getting the most out of TWM

[Retrograde]

From the «hey, default» department:
Title: Getting the most out of TWM, X11’s default window manager
Author: Thom Holwerda
Date: Mon, 08 Jul 2024 12:17:49 +0000
Link: https://www.osnews.com/story/140172/getting-the-most-out-of-twm-x11s-default-window-manager/

Graham’s TWM page[1] has been around for like two decades or so and still isn’t
even remotely as old as TWM itself, and in 2021 they published an updated
version with even more information, tips, and tricks for TWM[2]. The Tab Window
Manager finds its origins in the lat 1980s, and has been the default window
manager for the X Windowing System for a long time, now, too. Yet, few people
know it exists – how many people even know X has a default window manager? –
and even fewer people know you can actually style it, too.

OK, so TWM is fairly easy to configure but alot of people, upon seeing the
default config, scream ‘Ugh, thats awful!’ and head off to the ports tree or
their distro sources in search of the latest and greatest uber desktop
environment.

There are some hardcore TWM fans and mimimalists however who stick around and
get to liking the basic feel of TWM. Then they start to mod it and create
their own custom dekstop. All part of the fun in Unix :).
↫ Graham’s TWM page[1]

I’ll admit I have never used TWM properly, and didn’t know it could be themed
at all. I feel very compelled to spend some time with it now, because I’ve
always liked the by-now classic design where the right-click desktop menu
serves as the central location for all your interactions with the system. There
are quite a few more advanced, up-to-date forks of TWM as well, but the idea of
sticking to the actual default X window manager has a certain charm.

I almost am too afraid to ask, because the answer on OSNews to these sorts of
questions is almost always “yes” – do we have any TWM users in the audience?
I’m extremely curious to find out if TWM actually has a reason to exist at this
point, or if, in 2024, it’s just junk code in the X.org source repository,
because I’m looking at some of these screenshots and I feel a very strong urge
to give it a serious go.

Links:
[1]: https://www.cpcnw.co.uk/twm/twmrc.htm (link)
[2]: https://www.cpcnw.co.uk/twm2/Grahams_TWM_page2.html (link)

[candycanearter07]

Post by Retrograde
Title: Getting the most out of TWM, X11’s default window manager
Author: Thom Holwerda
Date: Mon, 08 Jul 2024 12:17:49 +0000
Link: https://www.osnews.com/story/140172/getting-the-most-out-of-twm-x11s-default-window-manager/
Graham’s TWM page[1] has been around for like two decades or so and still isn’t
even remotely as old as TWM itself, and in 2021 they published an updated
version with even more information, tips, and tricks for TWM[2]. The Tab Window
Manager finds its origins in the lat 1980s, and has been the default window
manager for the X Windowing System for a long time, now, too. Yet, few people
know it exists – how many people even know X has a default window manager? –
and even fewer people know you can actually style it, too.
OK, so TWM is fairly easy to configure but alot of people, upon seeing the
default config, scream ‘Ugh, thats awful!’ and head off to the ports tree or
their distro sources in search of the latest and greatest uber desktop
environment.
There are some hardcore TWM fans and mimimalists however who stick around and
get to liking the basic feel of TWM. Then they start to mod it and create
their own custom dekstop. All part of the fun in Unix :).
↫ Graham’s TWM page[1]
I’ll admit I have never used TWM properly, and didn’t know it could be themed
at all. I feel very compelled to spend some time with it now, because I’ve
always liked the by-now classic design where the right-click desktop menu
serves as the central location for all your interactions with the system. There
are quite a few more advanced, up-to-date forks of TWM as well, but the idea of
sticking to the actual default X window manager has a certain charm.
I almost am too afraid to ask, because the answer on OSNews to these sorts of
questions is almost always “yes” – do we have any TWM users in the audience?
I’m extremely curious to find out if TWM actually has a reason to exist at this
point, or if, in 2024, it’s just junk code in the X.org source repository,
because I’m looking at some of these screenshots and I feel a very strong urge
to give it a serious go.
[1]: https://www.cpcnw.co.uk/twm/twmrc.htm (link)
[2]: https://www.cpcnw.co.uk/twm2/Grahams_TWM_page2.html (link)

Interesting. I think I tried TWM during my search for "the perfect
desktop environment" and passed on it pretty quick. If it's as
customizable as claimed here, I might give it another shot.

