Running X programs from bash w/ framebuffer

This may seem really newbieish, but I have been running Gentoo for quite
some time now.

Is it possible to forego X altogether, and run things like firefox,
thunderbird, etc through the framebuffer from a bashprompt, rather than
starting X and going from there. The reason I ask, is I hate the bloat
of Gnome and KDE, and don't have the time to learn to configure fvwm or
fluxbox, etc. In addition, the X server has a lot to it that I don't
really need. This is just a personal desktop, and aside from setting up
samba to share mp3's with my fiance's computer (across the room), I
don't do provide any servers. I also generally don't use any graphical
utilities for setting up or maintaing the system. The only progs I
really use in X are, Firefox, Thunderbird, XMMS, Openoffice, and
occasionally KDevelop... mostly for editing my fvwm config.

Thanks in advance for any help.

Jeremy Abbott
jkbullfrog@comcast.net

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-newbie" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.linux-learn.org/faqs

Re: Running X programs from bash w/ framebuffer

What about a possible shell equivalent of XMMS, or at least an mp3
player with a que, I already know I can run elm as opposed to
Thunderbird? Also, is there a better (i.e. graphical) web-broweser that
runs from the command line? The only browsers I know of are links and lynx.

Eric Bambach wrote:

>Hi,
> I would say no. The X server isnt all too bloated if you use a lightweight
>window manager . Firefox, Openoffice, Xmms all use toolkits that need a
>backend X server to talk to. What gives you the impressions that X is that
>bloated? I would say just bite the bullet and search out a simple window
>manager. Sorry if anything doesn't make sense Im quite tired today, but I
>hope that answers your question.
>
>On Tuesday 11 January 2005 02:41 pm, you wrote:
>
>
>>This may seem really newbieish, but I have been running Gentoo for quite
>>some time now.
>>
>>Is it possible to forego X altogether, and run things like firefox,
>>thunderbird, etc through the framebuffer from a bashprompt, rather than
>>starting X and going from there. The reason I ask, is I hate the bloat
>>of Gnome and KDE, and don't have the time to learn to configure fvwm or
>>fluxbox, etc. In addition, the X server has a lot to it that I don't
>>really need. This is just a personal desktop, and aside from setting up
>>samba to share mp3's with my fiance's computer (across the room), I
>>don't do provide any servers. I also generally don't use any graphical
>>utilities for setting up or maintaing the system. The only progs I
>>really use in X are, Firefox, Thunderbird, XMMS, Openoffice, and
>>occasionally KDevelop... mostly for editing my fvwm config.
>>
>>Thanks in advance for any help.
>>
>>Jeremy Abbott
>>jkbullfrog@comcast.net
>>-
>>To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-newbie" in
>>the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
>>More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>>Please read the FAQ at http://www.linux-learn.org/faqs
>>
>>
>
>
>

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-newbie" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.linux-learn.org/faqs

Re: Running X programs from bash w/ framebuffer

>
> mpg123, a command-line mp3 player, can be run given a list of files to
> play. That's the closest I can think of to a playlist (what I assume
> you mean by a "que") capability in a CLI player. I didn't check, but
> the similar program mpg321 probably has the same capability.
>
>
Thanks, I will check into this.

> Yeah, or mutt or mush. I imagine pine is still around too. e-mail is
> easy for a CLI to handle.
>
I'm also just now checking into mutt, which is a prog I had forgotten
about. I used pine years ago when I was in high school.

> I'm seeing some references that indicate that links2 (a grapgical
> version of links) can run using svgalib, but the Debian binary seems
> to be compiled to use X libraries, so you may need to compile your own
> version. Take a look at the links upstream site --
> http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~clock/twibright/links/index .html --
> for the details.
>
The links I was refering to is links2, but I will look into using svgalib.

