×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Xfce 4.2.0 Released

michael posted more than 9 years ago | from the give-in-to-the-power-of-KDE dept.

X 275

kelnos copies and pastes: "The Xfce Team is pleased to announce the availability of Xfce 4.2.0, the next major version of the Xfce Desktop Environment and Development Framework for Unix and Unix-like platforms. Xfce 4.2.0 can be downloaded here. Xfce 4.2.0 includes new applications like a session manager and an application finder, a new and beautiful icon theme, support for bleeding-edge features (like the X.org Composite extension), usability and performance improvements, better support for multihead desktops, new and updated translations, additional themes, and various other improvements over the previous stable releases. See this page for a complete list of changes between Xfce 4.0 and Xfce 4.2. Furthermore, Xfce 4.2 is the first desktop environment to ship with an easy-to-use and platform-independent graphical installation wizard, which takes care of compiling and installing Xfce on your system. Visit the os-cillation installers website for download links and instructions. If you want to try Xfce 4.2.0 first, without installing anything on your system, you might want to try the Xfce Live Demo 0.2, provided by os-cillation, to discover the power and efficiency of Xfce."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

275 comments

Pfft (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11380005)

No... (0, Troll)

Uber Banker (655221) | more than 9 years ago | (#11380051)

...I'm interested. As a developer previously Windows based, but moving to Open Source, I'm reading up on GTK+ and QT and their related GUIs. I found this (useful info, though god knows why they put it in a pic [xdfgf.com] very informative.

Re:No... (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11380068)

Bananas!

Re:No... (-1, Offtopic)

theapodan (737488) | more than 9 years ago | (#11380080)

I found that very informative as well...

Yes, very informative....

Oh GOD IT'S EATING MY EYES FROM THE INSIDE!!!

Re:No... (2, Informative)

bcrowell (177657) | more than 9 years ago | (#11380116)

Parent post is a porn link.

Re:No... (1)

Uber Banker (655221) | more than 9 years ago | (#11380292)

If that's your idea of porn... you are a sick individual.

I interpreted it as a typical project management meeting.

Re:No... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11380382)

Hilarious! That is the most entertaining picture I've seen all year. Their facial expressions are great. Thanks!

I GOT A GREASED UP YODA DOLL SHOVED UP MY ASS! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11380008)

Though there's not much happening in Greased Up Yoda Dolls this year.

Is this like CE for Nixers?? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11380011)

First Post...i Think

How lightweight, if it requires gtk+? (1, Interesting)

IO ERROR (128968) | more than 9 years ago | (#11380015)

Can Xfce be used without GNOME or KDE? I'm looking for a very small window mangler I can throw into a USB pen drive distro, and the xfce.org site doesn't seem to be too clear on this.

Oh, wait, I found it. It requires GTK+. Hm. Are there any good WMs which don't have any gtk+ or Qt dependencies? Remember, I said GOOD. I've used wmaker and its ilk, but something a little more modern would be nice.

Oh, and I'm also familiar with DSL [damnsmalllinux.org] , but I hate Debian...

Re:How lightweight, if it requires gtk+? (4, Informative)

ThisNukes4u (752508) | more than 9 years ago | (#11380025)

You could try enlightenment, its not exactly "lightweight" but it could serve that purpose and doesn't have many external dependencies. But really, there is no point of running X without either Gtk or Qt as most apps use one of those.

Toolkit API wrappers (2, Interesting)

Doc Ruby (173196) | more than 9 years ago | (#11380313)

I wonder whether there's a role for something like "Gtk--": the Gtk/++ API implemented minimally. Both graphics and features are reduced to the bare usable minimum, but compiling against Gtk-- lets "Gtk" dependent apps run on totally stripped systems (like the requested pendrive). Of course a Qt-- seems just as possible, as I'm discussing only architectures, not which toolkit is better.

Such a "Toolkit--" could be a good enhancement, or spinoff, of the Gtk/Qt unification projects underway. The holy grail is a single build with style features from any toolkit selectable at runtime, without stopping the use of any program due to toolkit dependencies. "Style" includes under-the-hood features like IPC message buses and HW support. Open source is so mutably refactorable - let's leverage that main asset, and have it all!

icewm (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11380030)

icewm is very light, but keeps a familiar look and feel...

