oh neither of those are FVWM sorry..

I don't post my desktop much.

ｷﾀ━━━(ﾟ∀ﾟ)━━━!!

Have any of you guys checked out FVWM3? There hasn't been a whole lot of stuff done to it yet. I'm trying it out right now. Trying to get my old config to work.

>>24
Not yet, I'm still on 2.6.8. I browsed the repo last week but there wasn't enough documentation, I just learned from your post that fvwm2 configs were supposed to be compatible. That said the repo seemed more active than it was last year.

Also I noticed the fvwm forums were archived, I wonder what's up with that.

>>17
Yeah you can add keybindings for pretty much everything, there's also mouse gestures.

these are alll great desktops

fvwm ftw

I can never bring myself to use a WM with one of those gigantic (thick) panels. It just seems like a lot of wasted screen space, or you cover the panel with a maximized window and might as well not even have a panel at all.

>>28
Yeah, but it looks cool.

I think screen conservancy is more psychological. People tend to interpret a small window of 4:3 in a floating window setup as more generous than the 1:2 ratio you might getting in a tiling setup, even if the latter technically has more estate. The wm I use is tiling and has a golden-ratio mode, so the active buffer is proportionately larger than its inactive counterparts. It works out pretty good as far as estate is concerned, but I still have that issue where the active window isn't in the center. It doesn't really bother me, but I can understand why people want it to be in the forefront, even though it doesn't really matter.

Also, I've always pronounced FVWM as "'Ehv-whem", and no one can stop me.

I don't particularly know the best way to format this post, so I guess I'll just type my thoughts as they come to me, just so I don't have to keep looking at this page knowing I haven't really contributed my fair share lol
>>9
This post singlehandedly got me into fvwm a while ago. I love digging through old stuff to try to dig up cool dotfiles and stuff from long forgotten times. I've been waiting for an optimal point to post my desktop and I think I've gotten it to be good? maybe.
>>28
I was like that when I was using herbstluftwm and bspwm. Having no bar and being fully enveloped into your working enviroment can be pretty nice, but sometimes windows are quite useful. I've made it to where I still have all of the functionality of bspwm and more, FVWM is
extremely configurable, I also have a button to turn off decorations and panels so that it's basically back to being bspwm.
>>29
>Also, I've always pronounced FVWM as "'Ehv-whem", and no one can stop me.
Oh my, how devilish.
Also, apparently i can't post with a pic for whatever reason, so that's a bummer.

>>30
I still use it a year later. didn't change much though

>>10-16,31
These all look nice. Still, aren't you embarrassed, or at least inconvenienced by all of the useless space the titlebars and stuff take up?

>>32
Not everyone wants or needs everything to be 100% practical all the time. For many people (myself included) the desktop is like a sort of digital home. Making it look nice makes the computer much more enjoyable to use, even if it lacks any functional advantages

>>32
yeah it started to bother me at some point when I was using a vertical dock, that's why I switched to a bar. That, and and because it's a pain to fit text on a vertical bar. That said I don't even use the vertical space I reclaimed, having 40px more won't help fitting a third window.
The titlebars don't annoy me that much, in any case it bothers me less than having a desktop I can't use with a mouse would. Terminals emulators and stuff I only operate with the keyboard don't have titlebars though.

>>32
it's really not that big of an inconvenience

>>11,12
How did you get the shadows?

>>36
probably compton/picom
it used to suck at making sharp shadows but they fixed it recently

Recently redid my ui.

>>31
This is very nice. Is >>16 yours as well? Would you be willing to post your .fvwmrc? Trying to set up fvwm is such a chore, I just end up sticking with fullscreen grey on black tmux in cwm.

>>1
Nice look. But everybody seems to be using FVWM.
Is there a reason for this?
I tend to like tiling windowmanagers more as they can switch between floating and tiling.

>>6
Jesus 600 lines is a lot for my feeling.
My herbstluftwm config is 261 lines.