> The suggestion that you use X with a lightweight WM, which others have
> already made, really is good advice, probably much less work than
> diving down any of these rabbit holes. My own favorite in this respect
> is blackbox, though I think there are several others, such as your own
> example of fluxbox, that are also pretty good. With blackbox, I've run
> X on systems that have only 32 MB of RAM, with room to spare ...
> though some of the apps you are interested in themselves are too
> heavyweight for that.
>
I do have to ask you why using X is good advice (not to say your wrong),
my understanding, is that X is cobbled together adding code ontop of
code, to the point where it is barely readable. Aside from the bloat
(of which I was primarily writing of kde and gnome), I also have some
minor display problems with X. I have tried my monitor manufacturers
range of vertical and horizonatal syncs, but notice a flicker. I have
also tried tried the exact values my monitor tells me I have when I am
in Windowz XP (which is still on the system as backup, even though I
have abandoned it), and it doesn't flicker, but I see some kindof funky
lines, almost like my display is being slightly folded in on the top and
bottom. This could also have to do with the generic radeon driver I'm
running. I suppose I shall try installing the Ati drivers for X.

> Gentoo's source-based approach may make adding packages more trouble
> than, say, Debian or Fedora or Knoppix users have, but surely you're
> used to that aspect of Gentoo by now.
>
I personally have never had problems adding packages to Gentoo, aside
from the long compilation process, but this is always the case when
compiling sourcecode. I tried Debian once, but it would not recognize
my usb keyboard and mouse to install. I have never run Fedora, though I
did run Red Hat (I think 7.2) for a day, and quickly switched to
Mandrake which I found much better. I have also not tried Knoppix, but
thought it only to be like a LiveCD distro for recovery and the like.
What I like about Gentoo are the USE variabls I can choose before
compiling, without having to alter make files for each package. I have
heard that there is a similar deal to Gentoo's portage in Slackware, but
I have not tried it either.

> And the basic response you already received is also right ... apps
> familiar to us as X-based use shared libraries specific to X. They
> cannot write to a "raw" framebuffer.
>
To this I have to ask why? I know for a fact that I am not the only
person who has expressed this concern. Where is the next generation X
server? Don't tell me Xorg, cause that is what I'm running, and it aint
that different (not to sound to condescending).

I do however thank you for the help. I will be continuing to research this.

Jeremy Abbott
jkbullfrog@comcast.net

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-newbie" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.linux-learn.org/faqs

Re: Running X programs from bash w/ framebuffer

Ulrich Fürst wrote:

>Jeremy Abbott wrote:=20
> =20
>
>>This may seem really newbieish, but I have been running Gentoo for
>>quite some time now.=20
>>
>>Is it possible to forego X altogether, and run things like firefox,=20
>>thunderbird, etc through the framebuffer from a bashprompt, rather
>>than starting X and going from there. The reason I ask, is I hate th=
e
>>bloat of Gnome and KDE, and don't have the time to learn to configure
>> =20
>>
>
>You can start your programs from the console with X and without
>KDE/Gnome by typing:
>$ xinit /usr/bin/firefox -- :0
>or
>$ xinit /usr/bin/oowriter -- :1
>
>But I don't know exactly what you have to install (of X I mean). I'd
>think if you have fvwm installed to get used to it, there should be
>everything you need.=20
>
>hth
>
>Ulrich
>-
>To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-newbie=
" in
>the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
>More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>Please read the FAQ at http://www.linux-learn.org/faqs
>
> =20
>
I will try this, but am curious what the purpose of the -- :0 and the -=
-=20
:1 are. Is this in the man pages for X? Could this possibly be for=20
running more than one prog at a time, to switch between for the=20
console? If so how? Or should I also read the man page for this?

