, 13-Jun-99, 20:42:40, 
>> Ignatios Souvatzis <is%jocelyn.rhein.de@localhost> wrote about:
>> Re: Gateway4?:

>>> On Sun, Jun 13, 1999 at 07:03:22PM +0200, Rafael Vicaría Alloza wrote:
>>>> Would it be possible to set Fvwm instead of twm as default wm in
>>>> NetBSD1.4.1?

>>> You can do so, if you wish, yourself. 

>> Well, yes.

>>> But as fvwm (and you didnt even
>>> mention which version of it) is not part of the base X distribution, we
>>> simply can't do this.


>> Sory about not mentioning which version. I got fvwm from the OpenBSD2.4
>> cdrom, and it started nicely after typing startx (in b&w though). Whether
>> the X distribution included in the mentioned cdrom is part of the base X
>> distribution or not, frankly I can't tell.

> This still is no _fvwm version number_.

I said sorry.

I wrote:

> I'll check the fvwm version ASA my wife gets out of her"new" Mac IIci...  
<g>.

No wonder I didn't write any version number...   <g>.

Anyway, to the point.

#man fvwm 

gives 2.xx, which is not of great help, I guess...   

#man ver, #man version, #which ver, #which version, no luck.

#apropos version | grep fvwm

fvwm2 (2.xx) - F(?) Virtual Window Manager (version 2.xx) for X11



If you know a better way to find out how to tell you what you want, please
be my guest.



>  but anyway: we have ready-to-build
> fvwm and fvwm2 and fvwm95 and afterstep packages in our package tree.
> Maybe even binary ones for your cpu. 

That's great news. Thank you very much for all your effort. It is very much
appreciated.

Anyway, I'm still investigating the huge offer on  window managers.  There's
a lot to investigate. It goes without saying that variety is the spice of
life, though...   B-)


>But deciding that you want one of
> them instead of twm, or one of a dozen others, and installing into your
> machine, and write them into your .xsession, is your decision... 

Sure! It's my decision in the first place to run NetBSD/amiga,
OpenBSD/mac68k, AmigaOS, MacOS.
That's what I have at home. At the office, it's not my decision. Guess
what...   <g>

I'm not complaining.  I  find the "free unices" just too good to be truth.
It's amazing that it was very hard to get one's hands on a unix system a
few years ago, don't think about installing it in your home computer, and
now, WOW!

And it's all because of all the volunteers writing and polishing code. WOW!


> and if I
> may add, even at the user level, not at the sysadmin level.

Look. I'm learning unix at MY pace,. It's my decision. It's my time. I'm
happy with it. I'm completely delighted with all the varieties of unix I
can get for nothing and try them and study them and change them and
everything.

And what should I care about user level or sysadmin level? What is that? I
get a # prompt every time I login as root. If I screw it all, it's my
fault, I know. I'm learning. At MY pace.

Are you telling me that there's so much to be learnt yet on my part? That's
old news...   <g>

> We provide ready-to-compile, or even binary, packages of non-base stuff.
> You decide what you want to have. :-)

I don't write the default installation settings. Of course I can modify
anything. I am root, in my little computer. Everybody is when installing
unix. Do you know how to install a unix system without root privileges? Is
it possible?

> E.g., I, personally, still am using an old afterstep-1.0.

Thanks for your opinion. afterstep is within my candidates. twm is not.
There's a lot of research to be done on my part though.

But now, coming to my first question:

/Now that you mention that, errr..., ehem.../
//
/Would it be possible to include an "afterboot man page", like OpenBSD2.4?/
//
/I found it very useful. It's like a checklist of the initial config
settings/
/one needs to do right after booting. Quite nice./
//
/I have NetBSD 1.3.2 straight from Gateway3! cd, up and running with X, but
I/
/have a lot of things to do yetwith it. But I'll have to upgrade to 1.4.x
as/
/soon as I get an AriadneII, to connect this A3000 to the Mac IIci with/
/ethernet running OpenBSD2.4. I just got it working a few minutes ago, with/
/Fvwm running on X. I feel quite happy about it...   B-)/

I honestly believe that the suggestion above is constructive feedback.



Best regards

---Rafa


-- 
>...olive oil is the way to go!<
mailto:rafael.vicaria%homemail.com@localhost