Gimme that old time interface...

[Ben Scott]

On Nov 15, 2007 2:17 PM, mike ledoux <mwl+gnhlug at alumni.unh.edu> wrote:
> IME, FVWM2 is more resource-intensive than FVWM, for
> comparable configurations.

  That's I'll agree with, especially depending on the source build
configuration.  FVWM 2 added support for quite a few more features and
extensions, and all of those are usually enabled in most RPMs.  You
can slim it down a fair bit by excluding those from the build.  But
it's still just got more code than 1.x, and that usually means slower.

> It will, but it is a minor pain to do.  I've had to write several
> minor patches to work with modern libraries.

  :-(

> The "big" problem is that some idiot renamed the 'fvwm2' packages
> to 'fvwm' in FC5 or 6 ...

  I couldn't even *find* an FVWM (any version) packagein Fedora 5 or 6
(or maybe both; I forget).  I think it got removed from the distro,
and then put back later.

  Concurrent versions of the same package is something none of the
major package managers really handle well.  Embedding a version tag
into the package name is a kludge at best.  Of course, when that's the
only option, *un*doing that is worse still.

-- Ben