Thanks,
Jeremy Abbott
jkbullfrog@comcast.net

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-newbie"=
in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.linux-learn.org/faqs

Re: Running X programs from bash w/ framebuffer

Hi,
I would say no. The X server isnt all too bloated if you use a lightwe=
ight=20
window manager . Firefox, Openoffice, Xmms all use toolkits that need a=
=20
backend X server to talk to. What gives you the impressions that X is t=
hat=20
bloated? I would say just bite the bullet and search out a simple windo=
w=20
manager. Sorry if anything doesn't make sense Im quite tired today, but=
I=20
hope that answers your question.

On Tuesday 11 January 2005 02:41 pm, you wrote:
> This may seem really newbieish, but I have been running Gentoo for qu=
ite
> some time now.
>
> Is it possible to forego X altogether, and run things like firefox,
> thunderbird, etc through the framebuffer from a bashprompt, rather th=
an
> starting X and going from there. The reason I ask, is I hate the blo=
at
> of Gnome and KDE, and don't have the time to learn to configure fvwm =
or
> fluxbox, etc. In addition, the X server has a lot to it that I don't
> really need. This is just a personal desktop, and aside from setting=
up
> samba to share mp3's with my fiance's computer (across the room), I
> don't do provide any servers. I also generally don't use any graphic=
al
> utilities for setting up or maintaing the system. The only progs I
> really use in X are, Firefox, Thunderbird, XMMS, Openoffice, and
> occasionally KDevelop... mostly for editing my fvwm config.
>
> Thanks in advance for any help.
>
> Jeremy Abbott
> jkbullfrog@comcast.net
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-newbi=
e" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at http://www.linux-learn.org/faqs

--=20
----------------------------------------
--EB

> All is fine except that I can reliably "oops" it simply by trying to =
read
> from /proc/apm (e.g. cat /proc/apm).
> oops output and ksymoops-2.3.4 output is attached.
> Is there anything else I can contribute?

The latitude and longtitude of the bios writers current position, and
a ballistic missile.

                --Alan Cox LKML-Decembe=
r 08,2000=20

----------------------------------------
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-newbie"=
in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.linux-learn.org/faqs

Re: Running X programs from bash w/ framebuffer

On Tuesday 11 January 2005 03:28 pm, you wrote:
> What about a possible shell equivalent of XMMS, or at least an mp3
> player with a que, I already know I can run elm as opposed to
> Thunderbird? Also, is there a better (i.e. graphical) web-broweser t=
hat
> runs from the command line? The only browsers I know of are links an=
d
> lynx.

I think I misunderstood your request. You want to find ALTERNATIVES to =
those=20
programs that will run from the command line instead of running THOSE=20
programs from the command line right?

Good thoughts. There are command line MP3 players, how effective they a=
re Im=20
not sure. Some clever scripting will get you a playlist with command li=
ne=20
programs. You seem to be work adverse though (not installing fvwm etc.)=
As=20
far as webrowsers... all I know of is lynx. Be aware what you are tryin=
g to=20
do is a niche inside of a niche and your choice of programs may be smal=
l to=20
accomplish what you want to do. Furthermore you may sacrifice alot of=20
features that are only available to GUI-based programs such as playlist=
=20
queues. I said may because I really am not sure. Just something to thin=
k=20
about.

Emacs will let you do what you do in KDevelop(programming, syntax=20
highlighting) . Im sure you know about vi and vim too. Personally I pre=
fer=20
joe for stright text editing though.

Sorry for misunderstanding your request but now that I have it clear, I=
=20
haven't the foggiest clue of where to point you in terms of programs. A=
s=20
always check google, www.sourceforge.net and www.freshmeat.net :)

Good luck to you though. I certainly wouldn't do it, nor would I advise=
it,=20
but Im glad Linux gives you the freedom to! :)