Re:How lightweight, if it requires gtk+? (2, Informative)

Brandybuck (704397) | more than 9 years ago | (#11380042)

Try Blackbox or one of its relations (fluxbox, etc). I don't know what you mean by "modern", but they're small, efficient window managers that don't do anything but manage windows.

Re:How lightweight, if it requires gtk+? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11380074)

I don't want to start a holy war here, but what is the deal with you Mac fanatics? I've been sitting here at my freelance gig in front of a Mac (a G5) for about 20 minutes now while it attempts to copy a 17 Meg file from one folder on the hard drive to another folder. 20 minutes. At home, on my Pentium Pro 200 running NT 4, which by all standards should be a lot slower than this Mac, the same operation would take about 2 minutes. If that.

In addition, during this file transfer, Safari will not work. And everything else has ground to a halt. Even BBEdit Lite is straining to keep up as I type this.

I won't bore you with the laundry list of other problems that I've encountered while working on various Macs, but suffice it to say there have been many, not the least of which is I've never seen a Mac that has run faster than its Wintel counterpart, despite the Macs' faster chip architecture. My 486/66 with 8 megs of ram runs faster than this 300 mhz machine at times. From a productivity standpoint, I don't get how people can claim that the Macintosh is a superior machine.

Mac addicts, flame me if you'd like, but I'd rather hear some intelligent reasons why anyone would choose to use a Mac over other faster, cheaper, more stable systems.

Re:How lightweight, if it requires gtk+? (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11380115)

Mac users are stupid. The end.

Aaah yes, canned Mac troll #17... (4, Informative)

Cid Highwind (9258) | more than 9 years ago | (#11380263)

It's a classic. Reposted countless times on Slashdot and other websites since it's first appearance in 1998. The poster had enough sense to change the claimed Mac model from 8600/300 to G5, which is better than your average canned post troll can do, but it's still a six-year-old repost.

(see http://www.kottke.org/98/11/ for a nearly word-for-word identical post made 6 years ago)

Re:Aaah yes, canned Mac troll #17... (1)

NotoriousQ (457789) | more than 9 years ago | (#11380351)

Except in 1998 it was pretty close the truth, so it would not be a troll. Not any more though.

I still can not find any reason why this was posted, except to sound like an idiot.

Re:How lightweight, if it requires gtk+? (2, Insightful)

avalys (221114) | more than 9 years ago | (#11380086)

It requires GTK+, but not Gnome.

WindowMaker is an excellent window manager - I don't know what else you expect a "small window mangler" to do. If you want something "modern", then I would advise you to stop using an operating system that can trace it's origins back to the 1960's.

Blackbox is another personal favorite - it's about as lightweight as you can get.

Re:How lightweight, if it requires gtk+? (2, Interesting)

ultrabot (200914) | more than 9 years ago | (#11380330)

Blackbox is another personal favorite - it's about as lightweight as you can get.

No, ION [cs.tut.fi] is as light as you can get (or ratpoison, but let's be realistic and err on the side of usability). Windows ary typically full screen, without borders. Everything is basically in "workspaces", b/w which you switch by alt-1, alt-2 etc. Works like a charm on that server if you still want to use a browser or GUI apps every now and then.

Young at Heart (5, Insightful)

Doc Ruby (173196) | more than 9 years ago | (#11380346)

All operating systems' origins can be traced back to the 1960s, when they invented operating systems. OS development is largely "punctuated evolution" - incremental accelerated by occasional revolutionary changes. So OS'es with older, more direct roots have the advantage of maturity, meaning that many problems which OS'es address have been solved, in order to survive enough to contribute to the next generation. Truly new OS'es, like PalmOS, aren't even tested enough in many scenarios to predict how they'll fail, the most imporant property of using an OS. Some OS'es, like Windows, are trapped in both worlds: significant new, untested tech combined with lots of obsolete legacy apps to support, often in mutually exclusive modes or subsystems. Of all these lineages, Linux probably has the best deal, being a rebirth of pedigreed Unix architectures, without the old apps or users to hold back innovation, combined with its essential self-modifying toolchain and community.