[D]

Post by candycanearter07

Title: Getting the most out of TWM, X11’s default window manager
Author: Thom Holwerda
Date: Mon, 08 Jul 2024 12:17:49 +0000
Link: https://www.osnews.com/story/140172/getting-the-most-out-of-twm-x11s-default-window-manager/
Graham’s TWM page[1] has been around for like two decades or so and still isn’t
even remotely as old as TWM itself, and in 2021 they published an updated
version with even more information, tips, and tricks for TWM[2]. The Tab Window
Manager finds its origins in the lat 1980s, and has been the default window
manager for the X Windowing System for a long time, now, too. Yet, few people
know it exists – how many people even know X has a default window manager? –
and even fewer people know you can actually style it, too.
OK, so TWM is fairly easy to configure but alot of people, upon seeing the
default config, scream ‘Ugh, thats awful!’ and head off to the ports tree or
their distro sources in search of the latest and greatest uber desktop
environment.
There are some hardcore TWM fans and mimimalists however who stick around and
get to liking the basic feel of TWM. Then they start to mod it and create
their own custom dekstop. All part of the fun in Unix :).
↫ Graham’s TWM page[1]
I’ll admit I have never used TWM properly, and didn’t know it could be themed
at all. I feel very compelled to spend some time with it now, because I’ve
always liked the by-now classic design where the right-click desktop menu
serves as the central location for all your interactions with the system. There
are quite a few more advanced, up-to-date forks of TWM as well, but the idea of
sticking to the actual default X window manager has a certain charm.
I almost am too afraid to ask, because the answer on OSNews to these sorts of
questions is almost always “yes” – do we have any TWM users in the audience?
I’m extremely curious to find out if TWM actually has a reason to exist at this
point, or if, in 2024, it’s just junk code in the X.org source repository,
because I’m looking at some of these screenshots and I feel a very strong urge
to give it a serious go.
[1]: https://www.cpcnw.co.uk/twm/twmrc.htm (link)
[2]: https://www.cpcnw.co.uk/twm2/Grahams_TWM_page2.html (link)

Interesting. I think I tried TWM during my search for "the perfect
desktop environment" and passed on it pretty quick. If it's as
customizable as claimed here, I might give it another shot.

Why did you pass on it?

[candycanearter07]

This message is in MIME format. The first part should be readable text,
while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools.
--8323328-1325646568-1720951175=:17764
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT

Post by candycanearter07

Post by Retrograde
Title: Getting the most out of TWM, X11’s default window manager
Author: Thom Holwerda
Date: Mon, 08 Jul 2024 12:17:49 +0000
Link: https://www.osnews.com/story/140172/getting-the-most-out-of-twm-x11s-default-window-manager/
Graham’s TWM page[1] has been around for like two decades or so and still isn’t
even remotely as old as TWM itself, and in 2021 they published an updated
version with even more information, tips, and tricks for TWM[2]. The Tab Window
Manager finds its origins in the lat 1980s, and has been the default window
manager for the X Windowing System for a long time, now, too. Yet, few people
know it exists – how many people even know X has a default window manager? –
and even fewer people know you can actually style it, too.
OK, so TWM is fairly easy to configure but alot of people, upon seeing the
default config, scream ‘Ugh, thats awful!’ and head off to the ports tree or
their distro sources in search of the latest and greatest uber desktop
environment.
There are some hardcore TWM fans and mimimalists however who stick around and
get to liking the basic feel of TWM. Then they start to mod it and create
their own custom dekstop. All part of the fun in Unix :).
↫ Graham’s TWM page[1]
I’ll admit I have never used TWM properly, and didn’t know it could be themed
at all. I feel very compelled to spend some time with it now, because I’ve
always liked the by-now classic design where the right-click desktop menu
serves as the central location for all your interactions with the system. There
are quite a few more advanced, up-to-date forks of TWM as well, but the idea of
sticking to the actual default X window manager has a certain charm.
I almost am too afraid to ask, because the answer on OSNews to these sorts of
questions is almost always “yes” – do we have any TWM users in the audience?
I’m extremely curious to find out if TWM actually has a reason to exist at this
point, or if, in 2024, it’s just junk code in the X.org source repository,
because I’m looking at some of these screenshots and I feel a very strong urge
to give it a serious go.
[1]: https://www.cpcnw.co.uk/twm/twmrc.htm (link)
[2]: https://www.cpcnw.co.uk/twm2/Grahams_TWM_page2.html (link)

Interesting. I think I tried TWM during my search for "the perfect
desktop environment" and passed on it pretty quick. If it's as
customizable as claimed here, I might give it another shot.

