Openbox users group

Forum Forums General Software Openbox users group

  • This topic has 35 replies, 12 voices, and was last updated Mar 25-9:03 am by fungalnet.
Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 36 total)
  • Author
  • #7145

    Everything is fine and well in antix but not much of openbox interest. I see all kinds of work on all other minimal de/wm but nothing on openbox.
    Sadly I can’t even get some of the debian stuff to work properly, like themes. Neither lxappearance or obconf will pick them up after installation. I keep trying different GTK2 themes, especially the ones that include some dark options, and nothing works.

    So if anyone out there is using openbox and likes to share some experience I’d appreciate it.

    PS By the way, it was voted linux window manager of the year @ linuxquestions Window Manager of the Year – Openbox (24.22%)

    • This topic was modified 1 year, 9 months ago by fungalnet.

    I used to use it in #! (Crunchbang), but I used it as it came – didn’t add menu bars, themes, or anything else, just kept it nice & simple.

    Here, I use Fluxbox, my favourite WM, & tend to install it when I’m using OpenBSD too.

    So you might not find too many users of OB here. 😉

    Edit: You may find more info on the Devuan forum, as a few of their spins use it.

    • This reply was modified 1 year, 9 months ago by fatmac.

    Linux (& BSD) since 1999


    I created something, and got it all working but there wasn’t any interest at the time.


    There are a lot of good window managers (WM) and nearly as many desktop environments (DM) these days too, at least if you consider the countless variations on the dozen or so desktop environments.

    The vast majority of them are good and have much to offer. Like quite a few things we see in software, preferences seem to factor into the choices and popularity of various WM and DM. Interestingly, in this particular forum, a lot of people have a preference for Fluxbox, and that makes sense because it was the default WM in the original antiX software. Those who make good use of all three of the typical buttons on mouse pointers are often those who prefer window managers like Fluxbox – and also people who have used the X Window System (X11) and/or UNIX systems for long periods of time, but Fluxbox is also a nimble, flexible window manager; some people gravitate to it for this reason.

    Most of the people I’ve seen who use OpenBox have also been users of either LXDE or other environments that either use OpenBox or a window manager with similar characteristics.

    I was one of the ones advocating a switch from a technology-driven window manager, such as Fluxbox, OpenBox, or window managers favoring functionality as the key factor, instead advocating either a window manager or a desktop manager that favors usability and simplicity over functionality, and therefore I advocate the default of IceWM as a window manager and Xfce as a moderate, relatively simple desktop manager. My reasoning is that technologists and enthusiasts are usually able to find and install their favorite tools and toys, whereas true beginners sometimes struggle with finding, installing, and configuring things they are still learning about.

    Once we all know what we’re doing – and assuming that is the case, the Debian-based repositories on which our software is based are full of window managers, desktop managers, applications, and tools of every conceivable size and type. When we know what we are doing, we know how to install them. If we don’t, then I personally think that it is easier and safer to stick with simple, basic applications and utilities.

    Brian Masinick


    Here is a link.

    I still have the tar files that were posted with it, and might still have it on a system.

    PS: I’d be interested to know the exact sequence of package installs to create an AntiX LXDE version. Mine was intended to integrate with the then current AntiX system as another desktop option. Myself, I do run IceWM, still, and like it, and don’t see much difference, really.

    • This reply was modified 1 year, 9 months ago by BobC.

    @ Fungalnet
    There are no dependencies to systemd in Openbox. So it should run as well in antiX as it does in Debian. In my case I can confirm that. I have installed Openbox in antiX-17-64-base and in a net-install of antiX-17.1-64-sid. In both cases it is running without any problems with full funtionality.
    Have you checked your themes, if they had the correct permissions? ‘Read’ should be allowed for everone.

    • This reply was modified 1 year, 9 months ago by Xaver.

    If you download/install a package such as themes, and it is placed in /usr/share/themes (I think) why would the rights be insufficient? This never happened in debian or any other installation I know.


