4 ms·
Once I had my WM running I had to clobber together lots of different pieces together (with scripts and whatnot) to get the remaining desktop functionality. For
by greyw 4y ago
Once I had my WM running I had to clobber together lots of different pieces together (with scripts and whatnot) to get the remaining desktop functionality. For example:
1. Laptop screen brightness
2. Wifi setup
3. Application launcher
4. External monitor/projector configurations for presentations
etc.
Some people might argue this part of the unix principle to have separate tools that do one job well but frankly I don't care about the unix principle as long-time emacs user (the anti-thesis of unix). The end result was a frankenstein thing: random tools glued together to emulate a basic desktop experience.
- zdragnar 4y agoReally? Most of that is pretty simple to do in i3 / sway at least. Every one of those things worked out of the box for me the last time I installed (which, admittedly, was via Manjaro, so a fair amount of config came from them). Even prior to that when I rolled an i3 setup by hand, external displays was the only troublesome bit.
- greyw 4y agoIt's definitely possible that some distros improved WM based setups. Last time I as down the WM rabbit hole was over 4 years ago. I spent quite a bit of time to get something usable (and it was fun!).
- servilio 4y agoWhat always did, going through awesomewm, stumpwm and xmonad to now sway, was to used whatever of those services were available from the OS. Some I had to launch by hand, but that was a one time change always (some of them across WMs). Nowadays it is even easier, since most of what I needed to launch manually are now user-level service from systemd. In the end, I am running most of the normal services a GNOME desktop would be running, but without using the GNOME shell, and that has worked very well.