>>9
EXWM seems cool but i dislike the idea of living within emacs.
Cause all software has limitations, and i heavily dislike all terminals that emacs provides.

>>14
Ive never seen anyone on an imageboard actually use plan9, is it comfy? What game is the everyday.jpg from?

>>27
Im gonna need that visualizer (is it Cava?).

>>33
Extremely true, thats why amost all my programs are hooked to pywal ;>).
qutebrowser (my webbrowser)
st (terminal of course)
polybar (my bar (thinking about switching soon))
emacs (i have a program for it but its janky)

I run most of my programs in TUI:
nvim, ranger/nnn, cdm, my loginscript, etc etc

Proper thread lads.

>>40
>Im gonna need that visualizer (is it Cava?).
its cli-visualizer (https://github.com/dpayne/cli-visualizer)

Also I changed up my (>>27) desktop. What do u guys think? :)

>>38,16,15,14,13,12,11,10
also, these are all very cool and good desktops
>>40
>I tend to like tiling windowmanagers more as they can switch between floating and tiling.
not OP, but I used to use tiling managers and I just realized I'm fine with using the mouse. I appreciate the ability for efficiency with tiling managers, but dragging around windows is fine by me. Fvwm with some keybinds for keyboard only use is good for me. I don't need everything to be tiling all the time.

>>40
Well I thought that it was just mutually understood to be a FVWM thread and not specifically a desktop sharing thread just cuz of the sheer focus we all had on FVWM. Not that there's anything wrong with it not being a FVWM thread, I just never thought of it that way honestly.

>>41
i think dj rashad is the tits

>>9
What did you do to get the title bars on the side? I'm struggling to find anything looking through the manual.

>>45
search for TitleAtLeft in the style section
https://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/doc/fvwm/html/commands/Style.html

>>32
>Still, aren't you embarrassed, or at least inconvenienced by all of the useless space the titlebars and stuff take up?
OP here, not in the slightest my guy.
Happy to see this thread is still being trafficked. Long live fvwm

Is there any way to get transparency in the title bar? There's one screenshot I've seen with a transparency effect on FVWM but I don't have a clue how they did it.
Pic related

>>48
It's weird how years ago I would've looked at this and thought it was ugly as hell, but I now I think this is a really amazing desktop.
The closest thing I found to this feature is a branch of fvwm called fvwm-crystal (https://fvwm-crystal.sourceforge.io/features.html). You might've already found this though.

>>48
If it's detemined by a hex triplet, try adding two more numbers to control the transparency.

>>49
It does look old-school with all that entails.

>>48
I think so, you can at least get fake transparency. look at the part about colorsets in the manual

i'm learning to configure it. i recently saw a very impressive gif from a fvwm user on another imageboard who demonstrated all the keyboard shortcuts they configured to tile and manipulate windows. it seems like it will be a while and a lot of reading/experimenting before i'd be happy using this for everything i do, but its really quite fun

>>53
Would you be comfortable sharing that gif here? I'm interested

ded board
ded thread
(sorry not fvwm)

>>53
Seconding >>54.

>>55
Your 'shot' program produces PNGs with pHYs chunks with an invalid 0:1 pixel aspect ratio. With the unit specifier set to 0 square pixels should have an X:Y of 1:1, your current 0:1 makes no sense. See "4.2.5. pHYs Physical pixel dimensions" of "PNG (Portable Network Graphics) Specification" https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2083

And your anime girls are terribad.