Re:How lightweight, if it requires gtk+? (3, Informative)

Wolfrider (856) | more than 9 years ago | (#11380374)

--For the easily infuriated, here is the direct link to the Debian package repository for XFCE 4:

http://www.os-works.com/view/debian/

--For the impatient:

deb http://www.os-works.com/debian testing main
deb-src http://www.os-works.com/debian testing main

--I spent like 10 minutes going round the bend with their stupid circular links to find that!!

Re:How lightweight, if it requires gtk+? (5, Informative)

bcrowell (177657) | more than 9 years ago | (#11380103)

Are there any good WMs which don't have any gtk+ or Qt dependencies?
fluxbox

Re:How lightweight, if it requires gtk+? (1)

sanityspeech (823537) | more than 9 years ago | (#11380123)

Have you taken a look at xwinman.org? [xwinman.org] The site has quite extensive coverage of various Desktop Environments and Window Managers.

I have gentoo set up on several machines using XFCE as my primary WM. Fluxbox is kept around just in case. I use kdm as a login manager and Kopete for its IM capabilities. As a result, I *unfortunately* need KDE installed due to the incredible integration KDE has got going on.

Oh, and I'm also familiar with DSL, but I hate Debian...

HATE is rather strong... Why do you hate Debian? Surely, there are quite a few distributions out there. Hopefully, you will find one that suits you, sooner or later.

Re:How lightweight, if it requires gtk+? (1)

mattyrobinson69 (751521) | more than 9 years ago | (#11380266)

apparently kde is going to be split into individual packages in portage soon, not sure when, not sure if its true. Anyway, that will mean you dont need all of kdenetwork installed if you only use kopete, you'l need qt arts and kdelibs though

Re:How lightweight, if it requires gtk+? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11380133)

IceWM [icewm.org] supports, but does not require, both GNOME and KDE. There is also an IceWM-Light, which is even lighter, but does not support GNOME or KDE. IceWM itself only requires XLib.

As for features, you get a taskbar with start menu, quicklaunch buttons, and a dock with a clock. The dock will also work with GNOME and KDE programs if you run an extra process to manage that. IceWM also supports multiple workspaces if you want them. It does not have desktop icons, and it does not have a file manager or similar built in.

Lourens

Re:How lightweight, if it requires gtk+? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11380147)

No, it doesn't require gnome or kde.
It requires GTK, for drawing dialogs and such. It only requires QT, if you try using apps that use qt..but that is a dependency of the apps and not of the wm.

Your quest for a WM that doesn't use gtk or qt seems strange. Unless of course you don't use any apps that rely on gtk or qt. then you might as well be using ion or something like that.

Re:How lightweight, if it requires gtk+? (4, Informative)

damiam (409504) | more than 9 years ago | (#11380162)

XFCE isn't a window manager; it's a desktop environment. If you want something so ultra-lightweight that libgtk alone is too big, then you probably want Fluxbox or something of that ilk. But that's a damn small pen drive.

For any decent-sized drive (128MB and up) on any computer built within the past ten years, XFCE would be fine.

Re:How lightweight, if it requires gtk+? (1)

Alan Cox (27532) | more than 9 years ago | (#11380397)

I'm running Xfce on a 64Mb pentium box and its pretty reasonable a performer. I've run xfce in the past on 32Mb boxes and it was ok. xfce+sylpheed+abiword works very well on smaller systems. Its also nice on a fast box - Xfce X sessions start essentially instantly on a decent machine unlike gnome/kde

Re:How lightweight, if it requires gtk+? (2, Insightful)

fymidos (512362) | more than 9 years ago | (#11380165)

gtk+ is not that big - maybe 5-6 mb.
Besides, as a *common* library, it will ultimately *save* space, if you are planning to actually install graphical applications.

Re:How lightweight, if it requires gtk+? (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11380186)

Are there any good WMs which don't have any gtk+ or Qt dependencies? Remember, I said GOOD.
twm.

Re:How lightweight, if it requires gtk+? (1)

kjamez (10960) | more than 9 years ago | (#11380248)

i still use blackbox ... extremely lightweight, almost no deps whatsoever, easy to manage menuing system, etc, etc ... but i don't have a head on any linux machine so i use vnc with blackbox as my wm.

Re:How lightweight, if it requires gtk+? (2, Informative)

wojci2 (782038) | more than 9 years ago | (#11380295)

You could try Ion 2 (http://modeemi.cs.tut.fi/~tuomov/ion/) - no GTK+ or Qt dependencies.