Why did you pass on it?
--8323328-1325646568-1720951175=:17764--

It felt kinda confusing to use, and I think the auto-startup script I
had broke on it.

[Mike Spencer]

Post by Retrograde
Link: https://www.osnews.com/story/140172/getting-the-most-out-of-twm-x11s-default-window-manager/
Graham's TWM page[1] has been around for like two decades or so and
still isn't even remotely as old as TWM itself....few people know it
exists -- how many people even know X has a default window manager?
-- and even fewer people know you can actually style it, too.

I've been using twm since 1999. My very first Linux install (Caldera)
came up with KDE and XEmacs by default. I had used uwm -- even fewer
frills that twm -- on Unix guest accounts for a decade before that.
So real soon, switched to Slackware, GNU Emacs and twm. Never looked
back.

An annoyance I've encountered with twm is that in more recent
Linuxen, programs have specs for their own icons. So, e.g., when you
iconify xterm, Seamonkey or Firefox, you get great, huge icons rather
than minimal ones just big enough to hold the related window's title.

I keep a column of icons stacked down the left side of my screen --
emacsen, xterms some of which hold running apps such as wicd-curses,
dmesg -w or tail -f, Seamonkey etc. and a non-iconified xclock. The
icons are all small and the column tidy. Huge icons screw it up.

Tnx to Ivan Shmakov (comp.misc, 09 Sep 2017) I learned how to fix
that. In .twmrc I have:

ForceIcons
Icons {
"UXTerm" "vlines2"
"XTerm" "vlines2"
"Firefox" "vlines2"
"SeaMonkey" "vlines2"
"Emacs" "vlines2"
}

where the left column is what is returned by xprop(1) for a given
window and my be camel case:

WM_CLASS(STRING) = "Navigator", "SeaMonkey"

With this fix in .twmrc, all icons are just big enough to hold the
window title.

The only other annoyance is that some programs won't run unless they
can find a system "tray". I use wicd-curses (for which I have been
reproved somewhat snarkily) because NetworkManager(8) is one of them
and wicd-curses(8) works fine in an xterm.

I see there is some stuff about "stand-alone tray" usable with twm but
I haven't yet pursued it.

BTW, I run XEarth for my root window. Does anybody have/know the
location of the source code for XEarth? I'd hate to give it up when
I'm eventually forced into 64 bits and I seem to have lost the source
if I ever had it.

Post by Retrograde
[1]: https://www.cpcnw.co.uk/twm/twmrc.htm (link)
[2]: https://www.cpcnw.co.uk/twm2/Grahams_TWM_page2.html (link)

Thanks for the pointers. Configuring twm is "easy" but the details
tend to be opaque. Examples such and those are invaluable.

[Aharon Robbins]

Post by Mike Spencer
BTW, I run XEarth for my root window. Does anybody have/know the
location of the source code for XEarth? I'd hate to give it up when
I'm eventually forced into 64 bits and I seem to have lost the source
if I ever had it.

I have put xearth 1.1 up on my site: https://www.skeeve.com/xearth-1.1.tar.gz.

Get it while it's hot, I may not leave it there forever.

Enjoy,

Arnold

[Mike Spencer]

Post by Aharon Robbins

Post by Mike Spencer
BTW, I run XEarth for my root window. Does anybody have/know the
location of the source code for XEarth? I'd hate to give it up when
I'm eventually forced into 64 bits and I seem to have lost the source
if I ever had it.

I have put xearth 1.1 up on my site: https://www.skeeve.com/xearth-1.1.tar.gz.
Get it while it's hot, I may not leave it there forever.

Excellent! Splendid! Compiles and behaves as exected with my
existing markerfile and usual command line. And I'll have it if/when
the dreaded departure from the trailing edge of technology to 64 bits
occurs.

And new features to play with as well!

I usually have a north polar display (-pos "fixed 90 -63.8") with
only Nova Scotia, Ulan Bator and the pole marked.

TYVM!

[Aharon Robbins]

Post by Mike Spencer

Post by Aharon Robbins

Post by Mike Spencer
BTW, I run XEarth for my root window. Does anybody have/know the
location of the source code for XEarth? I'd hate to give it up when
I'm eventually forced into 64 bits and I seem to have lost the source
if I ever had it.