    I found the tar files. The packages needed are listed the old post linked to above, and after those are installed, the tar files are what I needed to overlay with. It was installed on top of AntiX 14 Full when I built it.

    I don’t recall having theme problems.

    1. tar-file7.tar.gz

    @ fungalnet
    Did you check permissions? If you install your theme from the debian repo or as xy.deb, the permissions should be ok. Any other way you probably have to correct them.


    @BobC Thank you, there are some interesting ideas in there. I like obmenu-generator for click-menu and if I need a panel I use lxpanel, but rarely do. I believe it offers much more than tint2 with about the same ram use.

    @Xaver No, it is all debian, and the stuff I have used in the past that don’t seem to work. It is puzzling me too, thinking more of a missing lxde component rather than perimissions. I’ll track it down. I have to admit that arch-based distros in terms of customizing a minimalist desktop is far advanced than anything debian based.

    My comment initially had to do with seeing all this antix custom stuff for many de/wm and nothing for openbox, which is popular and the base for LXDE/LXQT .. and maybe others that I don’t know of.

    I have tried jwm, awesome, fluxbox, and even the dreaded i3 (which I hated). I am pretty set on my ob ways.


    fungalnet, If you like lxpanel better than tint2, IIRC it did work at the time, but took an extra 9 or 10 mb of memory. My configuration was done with tint2 because I had a PIII with 512mb I was working with, so basically there was no ram to spare, and therefore I ran as memory-light of apps as I could find that worked. The things I installed on top of AntiX Full were:

    As far as meta package, I would think it either needs to be it or the top part of it. First, the following packages need to be installd via synaptic or apt-get:
    Packages needed were:


    Then my tar file needs to be installed with each piece in its relative directory

    I have not tried it on top of AntiX 17. I would expect there would be differences needed in what I did for that to work.

    Forum Admin

    Oh yes I forgot about this.
    Lets see if this can be done, I have modified / merged the menu building parts from the tarball into the github. If anyone would like to try copy desktop-menu from here
    to /usr/local/bin
    and copy all the template files from
    to /usr/share/desktop-menu/templates/
    and then run
    /usr/local/lib/desktop-menu/desktop-menu-apt-update force

    which should update the menus for all the window managers (openbox included)
    The menu uses the ID “antiX-Applications” to link to the root menu.

    Computers are like air conditioners. They work fine until you start opening Windows. ~Author Unknown


    I loaded a pristine AntiX-17_x64 Full last night, and will try Openbox on it. Its a Dell D620 laptop with 2 gb of ram, so that should be plenty.

    Can someone please tell me the virtues of lxpanel rather than tint2?

    PS, as was also the case in 2014 when I was playing with this before, I do believe that having an Openbox option might not seem that important to many people running AntiX now, but might significantly broaden it’s appeal to people looking for a new distro that runs light and is flexible to fit their needs and wants, and because Openbox is well known and popular, many folks already know how to work it.

    • This reply was modified 1 year, 9 months ago by BobC.

    I think I did that all correctly. I installed all the packages in my list, but I did not install my tar file. I then followed your instructions. I then restarted icewm, and went to other desktops and selected openbox. It did switch to openbox, but the menus are very barren, ie no xwindows apps, and I got an odd error box, see pic below.

    Should I have installed my tar file mods? I don’t think I can run lxpanel without reviewing for changes, if I did.

    Forum Admin

    I never took to running openbox on a permanent basis. But if anyone wants my tint2rc file I used. It looks like this and it auto hides.

    You will have to edit my tint2rc for The icon launchers I put in my tint2rc . That screenshot I am showing is in fluxbox though.

    # Each launcher_item_app must be a full path to a .desktop file

    • This reply was modified 1 year, 9 months ago by rokytnji.
    • This reply was modified 1 year, 9 months ago by rokytnji.

    Sometimes I drive a crooked road to get my mind straight.
    Not all who Wander are Lost.
    Linux Registered User # 475019
    How to Search for AntiX solutions to your problems

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 36 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.