Post #2407538
2026-05-06 05:47 UTC
Replies (3)
-
@stphrolland@mathstodon.xyz 2026-05-06 05:55
@dannypsnl@g0v.social I'd say it was similar to xmonad in spirit, but with instead 2 or 3 specialized DSL, for: - keyboard shortcuts - menus - windows - workspaces I can't remember others. I'd say there were 4 parts in the configuration. And you'd plug things for access bar. But with time I even dropped the access bar ;-) Then I went for xmonad, which I really liked. Both #fluxbox and #xmonad made me adopt a workspace+terminal centered workflow. Now that I have the habit, the default gnome install suffice me. But it was forged in fluxbox/xmonad daily practice. It is important for me: it's mostly because of the perfect aesthetics that I switched to Linux entirely -> I could have MY OWN totally my OWN desktop This after a 100th windows update failing in the middle and n-th time leaving my system broken: the time too much -> not wanting to reinstall everything The user screen desktop that made me choose fluxbox/openbox was based on this: with menu and buttons in the same shade I worked facing a zen ocean with transparent terminals The contrast with Microsoft VIsual Studio is without comparison possible
-
@stphrolland@mathstodon.xyz 2026-05-06 06:00
@dannypsnl@g0v.social I try to remember but I would not say it was super modular in the SmallTalk language mindset. I just scratched the surface. I think it was in bare C language. I could not talk about the inner design. I think I only looked at the code for keyboard shortcuts: but even this left not much traces
-
@stphrolland@mathstodon.xyz 2026-05-06 06:04
@dannypsnl@g0v.social From , this one was close in spirit to the result https://fluxbox.org/screenshots/ #fluxbox I don't know how the project is going though. Years I no longer use it. But if use linux the way I do, it's probably thanks to this project.