I started using it after I got tired of the mainstream window managers, fluxbox included.

Re:How lightweight, if it requires gtk+? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11380328)

I would certainly mod this post up. Man how intesting... the poster really doesn't know anything about anything except he hates Debian.

Installed nicely on my 'minimal' Centos (1)

slashmojo (818930) | more than 9 years ago | (#11380359)

I have centos 3.3 installed on my old toshiba laptop.. chose the 'minimal' centos installation to keep it small and light since its not exactly a speed demon laptop and disk space was quite limited.

I then installed xfce (previous version) manually (one annoying dependency at a time ;)) on top of it. As it was a minimal centos install I had no kde, gnome or any other graphical desktop thingy installed.. so now its just xfce with whatever dependencies it required..

There were many many dependencies to install but still it zips along nicely now with none of the useless clutter that normally seems to come with 'all things to all people' desktop environments these days.

One reason why I'm still using Window Maker.... (4, Insightful)

MisterP (156738) | more than 9 years ago | (#11380016)

I've been a Window Maker user for 7 or 8 years and I've tried XFCE 4.0 and the RC's of 4.2. I used 4.0 for a good 2 weeks at home and at work and then 4.2 RC for another week but I'm back using Window Maker again. XFCE is very nice and the developers have done a great job making a nice light WM, but the reason I switched back is the same reason I don't use KDE or Gnome. They all redraw funny. The GUI doesn't feel "solid" like MS Windows, OS X or Window Maker does. I'm not talking about stability. I wish I could explain it better and I hope someone else can chime and explain it. Here's how I reproduce it:

When I have 4+ desktops (or even one loaded up with applications) and I switch desktops or alt-tab, with XFCE (or Gnome, KDE) it takes longer than it should to redraw the screen or window. I notice this even on fast machines with fast video cards running recent Xorg releases.

Does anybody else experience this?

Re:One reason why I'm still using Window Maker.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11380128)

To answer your question, nope, I don't have this problem. Neither with xfce, gnome, nor kde.

Re:One reason why I'm still using Window Maker.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11380136)

I think you need to change distributions. I don't have that problem at all.

Re:One reason why I'm still using Window Maker.... (2, Informative)

Chris Croome (24340) | more than 9 years ago | (#11380138)

Yeah... I'm also still using WindowMaker, and it's great, the only thing that I don't like is the lack of UTF-8 support...

Re:One reason why I'm still using Window Maker.... (2, Informative)

NotoriousQ (457789) | more than 9 years ago | (#11380399)

I am quite certain that from version .90, windowmaker has utf-8 support and antialiasing.

Re:One reason why I'm still using Window Maker.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11380158)

I've not experienced it but I still find Windowmaker the best environment there is available. The Dock and method of iconification is more intuitive IMO. For example, once I've launched an app from the dock, double-clicking its icon again simply brings the running app to the front, changing the workspace if necessary. Makes much more sense to me. Moreover, I can set it so that the "mini-windows" of the iconified app aren't present on all workspaces. In this way, I can keep the logical seperation between workspaces.

There are issues with Windowmaker of course. To wit, it's poor support for modern X.org protocols but in general, it is the simplest and least confusing of the environments currently available.

Re:One reason why I'm still using Window Maker.... (3, Informative)

rhodes777 (723318) | more than 9 years ago | (#11380197)

I know what you're talking about. It's not your distro. The difference is obvious when you compare something like Fluxbox (or Windows!) to Gnome or KDE. In Flux the redraw is basically instantaneous, whereas KDE and Gnome and others there is definitely a noticible redraw. P.S. I use KDE. I've just learned to accept it.

Re:One reason why I'm still using Window Maker.... (1)

sanityspeech (823537) | more than 9 years ago | (#11380222)

Perhaps you are confusing Desktop Environments (e.g. GNOME, KDE, XFCE, CDE, etc) and Window Managers (e.g. Window Maker, Fluxbox, Blackbox)? I urge you to check out this site [xwinman.org] for an extensive list of Window Managers and Desktop Environments.

AFAIK, the reason WMs may feel "zippy" when compared to DEs is that the latter simply has to do a fair amount of heavy lifting.

