Home > Window Managers > EDE 1.0.2 Released EDE 1.0.2 Released Eugenia Loli 2005-02-04 Window Managers 33 Comments The EDE Team presents version 1.0.2 of the Equinox Desktop Environment and version 2.0.4 of the Extended Fast Light Toolkit (eFLTK). About The Author Eugenia Loli Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker. Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli 33 Comments 2005-02-04 11:45 pm Never heard of EDE before. Looks refreshingly light and simple. Probably hard to beat something like Fluxbox in terms of speed, but this looks much easier to adjust to for someone coming from windows. 2005-02-05 12:20 am Hmm. I would never be able to guess what UI they’re influenced by… Personally, I think one version of xpde is enough. But if the developers feel that another operating system that looks exactly like MS Windows is what the Linux world needs, that’s their perogative. Personally, I’ve never liked the FLTK API, I’m more of a Qt guy (although I still love Be’s APIs) when it comes to APIs. But whatever. To each his/her own. 2005-02-05 12:21 am Never heard of EDE before Hmm.. For those not yet knowing Xwinman, you can find a pretty comprehensive list and some short reviews of the alternative desktop environments (including EDE) and window managers for X here: http://www.xwinman.org/ 2005-02-05 12:26 am Windows 98/2000 users should feel right at home in this non spectacular but functional desktop. 2005-02-05 12:42 am I really wish people would be more creative and stop copying the Windows look and feel. Yes, making it look like Windows makes it more familiar and hence more attractive, but it’s boring!! Do something (dare I say) unique?!?! 2005-02-05 12:43 am Aside from the eFLTK portion of this project, it looks alot like XPDE and ICEWM. The effort would be alot better spent on other more robust WM’s, but I’m not one to judge. Who knows this could turn into a very usable DE, like XFCE. Good luck to the developers, and keep up the hardwork. 2005-02-05 12:55 am YAWCDE = Yet Another Windows Clone Desktop Environment 2005-02-05 1:02 am The bit that made me think this project has a use is its very small footprint – apparently it uses less ram than an xterm session, but looks like it has quite a bit of functionality. Only problem is the win95 look Simple I guess. 2005-02-05 1:09 am maybe they should merge? that said XPDE looks dead now… same for Ark Linux. 2005-02-05 1:09 am I love the professional Windows 2000 look and at least their widgets are not gigantic unlike KDE and GNOME’s where three controls such as a text field and a button and a combo box will take 70% of the screen real estate forcing you to use max resolution just so that everything fits on the screen. 2005-02-05 2:11 am … a good acronym… and EDE is a cool acronym. 2005-02-05 2:16 am This looks like a very interesting project to me. I’m always looking for lightweight window managers/environments for my old 233mhz laptop and EDE looks like its worth trying. Right now I’m switching between fluxbox, openbox, and icewm. It really depends on how I feel that day as to which WM to use. Now I can add EDE to the list. I agree with some of the others tho, I could do without the standard win95 look. Perhaps someone will implement a theme or different window manager look into it. That’d be swell. 2005-02-05 2:17 am To those who just post and whinning without knowing the actual information, I wish to inform that EDE came a lot earlier than XPDE. Maybe XPDE look nicer but EDE are faster. I believe if Qt should follow FLTK in term of lean and fast aspect but for sure eFLTK need some work on the look. 2005-02-05 2:34 am Another copy of Windows(R). At this pace there will never be inovation in the Linux(R) world. If devs like so much to copy Windows interfaces, why not copy Apples(R) Aqua(TM) for a change. Lets also copy Quartz(TM) and ditch the stupid XServer. It’s not that imposible to emulate the cool Aqua(TM) interface. If people can write cool OpenGL code for games, I’m sure they can get it donne for a desktop. Just my 2 cents. 2005-02-05 2:46 am I won’t defend cloning a Windows UI, but it should be said that XPDE aims to clone WinXP while EDE obviously clones Win9x. Also, I think XPDE needs more system power than EDE; much like the OS’s they clone. I don’t see the two projects occupying the same space. Regarding Ark, it’s very much alive, the development just isn’t getting the media attention it once did. Being a user friendly distribution, I think it’s a smart move not to attract the media with too many alphas that aren’t near ready for their target. 2005-02-05 2:52 am Yes, because, thanks to two DE projects cloning the Windows UI, there’s absolutely no innovation in the GNU/Linux world. And, again because of these two projects, no other project has borrowed elements from MacOS, 10 or earlier. No, Gnome and XFCE simply don’t exist. And you’re right, let’s replace the X Server with a rendering system that runs like absolute crap on anything less than a gigahertz processor with 512MB of RAM and a rather fast graphics card. That’s a great idea, let’s tell millions of users that they don’t matter because their computers aren’t fast enough. Hey, it’s obviously worked for Apple! 2005-02-05 3:00 am Another copy of Windows(R). At this pace there will never be inovation in the Linux(R) world. I don’t get what you mean by that, but there are only a few copy of Windows(R) regarding window managers, and it’s not popular or widely used. It might help newbies who in transition from Windows, but once they get used to window/desktop managers like Windowmaker, Fluxbox, XFCE4 and etc– they won’t go back. I have tried a handful of copy of Windows(R); didn’t find it useful. Oh yeah, there’re innovations. 