>>57
normally i should've stopped reading at that _lowercase_ letter p, but i chose to give it a look
>Non-square pixels can be represented (see the pHYs chunk), but viewers are not required to account for them; a viewer can present any PNG file as though its pixels are square.
not only it has "are not required" wording, but also it explicitly says a viewer can perfectly ignore it (which an image viewer should do if it sees that "nonsensical" value)
compared to their comment on other ancillary chunks with "should" and "need":
>To produce correct tone reproduction, a good image display program should take into account the gammas of the image file and the display device
>Viewers that have a specific background against which to present the image (such as Web browsers) should ignore the bKGD chunk, in effect overriding bKGD with their preferred background color or background image
>If the image has a tRNS chunk, the viewer will need to adapt the suggested palette for use with its desired background color
>For images of color type 6 (truecolor with alpha channel), any suggested palette should have been designed for display of the image against a uniform background of the color specified by bKGD.
>If practical, decoders should have a way to display to the user all tEXt and zTXt chunks found in the file
other than these, most of others are "can", and a small amount are "are not required", but none of them explicitly suggests ignore

>And your anime girls are terribad.
according to what you posted?
wrong

>>58
The fact that PNG readers are allowed to ignore nonsensical pHYs chunks is not a counter to that pHYs chunk being nonsensical and the 'shot' program needing a fix. It is also pointless to bring up after >>55 was thumbnailed, because if PNG readers were required to be strict on pHYs chunks, as with chunk checksums, >>55 would not have gotten a thumbnail, if it posted at all.

>>no-hips/no-breasts trash versus a hot, curvy woman
>wrong
Yeah, no.

>>59
> if PNG readers were required to be strict on pHYs chunks
They're not, so you can be quiet instead of arguing about nothing.

>Yeah, no.
You are, however, a faggot.

pHYs [00000000x 00000001y 00 (measured by pixel)]
pHYs = 0x*1y (1x*2y?)
Takeaway here is, >>55 using a bizarre 5:4 monitor in "TATE" position, and with a video mode fucked beyond belief.

>With the unit specifier set to 0 square pixels should have an X:Y of 1:1...
Don't know what >>57's going on about here, the RFC doesn't say anything like that at all.
Maybe I'm just missing something.

http://www.thinkwiki.org/wiki/Category:X201
>One of the following TFT displays:
> 12.1" TFT display with 1280x800 (WXGA) resolution with LED backlight
Oh, guess that's impossible huh... And I thought I was onto something too...

>>61
the image was created by ffmpeg, which "shot" uses, and its default value for sample (pixel) aspect ratio of several formats is 0
apparently ffmpeg developers think that 0 is a sensible default value for this
anyway, the only real life example of no-square pixels i met is some dvd rips which contain such information to cater ntsc tvs, but they causes more trouble than benefits on computers: mpc-hc respects that value and displays the video distorted (squeezed), while mpv ignores this so it displays the video properly
however, the same mpc-hc displays the desktop png just as normal

>mpc-hc respects that value and displays the video distorted (squeezed), while mpv ignores this so it displays the video properly
Wrong way around, it's "proper" display in your opinion uses extra processing to squish the video back down to what might be displayed on a (misbehaving) 4:3 set.

>>64
>Wrong way around
saying to yourself?
pic related: all videos here have 16:9 aspect ratio, but the one opened contains "Original display aspect ratio" which says 3:2 (other videos don't have this)
the windows thumbnailer respects this ratio, rescales it to 3:2, and cuts off edges so that it fits into 4:3, just like a tv does; mpv does not
as a result, they display that video in different aspect ratios, while for other files they display the same
just tell me which one is displayed properly on a pc, as intended by the author, as opposed to catering to tv limitations?

>>65
Whoops, I think I had a bit of a misunderstanding. I don't think mpv's normal behaviour is to ignore the aspect ratio value though.
I would ask if you can see the deinterlacing lines clearly, but that's not raw video you have there, it's just a transcode they fucked up somehow.

In any case I absolutely agree, the sanest behaviour for a TV is to do the black lines thing but companies always compensate for (or at least take advantage of) the worse rescaling behaviour.

>>55

sooo pretty ii love ilove

>>55
aren't you that anon that's working on a gui toolkit? have you published the source code yet?

This thread made me want to start doing this.
So I'm downloading FVWM, for now, have this screenshot I found online

Here you go.