Desktop environments which aim to provide a more complete interface to the operating system, supply their own range of integrated utilities and applications.

Hope this helps.

Re:One reason why I'm still using Window Maker.... (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11380252)

Typical open source elitism. Somebody has a complaint about the software, and you think that only means that they need to be educated more. You open source butt groupies are all alike. Don't tell me why your software sucks, just make it so it doesnt suck anymore.

Retard.

Re:One reason why I'm still using Window Maker.... (1)

mattyrobinson69 (751521) | more than 9 years ago | (#11380290)

A troll, but i'l bite.

I would presume that would be fixed in KDE4, with QT4, which includes hardware acelleration, IIRC

Re:One reason why I'm still using Window Maker.... (5, Interesting)

pherthyl (445706) | more than 9 years ago | (#11380233)

Yes. I notice this too. I have no idea what causes it exactly, but you can definitely tell that MS Windows or OSX has a better "feel" to it than the Linux desktop (I haven't tried WindowMaker). I think it has something to do with the way redraws are done. KDE has long had problems with flickering, which have been fixed to a large extent in recent releases, but some problems still remain.

The thing is, it's so hard to quantify so its impossible to file any meaningful bug reports.
My best guess right now is that Windows seems to draw things to the screen when it is fully rendered so the entire menu/window/dialog will appear at the same time. In KDE I notice that sometimes windows will appear but will be drawn a second time after they are displayed. Perhaps it displays the text first and then redraws the icons or something.

Well this comment is starting to sound like meaningless blather, but I can't describe the problem much better.

FYI I almost exclusively use Linux, so no I'm not a microsoft troll.

Re:One reason why I'm still using Window Maker.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11380296)

Flickering and redraw problems are almost always due to shotty video drivers.

I don't have any of these problems on my machines.

Re:One reason why I'm still using Window Maker.... (2, Informative)

pherthyl (445706) | more than 9 years ago | (#11380329)

Well in the case of KDE, flickering problems were caused by multiple repaints when only one was actually necessary.

Re:One reason why I'm still using Window Maker.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11380281)

I'm still waiting for a new version of AmiWM dammit. Although looking at their webpage I guess I shouldn't hold my breath:
Newsflash: amiwm0.20pl48 now out! (1998-03-15)

Re:One reason why I'm still using Window Maker.... (1)

ilmdba (84076) | more than 9 years ago | (#11380325)

well said. windowmaker is very clean/fast/non-bloated. you don't need 800 libs and 400 extra processess running in the background to keep it happy, unlike kde/gnome.

i imagine the day windowmaker is 100% dropped from any development, there will still be plenty of people using it 10 years later. it's just fast and solid.

that said, i'm fooling with ion3 at the moment. worth looking into if you like fast/minimalist desktops.

Re:One reason why I'm still using Window Maker.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11380332)

You said the problem is
They all redraw funny. The GUI doesn't feel "solid" like MS Windows, OS X or Window Maker does.

And that an example of the problem is
When I have 4+ desktops (or even one loaded up with applications) and I switch desktops or alt-tab, with XFCE (or Gnome, KDE) it takes longer than it should to redraw the screen or window.

How can you say that MS Windows and OS X solves the problem, if they don't even give the option of 4+ desktops?

Re:One reason why I'm still using Window Maker.... (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11380377)

Compile a new kernel with

CONFIG_PREEMPT=y

See if that helps. Also try enabling mmio for your networking. X does a lot of its shit over Unix domain sockets (the default), or TCP (if you enable it). Both are slow. Using memory-mapped io for your socket communications can speed things up.

Best Alternative (5, Interesting)

ebob (220513) | more than 9 years ago | (#11380022)

To anyone who thinks this sounds like the best alternative to the bloated KDE and Gnome, it is. Go the their website and check out the flash demos [xfce.org] . They show how well (and how fast) it works better than any description. The window manager has about a bazillion styles from simple to extreme. If you want to compile it yourself, the graphical installers are fabulous. Translations into 40 languages! Xfce simply rocks.


Re:Best Alternative (1)

Homology (639438) | more than 9 years ago | (#11380100)

I'm using xfce on a PII/300MHz laptop. It works very well, looks nice, loads fast and is not a resource hog. I've tried both KDE and Gnome on the laptop, but I can't stand the loooong loading times.