I have put xearth 1.1 up on my site: https://www.skeeve.com/xearth-1.1.tar.gz.
Get it while it's hot, I may not leave it there forever.

Excellent! Splendid! Compiles and behaves as exected with my
existing markerfile and usual command line. And I'll have it if/when
the dreaded departure from the trailing edge of technology to 64 bits
occurs.
And new features to play with as well!
I usually have a north polar display (-pos "fixed 90 -63.8") with
only Nova Scotia, Ulan Bator and the pole marked.
TYVM!

You're welcome. I have some older versions as well, it seems.
Pleas email me privately if you are interested.

Arnold

[Mike Spencer]

Post by Aharon Robbins

Post by Mike Spencer
BTW, I run XEarth for my root window. Does anybody have/know the
location of the source code for XEarth? I'd hate to give it up when
I'm eventually forced into 64 bits and I seem to have lost the source
if I ever had it.

I've put xearth 1.1 up on my site: https://www.skeeve.com/xearth-1.1.tar.gz

Excellent! Splendid! Compiles and behaves as expected with my
existing markerfile and usual command line. And I'll have it if/when
the dreaded departure from the trailing edge of technology to 64 bits
occurs.
[snip]
TYVM!

You're welcome.

Oy! A quick look at your home page reveals an attributed quote from
Yours Truly! Fame (or is that notoriety?) comes in very tiny snippets.

A similar snippet unrelated to computers may be found on page 2 of

https://www.rockyforge.org/newsletters/rfn_v6i12.pdf

Good yarns related to otherwise inexplicable objects found in the lab
(basement, server room, wiring cabinet etc.) are less traditional than
those from the blacksmith shop but not entirely unknown (magic switch?).

Post by Aharon Robbins
I have some older versions as well, it seems.
Please email me privately if you are interested.

Noted, tnx.

[Johanne Fairchild]

Post by Mike Spencer

Post by Mike Spencer
BTW, I run XEarth for my root window. Does anybody have/know the
location of the source code for XEarth? I'd hate to give it up when
I'm eventually forced into 64 bits and I seem to have lost the source
if I ever had it.

I've put xearth 1.1 up on my site: https://www.skeeve.com/xearth-1.1.tar.gz

[...]

Post by Mike Spencer
Oy! A quick look at your home page reveals an attributed quote from
Yours Truly! Fame (or is that notoriety?) comes in very tiny snippets.

It's indeed nice one.

--8<-------------------------------------------------------->8---
A nice quote, by Mike Spencer: The command line is like language. The
GUI is like shopping.

Source: https://www.skeeve.com/
--8<-------------------------------------------------------->8---

[Lawrence D'Oliveiro]

Post by Aharon Robbins
https://www.skeeve.com/xearth-1.1.tar.gz.

Is that different from this <https://xearth.org/>?

[vallor]

Post by Aharon Robbins

Post by Mike Spencer
BTW, I run XEarth for my root window. Does anybody have/know the
location of the source code for XEarth? I'd hate to give it up when I'm
eventually forced into 64 bits and I seem to have lost the source if I
ever had it.

https://www.skeeve.com/xearth-1.1.tar.gz.
Get it while it's hot, I may not leave it there forever.
Enjoy,
Arnold

I'd love to run this on my root X window, but xfce seems
to want to cover it up with its own desktop. Even
tried a transparent image as a background, but it still
covered the root window with a solid color.

Does anyone know how to get xfce to get out of the way,
and let me see the root X window in all its glory?

Also: did a diff -r with the code from xearth.org, and
it's all the same code. (That's a good thing. :)

Thanks,

[Retrograde]

Post by vallor
I'd love to run this on my root X window, but xfce seems
to want to cover it up with its own desktop. Even
tried a transparent image as a background, but it still
covered the root window with a solid color.
Does anyone know how to get xfce to get out of the way,
and let me see the root X window in all its glory?

Possibly some help here:
https://forums.freebsd.org/threads/xearth-and-the-root-window-how.9952/
https://docs.xfce.org/xfce/xfdesktop/start

Will probably involve starting xfdesktop initial configuration, if you
can find the right xfce startup script to modify.