> Eric Bambach wrote:
> >Hi,
> > I would say no. The X server isnt all too bloated if you use a
> > lightweight window manager . Firefox, Openoffice, Xmms all use tool=
kits
> > that need a backend X server to talk to. What gives you the impress=
ions
> > that X is that bloated? I would say just bite the bullet and search=
out a
> > simple window manager. Sorry if anything doesn't make sense Im quit=
e
> > tired today, but I hope that answers your question.
> >
> >On Tuesday 11 January 2005 02:41 pm, you wrote:
> >>This may seem really newbieish, but I have been running Gentoo for =
quite
> >>some time now.
> >>
> >>Is it possible to forego X altogether, and run things like firefox,
> >>thunderbird, etc through the framebuffer from a bashprompt, rather =
than
> >>starting X and going from there. The reason I ask, is I hate the b=
loat
> >>of Gnome and KDE, and don't have the time to learn to configure fvw=
m or
> >>fluxbox, etc. In addition, the X server has a lot to it that I don=
't
> >>really need. This is just a personal desktop, and aside from setti=
ng up
> >>samba to share mp3's with my fiance's computer (across the room), I
> >>don't do provide any servers. I also generally don't use any graph=
ical
> >>utilities for setting up or maintaing the system. The only progs I
> >>really use in X are, Firefox, Thunderbird, XMMS, Openoffice, and
> >>occasionally KDevelop... mostly for editing my fvwm config.
> >>
> >>Thanks in advance for any help.
> >>
> >>Jeremy Abbott
> >>jkbullfrog@comcast.net
> >>-
> >>To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-new=
bie"
> >> in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> >>More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> >>Please read the FAQ at http://www.linux-learn.org/faqs

--=20
----------------------------------------
--EB

> All is fine except that I can reliably "oops" it simply by trying to =
read
> from /proc/apm (e.g. cat /proc/apm).
> oops output and ksymoops-2.3.4 output is attached.
> Is there anything else I can contribute?

The latitude and longtitude of the bios writers current position, and
a ballistic missile.

                --Alan Cox LKML-Decembe=
r 08,2000=20

----------------------------------------
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-newbie"=
in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.linux-learn.org/faqs

Re: Running X programs from bash w/ framebuffer

At 09:28 PM 1/11/2005 +0000, Jeremy Abbott wrote:

>What about a possible shell equivalent of XMMS, or at least an mp3 player
>with a que,

mpg123, a command-line mp3 player, can be run given a list of files to
play. That's the closest I can think of to a playlist (what I assume you
mean by a "que") capability in a CLI player. I didn't check, but the
similar program mpg321 probably has the same capability.

> I already know I can run elm as opposed to Thunderbird?

Yeah, or mutt or mush. I imagine pine is still around too. e-mail is easy
for a CLI to handle.

>Also, is there a better (i.e. graphical) web-broweser that runs from the
>command line? The only browsers I know of are links and lynx.

The two you name are the only ncurses-based browsers I am aware of. What
you want, though, is (probably) a browser that uses svgalib.

I'm seeing some references that indicate that links2 (a grapgical version
of links) can run using svgalib, but the Debian binary seems to be compiled
to use X libraries, so you may need to compile your own version. Take a
look at the links upstream site --
http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~clock/twibright/links/index .html -- for
the details.

There once was a version of arachne that I believe used svgalib, but I
can't find any indication that it is currently available.

A little googling turned up lists of lightweight browsers at these URLs --

http://users.netwit.net.au/~pursang/brows.html
http://www.itp.uni-hannover.de/~kreutzm/en/lin_browser.html

-- though the svgalib choices they list all appear either to be gone or to
be very early-stage alpha code.

The suggestion that you use X with a lightweight WM, which others have
already made, really is good advice, probably much less work than diving
down any of these rabbit holes. My own favorite in this respect is
blackbox, though I think there are several others, such as your own example
of fluxbox, that are also pretty good. With blackbox, I've run X on systems
that have only 32 MB of RAM, with room to spare ... though some of the apps
you are interested in themselves are too heavyweight for that.

Gentoo's source-based approach may make adding packages more trouble than,
say, Debian or Fedora or Knoppix users have, but surely you're used to that
aspect of Gentoo by now.