Re:Best Alternative (1)

advocate_one (662832) | more than 9 years ago | (#11380210)

Nice to know... I'm downloading the live demo as a quick way of installing a low spec (hardware requirements wise) Linux onto an old Cyrix MII 300 MHz machine... That machine has currently got an old install of Mandrake 7.0 with KDE 1.whatever on it... getting a bit dated, but it's what I started with and it's got happy memories for me... I won't be wiping that disk, just use another 6 gig disk I found in the drawer...

Re:Best Alternative (2, Interesting)

Val314 (219766) | more than 9 years ago | (#11380202)

Go the their website and check out the flash demos
i dont want to bash Xfce (never tried it, so i cant say anything) but compare this [xfce.org] to that [apple.com] (not the product, just the movie itself).
why did they had to make those flash moves so damn fast that you cant really follow them.

Re:Best Alternative (1)

alphakappa (687189) | more than 9 years ago | (#11380236)

The flash demos are quite impressive, so here's my question: How do you create such a flash demo that records your actions? Is there some kind of a tool that does this (on whatever platform)?

Re:Best Alternative (2, Insightful)

ebob (220513) | more than 9 years ago | (#11380322)

This question came up on the xfce user's email list. Here is a link to the relevent reply: http://lunar-linux.org/pipermail/xfce/2004-Decembe r/012132.html

torrent (5, Informative)

froggero1 (848930) | more than 9 years ago | (#11380023)

here's the torrent [os-cillation.de] of it

Re:torrent (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11380044)

TORRENTS?!! i hope you are expecting a C&D FROM BAYTSP!!!!!

MOD PARENT UP (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11380194)

I ran out of mod points, and I'm getting 12KB/s down on the torrent. A few more slashdotters should increase my speed a tad. :P

Re:MOD PARENT UP (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11380366)

you insensitive clod, whoring karma for your more faster downloads

nice (2, Informative)

BibelBiber (557179) | more than 9 years ago | (#11380024)

Looks really nice from the screenshots. Something between Gnome and KDE (but more Gnome like) Thanks to the developers, I'll give it a try if I get it to run on my PPC Ubuntu :-)

Dumb question... (1, Insightful)

LnxAddct (679316) | more than 9 years ago | (#11380036)

But can you place icons and folders on the dekstop? It seems like alot of these less popular but sometimes more feature filled window managers are lacking something as basic as a desktop. Xfce looks real nice but if i can't just drag an icon onto my main screen, then forget it.
Regards,
Steve

Re:Dumb question... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11380085)

Then forget it, you can't.
What you could do is use rox-filer as a desktop, that way you'll have xfce4.2 + icons on the desktop and a nice filemanager to boot.

Re: rox filer (1)

RWerp (798951) | more than 9 years ago | (#11380134)

I use sometimes rox-filer and the only good thing about it it's speed. Otherwise, it is rather poor.

Re:Dumb question... (1)

Bastian (66383) | more than 9 years ago | (#11380130)

I'd actually like to see this feature go away in general. At best, I see the 'desktop' of most GUIs as nothing other than a broken shelf. [occam.com] (a note to other Apple folks out there - I also consider the OS X shelf to be a broken shelf.)

The official WM of the GNAA (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11380037)

The Gay Niggers Association of America is pleased to announce that XFCE 4.2 will be it's official window manager for 2005.

Building. (3, Interesting)

theapodan (737488) | more than 9 years ago | (#11380049)

To be playing devil's advocate for a moment,

Is this release substantially slower/more bloated than the 4.0 release, and less so than the 4.1 release? When I went from the 4.0 release to the 4.1 release, my system couldn't take it and still remain reasonable (I have a junker running FreeBSD). So how does 4.2 run, for those who went right ahead and installed the release? I wonder if there will even be packages built for this version for the 4.x tree.

Re:Building. (2, Informative)

drigz (804660) | more than 9 years ago | (#11380308)

Using 4.2 over 4.0, I have noticed no speed difference during normal use, although #xfce say that it should be faster.

However, it is _much_ (several times) slower to load (they have a splash engine now). However, I don't do this very often, so that doesn't really matter.