[Bozo User]

Post by Mike Spencer

Post by Retrograde
Link: https://www.osnews.com/story/140172/getting-the-most-out-of-twm-x11s-default-window-manager/
Graham's TWM page[1] has been around for like two decades or so and
still isn't even remotely as old as TWM itself....few people know it
exists -- how many people even know X has a default window manager?
-- and even fewer people know you can actually style it, too.

I've been using twm since 1999. My very first Linux install (Caldera)
came up with KDE and XEmacs by default. I had used uwm -- even fewer
frills that twm -- on Unix guest accounts for a decade before that.
So real soon, switched to Slackware, GNU Emacs and twm. Never looked
back.
An annoyance I've encountered with twm is that in more recent
Linuxen, programs have specs for their own icons. So, e.g., when you
iconify xterm, Seamonkey or Firefox, you get great, huge icons rather
than minimal ones just big enough to hold the related window's title.
I keep a column of icons stacked down the left side of my screen --
emacsen, xterms some of which hold running apps such as wicd-curses,
dmesg -w or tail -f, Seamonkey etc. and a non-iconified xclock. The
icons are all small and the column tidy. Huge icons screw it up.
Tnx to Ivan Shmakov (comp.misc, 09 Sep 2017) I learned how to fix
ForceIcons
Icons {
"UXTerm" "vlines2"
"XTerm" "vlines2"
"Firefox" "vlines2"
"SeaMonkey" "vlines2"
"Emacs" "vlines2"
}
where the left column is what is returned by xprop(1) for a given
WM_CLASS(STRING) = "Navigator", "SeaMonkey"
With this fix in .twmrc, all icons are just big enough to hold the
window title.
The only other annoyance is that some programs won't run unless they
can find a system "tray". I use wicd-curses (for which I have been
reproved somewhat snarkily) because NetworkManager(8) is one of them
and wicd-curses(8) works fine in an xterm.
I see there is some stuff about "stand-alone tray" usable with twm but
I haven't yet pursued it.
BTW, I run XEarth for my root window. Does anybody have/know the
location of the source code for XEarth? I'd hate to give it up when
I'm eventually forced into 64 bits and I seem to have lost the source
if I ever had it.

Post by Retrograde
[1]: https://www.cpcnw.co.uk/twm/twmrc.htm (link)
[2]: https://www.cpcnw.co.uk/twm2/Grahams_TWM_page2.html (link)

Thanks for the pointers. Configuring twm is "easy" but the details
tend to be opaque. Examples such and those are invaluable.

Similar, but with CWM or Blackbox with Emacs. Blackbox has no keybindings
support, so everything goes into Emacs. As I launch it at ~/.xinitrc before
blacbox, it works perfectly fine.

[John McCue]

<snip>

Post by Bozo User

Post by Mike Spencer
Thanks for the pointers. Configuring twm is "easy" but the details
tend to be opaque. Examples such and those are invaluable.

Similar, but with CWM or Blackbox with Emacs. Blackbox has no
keybindings support, so everything goes into Emacs. As I launch
it at ~/.xinitrc before blacbox, it works perfectly fine.

blackbox use to have builtin key bindings, but the author
moved all that logic to a separate utility called bbkeys, I
think for version 6. IIRC, bbkeys could be used with other
window managers back then.

https://github.com/bbidulock/bbkeys

A lot of people did not like that change and I believe fluxbox
was created as a result. At the time I thought it was a decent
idea.

[John McCue]

Title: Getting the most out of TWM, X11?s default window manager
Author: Thom Holwerda
Date: Mon, 08 Jul 2024 12:17:49 +0000
Link: https://www.osnews.com/story/140172/getting-the-most-out-of-twm-x11s-default-window-manager/
Graham's TWM page[1] has been around for like two decades
or so and still isn't

Wow, that long, does not seem like it.

even remotely as old as TWM itself, and in 2021 they published an updated
version with even more information, tips, and tricks for TWM[2]. The Tab Window
Manager finds its origins in the lat 1980s, and has been the default window
manager for the X Windowing System for a long time, now, too. Yet, few people
know it exists ? how many people even know X has a default window manager? ?
and even fewer people know you can actually style it, too.

With vdesk(1) you can even have pusedo separate desktops.

http://offog.org/code/vdesk.html

[Scott Alfter]

Title: Getting the most out of TWM, X11's default window manager
Author: Thom Holwerda
Date: Mon, 08 Jul 2024 12:17:49 +0000
Link: https://www.osnews.com/story/140172/getting-the-most-out-of-twm-x11s-default-window-manager/
do we have any TWM users in the audience?