2005-02-05 4:38 am built and installed eFLTK, no problem: ./configure –enable-xft –enable-static –disable-nls –disable-unixODBC –disable-mysql attempting to build EDE however: ./configure (no problem) gmake — Going to common… Compiling aboutdialog.cpp… aboutdialog.cpp: In function `void showCopyingInfo()’: /home/$user/local/include/efltk/Fl_Util.h:58: error: too many arguments to function `int fl_start_child_process(char*)’ aboutdialog.cpp:11: error: at this point in file gmake: *** [aboutdialog.o] Error 1 gmake: *** [all] Error 2 2005-02-05 4:59 am My fault! I grabbed eFLTK 2.0.1 instead of 2.0.4 (note to developers, interface changes should not take place between subversions. 2.0.x should be bugfixes with the same interfaces. 2.1.x versus 2.0.x might warrant an interface change, although strict library developers usually leave interface changes for the major version only) eFLTK – ./configure –disable-mysql –disable-unixODBC –disable-nls –enable-xft –with-x && gmake && gmake install EDE – ./configure –enable-optimize –disable-nls –disable-silent && gmake && gmake install Worked like a charm – great job EDE guys! 2005-02-05 7:44 am mine fails on ./configure config.status: error: cannot find input file: efltk.spec.in I just extracted efltk-2.0.4.tar.bz2 and go to its directory and type ./configure Well, I don’t know what to do from here, where do I find this file 2005-02-05 11:21 am “Personally, I’ve never liked the FLTK API, I’m more of a Qt guy” Why? FLTK API is clean, fast and C++ strict (without MOCs, pre-processors or crypt macros; it uses namespaces, exceptions, etc.). 2005-02-05 12:48 pm “mine fails on ./configure config.status: error: cannot find input file: efltk.spec.in ” I have the exactly same problem . I tried to Google for it but could not find an answer. I would really like to try EDE on my old P233MMx Slackware 10.0 box. 2005-02-05 1:21 pm Do: touch efltk.spec.in and then: ./configure make make install hope it works 2005-02-05 2:25 pm exactly so. 2005-02-05 4:03 pm EDE is programmed in C++ with an extended version of FLTK2 and is intended to be a DE. It looks a lot like windows and maybe it is supposed to, who knows what its going to look like 2 or 3 years from now. IceWM is also programmed in C++ but doesn’t use a preexisting toolkit. It doesn’t try to be a DE, and is made to be a lot like OS/2. XPDF is programmed in Object Pascal (Kylix) and uses CLX. Since Kylix is discontinued and CLX isn’t really used anywhere else I don’t see a bright future for XPDF. 2005-02-05 4:48 pm I dunno, I never really got “into” it. Not that it matters much anyway. I’m a horrible GUI designer. 2005-02-05 6:28 pm Efltk compiled and installed worked. But, with Ede, during compilation, I get this error: snip Going to edewm… Linking edewm /usr/local/lib/libefltk.a(Fl_WM.static.o)(.bss+0x0): multiple definition of `_XA_NET_SUPPORTED’ Winhints.o(.bss+0x2c): first defined here /usr/local/lib/libefltk.a(Fl_WM.static.o)(.bss+0x4): multiple definition of `_XA_NET_SUPPORTING_WM_CHECK’ and so on…. I ran ldconfig after compiling efltk. 2005-02-05 7:35 pm “Do: touch efltk.spec.in “…” hope it works ” Thanks a lot . It worked, I’m compiling eFLTK right now and hoping that everything works. Why didnt I thought that my self… *me stupid* 2005-02-05 9:43 pm Well touch efltk.spec.in workd Thanks for that. efltk-2.0.4 has been compiled and installed but nowwww….. I try to run ./configure in ede’s directory and after a while I get You don’t have efltk installed. To compile Ede, you will needit. But I did install it so I don’t know what’s going on. Should I add something in the PATH variable? May be it can’t see it if it’s searching the PATH. Then also, on their web site it says: you can just run ./build.gcc script, which will do usually preparations; but /build.gcc does not exist. also, (NOTE: before running ./configure, you must run aclocal, autoconf, and automake commands); aclocal does not exist and I don’t what it is, the rest: root@yos ede # autoconf autom4te: need GNU m4 1.4 or later: /usr/bin/m4 root@yos ede # automake autom4te: need GNU m4 1.4 or later: /usr/bin/m4 automake: autoconf failed with exit status: 1 I think I will give up on this unless someone gives me some tips and I can try out. 2005-02-06 1:08 pm If devs like so much to copy Windows interfaces, why not copy Apples(R) Aqua(TM) for a change. In which way exactly does this project copy Windows interfaces in your opinion? Or, better question, what exactly do you understand is an “interface”? 2005-02-06 2:38 pm I personally like this “interface concept”. Compliments to EDE team. I dont care about “DE too similar to Win9X/XP”.. WTF, I just want a nice DE. 2005-02-07 2:36 am Even a cursory overview shows many more “light” environments out there then “cutting edge”…yet everyone seems to think its groundbreaking when someone “finally gets it” and builds a light environment. Duh, there are like 20 already. 2005-02-07 7:06 pm There are prettier light-weight window managers/environments — XFCE and Rox come to mind, but this is basic and gets the job done. It would be familiar to migrating Windows users. Nothing wrong with that. Most window widget sets have functions for minimizing, closing, expanding, windowshading, closing, etc., and are going to create similar windows. No one bitches that NeXT windows look an awful lot like MS Windows widgets. I personally use Win2K Pro, OSX Panther, and Gnome on Gentoo. Grow up people. If you don’t like it, don’t use it, or better yet, if you don’t approve, then don’t watch.