Fluxbox vs Openbox

Non release banter
Post Reply
User avatar
M. Eerie
Posts: 181
Joined: 31 Aug 2017, 21:18
Distribution: APorteus BUDGIE x64

Fluxbox vs Openbox

Post#1 by M. Eerie » 15 Dec 2019, 09:55

MX Linux just launched Fluxbox edition.

Before a major screw-up from my part, I've been using Manjaro Openbox and was very satisfied. I ended with a very functional and polished system with some minors additions/deletions here and there.

Now, I'm back at XFCE on main desktop, and thanks to Porteus, this forum (and some AppImages) I have been able to complete an almost identical (portable) setup, whether in Slackware, Arch or Debian.

Also, It should be noted that XFCE has now reached a very mature GTK3 state and performs as solid and stable as ever (maybe a little heavier if you wish). What would I gain/lose in adding one of those WM instead xfwm? I don't like having redundant/duplicate things installed. (Thinking of xfce4-appfinder / whiskermenu plugin / rofi as semantic launcher)

In your experience, what are the biggest differences you've found when using one or the other as a WM ?


User avatar
DEV Team
DEV Team
Posts: 2361
Joined: 20 Mar 2012, 03:42
Distribution: 5.0rc1-64bit all-DE+more
Location: australia

Fluxbox vs Openbox

Post#2 by ncmprhnsbl » 15 Dec 2019, 12:12

it depends what you want ...
if you're using slackware porteus or nemesis, openbox is already included in 002-xorg(002-gui in nemesis)
openbox has more wm actions for keybinds(eg. keyboard driven tiling)
fluxbox has window tabbing(ie. several apps in one window)
openbox has xml config files, but also various third party configuration apps
fluxbox has simpler config syntax and some builtin configuration via it's menu..
fluxbox has its own taskbar, openbox does not..
Forum Rules : https://forum.porteus.org/viewtopic.php?f=35&t=44

Post Reply