Bringing up a minimal Arch Linux setup the other day, I was tweaking .Xinit
(or its system-level equivalent). The stock file calls on twm, xterm, and
(IIRC) xeyes. Of the three, at least xterm needs to be installed because
the last line is "exec xterm" etc. (My plan was to run Chromium in kiosk
mode under Ratpoison.)

That said, back when I was in college in the early '90s, we had a lab full
of SPARCstation 1s (complete with those weird optical mice that needed
special pads to work) that defaulted to twm. A reasonably useful default
configuration was provided to open new xterm windows, run a few other apps,
etc.

Slightly more recently, I used twm at home closer to the mid-'90s on a
homebuilt beige-box 386SX running an early (most likely pre-1.0) version of
Linux. I had a monochrome fixed-frequency VGA monitor that was intended to
only do 640x480 at 60 Hz. I cobbled together a modeline that produced
800x600 at 50 Hz (taking a cue from the differences between NTSC and PAL)
and tweaked the vertical-hold knob until the image stopped rolling. I'd set
up twm on it similarly to how it was running on the aforementioned
SPARCstations. For 4 MB of RAM and 120 MB of disk, it wasn't bad at all. :)

[Lawrence D'Oliveiro]

Post by Scott Alfter
Of the three, at least xterm needs to be
installed because the last line is "exec xterm" etc.

Does that mean that last xterm process ends up being the parent of all
the other processes?

I ask because I keep trying to make sense of this little gem from the
“Unix-Haters Handbook”:

Unix teaches us about the transitory nature of all things, thus
ridding us of samsaric attachments and hastening enlightenment.

For instance, while trying to make sense of an X initialization
script someone had given me, I came across a line that looked like
an ordinary Unix shell command with the term “exec” prefaced to
it. Curious as to what exec might do, I typed “exec ls” to a shell
window. It listed a directory, then proceeded to kill the shell
and every other window I had, leaving the screen almost totally
black with a tiny white inactive cursor hanging at the bottom to
remind me that nothing is absolute and all things partake of their
opposite.

In the past I might have gotten upset or angry at such an
occurrence. That was before I found enlightenment through Unix.
Now, I no longer have attachments to my processes. Both processes
and the disapperance of processes are illusory. The world is Unix,
Unix is the world, laboring ceaslessly for the salvation of all
sentient beings.

I kept wondering how a process that ran under the GUI could be the
parent of everything else that ran under that GUI, including obviously
the window manager.

[Dan Espen]

Post by Lawrence D'Oliveiro

Post by Scott Alfter
Of the three, at least xterm needs to be
installed because the last line is "exec xterm" etc.

Does that mean that last xterm process ends up being the parent of all
the other processes?
I ask because I keep trying to make sense of this little gem from the
Unix teaches us about the transitory nature of all things, thus
ridding us of samsaric attachments and hastening enlightenment.
For instance, while trying to make sense of an X initialization
script someone had given me, I came across a line that looked like
an ordinary Unix shell command with the term “exec” prefaced to
it. Curious as to what exec might do, I typed “exec ls” to a shell
window. It listed a directory, then proceeded to kill the shell
and every other window I had, leaving the screen almost totally
black with a tiny white inactive cursor hanging at the bottom to
remind me that nothing is absolute and all things partake of their
opposite.
In the past I might have gotten upset or angry at such an
occurrence. That was before I found enlightenment through Unix.
Now, I no longer have attachments to my processes. Both processes
and the disapperance of processes are illusory. The world is Unix,
Unix is the world, laboring ceaslessly for the salvation of all
sentient beings.
I kept wondering how a process that ran under the GUI could be the
parent of everything else that ran under that GUI, including obviously
the window manager.

It's not the parent, it "holds" the X session. In the case of "exec
xterm", when xterm exits, the x session ends.

Something in your .xinitrc has to keep running or X will come up and
then stop running. I've seen mostly, users using the window manager
to hold the x session.

Personally, I use xlogout. My .xinitrc ends like this:

exec xlogout -iconic

I start the window manager in a looping shell so that I can kill the
window manager without X ending and have xprompt ask me what I want to do next.

[Lawrence D'Oliveiro]

Post by Dan Espen

Post by Lawrence D'Oliveiro
I kept wondering how a process that ran under the GUI could be the
parent of everything else that ran under that GUI, including obviously
the window manager.