I am a developer on the Xfce 4.2.0 release (-1, Troll)

Amsterdam Vallon (639622) | more than 9 years ago | (#11380052)

I want to stress here there are very significant changes here in our 4.2.0 release of Xfce.

I know that sometimes Slashdotters complain that "every little release" of many Open Source applications is documented on the front page, but this one really deserves it.

Be sure to take a look at http://www.xfce.org/release_notes/4.2.0_changelog. html [xfce.org]

We added so many great features and improvements that it's impossible to list them all here. Thanks to Slashdot editors for approving the post!

-

Re:I am a developer on the Xfce 4.2.0 release (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11380110)

You must be new here if you think that people stop complaining just because someone posts a link to an article. People around here don't read articles, simply complaining is so much more convenient.

With that out of the way, having tried a beta of xfce4.2 I have to say I was really impressed and I'm sure I'll give it an other spin now it is released.

Keep up the good work!

Re:I am a developer on the Xfce 4.2.0 release (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11380253)

Cool, thanks :^)

xfce is the hottest thing for the desktop on Linux...

kudos to the XFCE dev team...

as far as complaints are concerned don't take them serously because 99% of it will most likely just be malcontents and trolls wanting to spread their bad attitude...

License confusion does not inspire confidence. (5, Interesting)

jbn-o (555068) | more than 9 years ago | (#11380129)

From the download page of the Xfld.org website [xfld.org] :

"Various parts of Xfld are covered by so many different licenses, we can't possibly keep them all straight."

They have an obligation to do exactly that--keep the licensing straight--so they aren't distributing something they don't have a license to distribute. Perhaps it is time to comb the distribution and make sure the licensing is correct.

Re:License confusion does not inspire confidence. (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11380181)

...except that it's f* debian with udpated xfce packages. Duh.

Re:License confusion does not inspire confidence. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11380270)

Perhaps it is time to comb the distribution and make sure the licensing is correct.

Perhaps your time would be better spent "combing" your personal life to figure out why the only romance you get is masturbating while thinking about open source licenses. At least we know you are canadian, though. Retard.

Re:License confusion does not inspire confidence. (2, Interesting)

MrHanky (141717) | more than 9 years ago | (#11380316)

I can't find that anywhere on the page you link to, but maybe they've removed it. Anyway, it doesn't have to mean the licenses are unknown, just that they are too numerous to list on the web page. And since it seems to be based on Debian, they probably used Debian's packages, and you'll find the licenses and the names of copyright holders under /usr/share/doc/$packagename/copyright.

tile windows? (1)

jago25_98 (566531) | more than 9 years ago | (#11380132)

I wonder if this now means IceWM is no longer the only WM where I can set F11 to `tile windows vertically`...

Re:tile windows? (1)

WaKall (461142) | more than 9 years ago | (#11380261)

Sawfish can do this. Google for the sawfish wiki library, find the extension that implements it, and install it. It's incredibly extensible.

too bleeding edge for me (0)

bcrowell (177657) | more than 9 years ago | (#11380153)

I tried xfce recently, and although it seemed nice in some ways, I switched back to fluxbox. XFce was just a little too bleeding edge for me. I need a window manager that lets me get my work done, and if it doesn't work right, it's not an option. The version I tried just didn't work right, e.g., a lot of the icons were incorrect.

For people who want speed and simplicity, I don't see what's wrong with fluxbox. For people who want a full-featured desktop environment, KDE seems fine to me -- I don't remember it being at all slow, even on old hardware. Maybe five years from now xfce will be the WM I suggest to Unix newbies.

Re:too bleeding edge for me (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11380246)

KDE seems fine to me -- I don't remember it being at all slow, even on old hardware
If said computer has < 128 megs of RAM then it is very, VERY slow. Start Firefox and OO.org and it is swap city.

Screenshots (0, Flamebait)

northcat (827059) | more than 9 years ago | (#11380167)

After looking at the screenshots, Xfce very remotely resembles OS X. Why hasn't Apple sued Xfce to destruction yet?

Re:Screenshots (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11380208)

Simple. They can only handle suing a few hundred people at a time and they are already busy suing college students. They'll get to them when they are done with the college kids. Oh and btw Mac users / Apple fanatics, how come I haven't heard you complaining about this? If Microsoft did it, you'd go nuts. Hypocrisy.