And the basic response you already received is also right ... apps familiar
to us as X-based use shared libraries specific to X. They cannot write to a
"raw" framebuffer.

>Eric Bambach wrote:
>
>>Hi,
>>I would say no. The X server isnt all too bloated if you use a
>>lightweight window manager . Firefox, Openoffice, Xmms all use toolkits
>>that need a backend X server to talk to. What gives you the impressions
>>that X is that bloated? I would say just bite the bullet and search out a
>>simple window manager. Sorry if anything doesn't make sense Im quite
>>tired today, but I hope that answers your question.
>>
>>On Tuesday 11 January 2005 02:41 pm, you wrote:
>>
>>
>>>This may seem really newbieish, but I have been running Gentoo for quite
>>>some time now.
>>>
>>>Is it possible to forego X altogether, and run things like firefox,
>>>thunderbird, etc through the framebuffer from a bashprompt, rather than
>>>starting X and going from there. The reason I ask, is I hate the bloat
>>>of Gnome and KDE, and don't have the time to learn to configure fvwm or
>>>fluxbox, etc. In addition, the X server has a lot to it that I don't
>>>really need. This is just a personal desktop, and aside from setting up
>>>samba to share mp3's with my fiance's computer (across the room), I
>>>don't do provide any servers. I also generally don't use any graphical
>>>utilities for setting up or maintaing the system. The only progs I
>>>really use in X are, Firefox, Thunderbird, XMMS, Openoffice, and
>>>occasionally KDevelop... mostly for editing my fvwm config.
>>>
>>>Thanks in advance for any help.
>>>
>>>Jeremy Abbott
>>>jkbullfrog@comcast.net






--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 265.6.10 - Release Date: 1/10/2005


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-newbie" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.linux-learn.org/faqs

Re: Running X programs from bash w/ framebuffer

Jeremy Abbott wrote:
> This may seem really newbieish, but I have been running Gentoo for
> quite some time now.
>
> Is it possible to forego X altogether, and run things like firefox,
> thunderbird, etc through the framebuffer from a bashprompt, rather
> than starting X and going from there. The reason I ask, is I hate the
> bloat of Gnome and KDE, and don't have the time to learn to configure

You can start your programs from the console with X and without
KDE/Gnome by typing:
$ xinit /usr/bin/firefox -- :0
or
$ xinit /usr/bin/oowriter -- :1

But I don't know exactly what you have to install (of X I mean). I'd
think if you have fvwm installed to get used to it, there should be
everything you need.

hth

Ulrich
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-newbie" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.linux-learn.org/faqs

Re: Running X programs from bash w/ framebuffer

On Tue, 11 Jan 2005 23:19:42 -0600
Eric Bambach insightfully noted:

EB>Hi,
EB> I would say no. The X server isnt all too bloated if you use a
EB> lightweight
EB>window manager . Firefox, Openoffice, Xmms all use toolkits that need a
EB>
EB>backend X server to talk to. What gives you the impressions that X is
EB>that bloated? I would say just bite the bullet and search out a simple
EB>window manager. Sorry if anything doesn't make sense Im quite tired
EB>today, but I hope that answers your question.
===================================
Jeremy might consider running ion or ratpoison which basically work like a
command line with some keybindings that are very easily configured.
Mike

--
"The man who views the world the same at 50 as he did at 20 has wasted 30
years of his life"
--Muhammad Ali
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-newbie" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.linux-learn.org/faqs

Re: Running X programs from bash w/ framebuffer

Jeremy Abbott wrote:
> I will try this, but am curious what the purpose of the -- :0 and the
> -- :1 are. Is this in the man pages for X? Could this possibly be

the "--" stands for "end of the options and the :0 or :1 is the
(virtual) display to start on.