It's not the parent, it "holds" the X session. In the case of "exec
xterm", when xterm exits, the x session ends.

Except it didn’t. In that example, the X server kept running, but there
was no window manager or any other X clients to actually let you do
anything with it.

[Mike Spencer]

Post by Dan Espen

Post by Lawrence D'Oliveiro
I kept wondering how a process that ran under the GUI could be the
parent of everything else that ran under that GUI, including obviously
the window manager.

It's not the parent, it "holds" the X session. In the case of "exec
xterm", when xterm exits, the x session ends.

Except it didn't. In that example, the X server kept running, but there
was no window manager or any other X clients to actually let you do
anything with it.

I've only excountered something similar to what you describe twice,
both apparently (but not certainly) caused by Netscape Navigator 4.76
(which I was using long ago but more recently than any normal person
:-).

The screen blanked and there was no response to *any* mouse or keyboard
events. Fixed by telnet over LAN from another computer in the same
room which revealed X still running. Killing X from the telnet login
returned the affected machine to the original login console.

That was with a system configured to use startx from the command line,
not a GUI X login at boot. That may make a difference -- I've never
done it that way except on Unix machines which someone else maintained.

Except for those two occasions, terminating the xterm started on the
last line of ~/.xinitrc by:

exec xterm -geometry 80x30+1+1 "#+1+40" -iconic -name 'X-login'

has always killed X cleanly and returned to the console.

It's my usual practice to launch anything not launched by .xinitrc
from that xterm.

[The Real Bev]

Post by Mike Spencer
That was with a system configured to use startx from the command line,
not a GUI X login at boot. That may make a difference -- I've never
done it that way except on Unix machines which someone else maintained.

I've done it that way since 1995. My experience with Windows indicated
that you should ALWAYS have a command line so you can fix whatever shit
the GUI is spewing.

[Lawrence D'Oliveiro]

Post by The Real Bev
My experience with Windows indicated
that you should ALWAYS have a command line so you can fix whatever shit
the GUI is spewing.

Unfortunately, the Windows command line often requires the use of Registry
edits, with those cryptic UUID keys, instead of simple, straightforward
*nix-style text config files. This makes things way too fiddly and error-
prone, even for Windows experts.

[The Real Bev]

Post by Lawrence D'Oliveiro

Post by The Real Bev
My experience with Windows indicated
that you should ALWAYS have a command line so you can fix whatever shit
the GUI is spewing.

Unfortunately, the Windows command line often requires the use of Registry
edits, with those cryptic UUID keys, instead of simple, straightforward
*nix-style text config files. This makes things way too fiddly and error-
prone, even for Windows experts.

I miss the days when each program had its own .ini file which could be
fixed if you did something stupid.

[Lawrence D'Oliveiro]

Post by The Real Bev

Post by Lawrence D'Oliveiro
Unfortunately, the Windows command line often requires the use of
Registry edits, with those cryptic UUID keys, instead of simple,
straightforward *nix-style text config files. This makes things way too
fiddly and error- prone, even for Windows experts.

I miss the days when each program had its own .ini file which could be
fixed if you did something stupid.

Text-based config files are clearly the way to go, which is why *nix
systems have stuck with them to this day.

Trouble is, Windows had no standard place to put them. So developers
scattered them all over the place. The Registry was Microsoft’s attempt to
get the mess under control. So now you have a mess of keys scattered all
over the Registry instead.

[The Real Bev]

Post by Lawrence D'Oliveiro

Post by The Real Bev

Post by Lawrence D'Oliveiro
Unfortunately, the Windows command line often requires the use of
Registry edits, with those cryptic UUID keys, instead of simple,
straightforward *nix-style text config files. This makes things way too
fiddly and error- prone, even for Windows experts.

I miss the days when each program had its own .ini file which could be
fixed if you did something stupid.

Text-based config files are clearly the way to go, which is why *nix
systems have stuck with them to this day.
Trouble is, Windows had no standard place to put them. So developers
scattered them all over the place. The Registry was Microsoft’s attempt to
get the mess under control. So now you have a mess of keys scattered all
over the Registry instead.

Putting an entire program and its .ini file in ONE subdirectory would
have been nice. Forget libraries unless they're all in one place and
their ownership (program, not user) and usage are clearly discernible.
I know it wasn't possible due to storage limitations back in Olden
tymes, but drives are dirt cheap now.