Re:Screenshots (1)

l3v1 (787564) | more than 9 years ago | (#11380227)

Is it more remote or less remote than Gnome (just as an example) ? :)

Come on, this is a happy thread, don't search for shadows.

Re:Screenshots (2, Informative)

Fallingcow (213461) | more than 9 years ago | (#11380285)

Actually, it more closely resembles C [plig.org] D [plig.org] E [plig.org] than OS X. And CDE definately predates OS X.

Mac Mini RULES! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11380172)

I'd like to take this opportunity to say why the Mac Mini is better than ANY other low cost Wintel machine:

- It uses 5 year old processor technology running at 1 ghz, but x86's that old aren't even in production anymore. Thank god for apple, if not for them I wouldn't be able to use outdated technology!!!11!!one

- It allows me to tell my friends I use a mac so they think i am rich... kind of the same way I drive a used 1984 BMW and just claim I've had it since it was new.

- Mac OS X is very stable. Safari only crashes about 10 times a day, simply from clicking a "search" button or trying to open a new page. And you don't have to worry about accidently deleting important files in Mac OS X, because if you try to browse your files in Finder, it will simply crash! Why doesn't windows offer that kind of protection?

- $499 is simply an amazing price, even though I *could* build a PC myself for half that price, but with 2x or 4x the power!

- Steve jobs is sexy.

- I'm a loser mac user.

Focus policy? (1)

ufnoise (732845) | more than 9 years ago | (#11380203)

I used xfce extensively when it was still based on CDE (years ago). I had to stop because the "focus follows mouse" policy had changed. When a new window popped up, the focus changed to the new window even if my mouse was still over the window I needed to be typing in. The pop up window was presenting output, but all my interaction was in this other window. It had something to do with a focus stack. I think one of the other users was offering a reward to whoever could bring back the old behavior. I finally gave up and moved to blackbox. Is this problem fixed yet?

Re:Focus policy? (3, Informative)

drigz (804660) | more than 9 years ago | (#11380337)

Yes. Settings Manager -> Window Manager -> Focus -> Automatically give focus to newly created windows is what I believe you are looking for.

Kiosk? (1)

XanC (644172) | more than 9 years ago | (#11380214)

How is this in a kiosk environment? I've been using KDE's kiosk features for the bank of public workstations I administer. I rebuild the home directory for each session, but I like to remove unnecessary settings and actions to avoid confusion.

a 4.2.0 release? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11380275)

the geek stoners will like that

Should we look more at build/installation wizards? (1)

bersl2 (689221) | more than 9 years ago | (#11380298)

A a universal frontend for configure and make, which has a list of --enable-* and --with-* options, maintained in a file separate from configure. The front-end could be customized by each distro to create packages in its native form if desired. It should depend on some simple widget set, maybe even Xlib, and not GTK+ or Qt.

It doesn't have to be for essential things like glibc, bash, or other such text-based programs. Maybe the X server itself and up should be buildable by this system.

Re:Should we look more at build/installation wizar (1)

bluesky74656 (625291) | more than 9 years ago | (#11380388)

Insert your standard Gentoo troll here. Seriously, though, you seem to be describing Portage with a graphical frontend.

Great for multi-user boxes (4, Interesting)

Bazman (4849) | more than 9 years ago | (#11380300)

I run a lab of thin clients hanging off a rack of Dell servers. I really wasn't too keen on umpteen Gnome sessions running, or even half a dozen bloaty nautiluses. So I stripped them out, and made XFCE the only option.

Its slick, light, windowsy-enough to not scare newbies too much, and the lab has run for over a term with no problems.

I set the servers up to give the users a choice of connecting to the Linux boxes or Windows boxes, and 95% of the connections are to the Linux boxes....

Baz

Oh common! (2, Funny)

odyrithm (461343) | more than 9 years ago | (#11380344)

I've been running xfce for years now, in that time I have yet to restart X, amasing really as I have a cron job running nightly updating.. but I swear if I go into work tommorow and my box(dual head) with a gizillion xterms open, gedits all over, ICA windows, vnc sessions, logins to places I've forgotten password to etc breaks.. I'm gonna go grrr and drink pepsi! yes pepsi! thats how bad this could be!
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...