> for running more than one prog at a time, to switch between for the
Exactly. You can switch to :0 with "CTRL-ALT-F7" to :1 with
"CTRL-ALT-F8" and so on.
So you can have e.g. firebird on :0 oowriter on :1 and something other
on :2

> console? If so how? Or should I also read the man page for this?
It's never a bad idea to look for the options someone is suggesting
in the manual page. Maybe it fits your purposes better, using something
a bit different :-)

Ulrich
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-newbie" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.linux-learn.org/faqs

Re: Running X programs from bash w/ framebuffer

At 11:57 PM 1/11/2005 +0000, Jeremy Abbott wrote:
[...]
>I do have to ask you why using X is good advice (not to say your wrong),
>my understanding, is that X is cobbled together adding code ontop of code,
>to the point where it is barely readable.

Well ... your concern about not having enough time to configure fluxbox
suggests you are not eager to take on a lot of configuration work, and X
provides a standard that lets you (and the people who write software) avoid
a lot of customizing. X itself could no doubt be better ... what software
couldn't? ... but used in a lightweight configuration, it's not really that
bad.

>Aside from the bloat (of which I was primarily writing of kde and gnome),

This is quite irrelevent to the discussion, since we've all been suggesting
ways to avoid use of KDE and Gnome (though not necessarily the underlying
gtk and qt libraries, since it's the apps you choose that dictate whether
they are needed).

>I also have some minor display problems with X. I have tried my monitor
>manufacturers range of vertical and horizonatal syncs, but notice a
>flicker. I have also tried tried the exact values my monitor tells me I
>have when I am in Windowz XP (which is still on the system as backup, even
>though I have abandoned it), and it doesn't flicker, but I see some kindof
>funky lines, almost like my display is being slightly folded in on the top
>and bottom. This could also have to do with the generic radeon driver I'm
>running. I suppose I shall try installing the Ati drivers for X.

Maybe. If you want help on this, you're going to need to discuss the
details. This is your first mention of display problems, so naturally my,
and others', prior reponses didn't consider it as an issue.

>[...]
>>And the basic response you already received is also right ... apps
>>familiar to us as X-based use shared libraries specific to X. They cannot
>>write to a "raw" framebuffer.
>To this I have to ask why? I know for a fact that I am not the only
>person who has expressed this concern. Where is the next generation X
>server? Don't tell me Xorg, cause that is what I'm running, and it aint
>that different (not to sound to condescending).

I don't understand your question. X apps cannot write to a raw framebuffer
because they use shared libraries that assume the presence of an X server.
Is there something about that design decision that you do not understand?
If so, what? (I understand that you do not *like* the limitation.)

And I don't know what you mean by "next generation X server". Generally
speaking, software for mainstream workstations is relatively heavyweight,
simply because they have the power to cope with heavyweight. Any "next
generation" X server we see from the traditional X sources will most likely
be distinguished by added features, not by more compact size. Why? Because
that's what interests that subset of developers, and Open Source projects
tend to be motivated more by developer interest that consumer demand. And
if you don't run KDE or Gnome, no current version of X is all *that*
heavyweight anyway.

If you are looking for something *extremely* lightweight, you probably want
to look at alternatives to X written for the embedded-systems world (PDAs
and the like)... projects like microwindows and matchbox. These
super-lightweight apps tend not to show up in mainstream distros, though,
and since they use different shared libraries, they do not support
mainstream X apps, only apps that have been written or adapted for them.




--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 265.6.10 - Release Date: 1/10/2005


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-newbie" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.linux-learn.org/faqs

Re: Running X programs from bash w/ framebuffer

On Wed, 12 Jan 2005, Ray Olszewski wrote:

> If you are looking for something *extremely* lightweight, you probably want
> to look at alternatives to X written for the embedded-systems world (PDAs
> and the like)... projects like microwindows and matchbox. These
> super-lightweight apps tend not to show up in mainstream distros, though,
> and since they use different shared libraries, they do not support
> mainstream X apps, only apps that have been written or adapted for them.