Wordstar and your files all fit on a floppy. We didn't appreciate what
we had!

[Lawrence D'Oliveiro]

Post by The Real Bev
Putting an entire program and its .ini file in ONE subdirectory would
have been nice.

I imagine that’s what they did, and that’s what led to the mess. That
means that, when you reinstall (or likely even upgrade), you lose your
original config customizations.

The right answer is what the Linux community came up with: a package
manager that can keep track of where all the bits go (executables, shared
libraries, read-only data etc), can manage common dependencies, and can
special-case configuration files so customizations don’t get lost (at
least not automatically) on an upgrade.

Post by The Real Bev
Wordstar and your files all fit on a floppy. We didn't appreciate what
we had!

I used an Apple Mac, back in the days when you didn’t even need
installers: just drag the apps off the distribution media onto your system
drive.

Those days are long gone. Modern problems need modern solutions.

[candycanearter07]

Post by Lawrence D'Oliveiro

Post by The Real Bev

Post by Lawrence D'Oliveiro
Unfortunately, the Windows command line often requires the use of
Registry edits, with those cryptic UUID keys, instead of simple,
straightforward *nix-style text config files. This makes things way too
fiddly and error- prone, even for Windows experts.

I miss the days when each program had its own .ini file which could be
fixed if you did something stupid.

Text-based config files are clearly the way to go, which is why *nix
systems have stuck with them to this day.
Trouble is, Windows had no standard place to put them. So developers
scattered them all over the place. The Registry was Microsoft’s attempt to
get the mess under control. So now you have a mess of keys scattered all
over the Registry instead.

And there's all the weird binary setting formats that apps use..

[Mike Spencer]

Post by The Real Bev

Post by Mike Spencer
That was with a system configured to use startx from the command line,
not a GUI X login at boot. That may make a difference -- I've never
done it that way except on Unix machines which someone else maintained.

I've done it that way since 1995. My experience with Windows indicated
that you should ALWAYS have a command line so you can fix whatever shit
the GUI is spewing.

Yeah, agree fully.

Just to be clear on "that way", it's the full-X, X-only logins I've
never done at home. As a guest on the Athena system many years ago,
fixing a system problem was far out of my league and mentioning such a
problem could result in a hacker demigod or two lurking over my carrel,
asking to see it repeated.

Post by The Real Bev
Buckle Up. It makes it harder for the aliens
to suck you out of your car.

Nice one.

https://www.newyorker.com/cartoons/daily-cartoon/wednesday-may-10th-roswell-trump

[Scott Dorsey]

I ran systems at a facility that had a number of Vaxstations using VMS
with the VWS windowing system as well as a few Sun machines running SunView.
These were both windowing systems without access to remote windows on
other systems, and without X behind them. Instead they used proprietary
ystems calls for window displays, and people liked the UIs.

We got X11r3 on some of the Sun systems, and I don't remember where we got
the kit from but it wasn't sunfreeware.com and it did some as a binary kit
that sat in /usr/local/X11. I started up the X server and got a nice grey
screen and couldn't do a damn thing with it. So I figured out that I needed
a script that started up a window manager and what came with it was twm.
But when I did this, I hardly got any more.

After looking into the man pages for a while, I figured out how to configure
a .twmrc file, and I did it with SunView in mind and set the thing up to
look as much like SunView as possible with a similar background, similar
menus and submenus, and similar mouse button operations. It was pretty good,
and people who were used to SunView liked it.

I thought of X11 at the time not as a windowing environment but as a kit
that you could use to build a winding environment. That's not how I had
started out thinking about it, but it's how I ended up.

I think it's still reasonable to think of twm this way. You can make it
however you want it, but it doesn't come with much. Man, it is so much
faster than struggling with gnome, though.
--scott

[Lawrence D'Oliveiro]

Post by Scott Dorsey
I ran systems at a facility that had a number of Vaxstations using VMS
with the VWS windowing system as well as a few Sun machines running
SunView. These were both windowing systems without access to remote
windows on other systems, and without X behind them. Instead they used
proprietary ystems calls for window displays, and people liked the UIs.

DEC were one of the prime sponsors of the initial development of X11. Not
too surprising they were so quick to abandon their own proprietary product
in favour of an X Windows-based one (which they did call “DEC Windows”).

Talking of Sun, did you ever have anybody use NeWS?