Since no one has yet mentioned Xvesa/Kdrive I will. It's some kind of
really stripped down version of X that's often used to get a
reasonably-performing display on older machines that might otherwise be
very sluggish running the full X windows. DamnSmallLinux uses Xvesa for
its display, for example, and Knoppix gives the option of using it as the
Xserver. Delilinux and Basiclinux offer or use it as well.

James, soundless in Milwaukee
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-newbie" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.linux-learn.org/faqs

Re: Running X programs from bash w/ framebuffer

There is athene desktop which does not use X. It's very fast.
http://www.rocklyte.com/athene

To configure blackbox in ~/.blackbox/menu is a child play and takes just
minutes and can be done a little at a time.

If I have a need for gnome or kde which do have some excellent programs which
I forget where they are I just type kicker for kde or gnome-panel for gnome
and I have their toolbars handy. When done one can even minimize them so they
are out of the way.

Regards
--
Peter

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-newbie" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.linux-learn.org/faqs

Re: Running X programs from bash w/ framebuffer

At 10:04 AM 1/13/2005 +0800, Peter wrote:

>There is athene desktop which does not use X. It's very fast.
>http://www.rocklyte.com/athene
>
>To configure blackbox in ~/.blackbox/menu is a child play and takes just
>minutes and can be done a little at a time.


Thanks, Peter. We seem to be turning up a lot of interesting ideas in this
thread.

As I said in an earlier comment, I thought the place to look for help is
not in large distros but in stuff targeted to embedded systems. I spent a
bit of time looking around there this afternoon and turned up this site --
http://www.directfb.org/ -- that provides a small library that permits
direct access to the framebuffer. I didn't look at all the details, but
maybe Jeremy will want to investigate if it fits his needs.

Descriptions of and pointers to variety of projects, some possibly relevant
to Jeremy's needs, can be found at
http://www.linuxdevices.com/articles/AT9202043619.html







--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 265.6.10 - Release Date: 1/10/2005


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-newbie" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.linux-learn.org/faqs

Re: Running X programs from bash w/ framebuffer

On Thu, 13 Jan 2005 10:04:51 +0800
Peter insightfully noted:

P>There is athene desktop which does not use X. It's very fast.
P>http://www.rocklyte.com/athene
P>
P>To configure blackbox in ~/.blackbox/menu is a child play and takes just
P>
P>minutes and can be done a little at a time.
P>
P>If I have a need for gnome or kde which do have some excellent programs
P>which I forget where they are I just type kicker for kde or gnome-panel
P>for gnome and I have their toolbars handy. When done one can even
P>minimize them so they are out of the way.
====================================
Or even just kill the process...
You are quite right about BB and it's sister fluxbox. Both exceptionally
lightweight gui X wms, very configurable and relatively easy to use.
For even more light weight wm, as I've mentioned earlier in this thread,
ratpoison, ion, UDE, and wmi are all so free of "frill" that one almost
feels as if one is operating in a terminal mode. But when you need an app
that requires X....., [i]voila[/i]
Best,
Michael

--
"The man who views the world the same at 50 as he did at 20 has wasted 30
years of his life"
--Muhammad Ali
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-newbie" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.linux-learn.org/faqs

Re: Running X programs from bash w/ framebuffer

Jeremy Abbott wrote:

> This may seem really newbieish, but I have been running Gentoo for quite
> some time now.
>
> Is it possible to forego X altogether, and run things like firefox,
> thunderbird, etc through the framebuffer from a bashprompt, rather than
> starting X and going from there. The reason I ask, is I hate the bloat

http://quingy.sf.net

qingy is a replacement of getty. Written in C, it uses DirectFB to provide a
fast, nice GUI without the overhead of the X Windows System. It allows the
user to log in and start the session of his choice (text console, gnome,
kde, wmaker, ...).

emerge -a quingy
emerge --newuse world

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-newbie" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.linux-learn.org/faqs