Does an X client necessarily need a window manager to work?












27














Does an X client necessarily need a window manager to work? Can an X client work with only the X server?



If an X client doesn't have a window, does whether it can work need a window manager?



If an X client can work without a window manager, does the X client necessarily have no window?



Thanks.










share|improve this question




















  • 4




    When I first encountered X—that is, quite a long time ago—the fact that you don't need a window manager was discussed in most introductory materials. That doesn't seem to be the case these days, but I suppose that someone might think this obvious or an example of laziness.
    – dmckee
    2 days ago






  • 10




    @Tim: You seem to have been around long enough that you should know that a downvote is not intended to communicate "hatred", "evilness", "cruelty", "discrimination" or anything like that at all. A downvote is simply a content rating system, and some content is less valuable than other content. (For the record, I didn't downvote this question: I think this question is great.) See also: Can we make it more obvious to new users that downvotes on the main site are not insults and in fact can help them help themselves? on Meta Stack Overflow.
    – Daniel Pryden
    yesterday










  • @DanielPryden yes, long enough to notice the downvotes follow me in virtually every post, to have the sense of what is normal and what is hatred. I don't think my questions in general as great as the upvotes that I have received, but certainly not worth the downvotes and close votes
    – Tim
    yesterday








  • 5




    @Tim Some of your downvoted questions seem not useful to me. The UI (the alt text of the button) encourages users to downvote "not useful" questions. Hatred is not a necessary component. Adding a small hint/assertion that a question could be potentially used in some scenario (even if very marginal/improbable) would mostly prevent that knee-jerk reaction. Your questions that I saw are remarkably similar in that they lack any such hint/assertion.
    – kubanczyk
    yesterday








  • 3




    Tim, the diamond moderators have access to some tools that detect pattern voting. Flag them and ask them to look into it. /mod on physics.se
    – dmckee
    yesterday
















27














Does an X client necessarily need a window manager to work? Can an X client work with only the X server?



If an X client doesn't have a window, does whether it can work need a window manager?



If an X client can work without a window manager, does the X client necessarily have no window?



Thanks.










share|improve this question




















  • 4




    When I first encountered X—that is, quite a long time ago—the fact that you don't need a window manager was discussed in most introductory materials. That doesn't seem to be the case these days, but I suppose that someone might think this obvious or an example of laziness.
    – dmckee
    2 days ago






  • 10




    @Tim: You seem to have been around long enough that you should know that a downvote is not intended to communicate "hatred", "evilness", "cruelty", "discrimination" or anything like that at all. A downvote is simply a content rating system, and some content is less valuable than other content. (For the record, I didn't downvote this question: I think this question is great.) See also: Can we make it more obvious to new users that downvotes on the main site are not insults and in fact can help them help themselves? on Meta Stack Overflow.
    – Daniel Pryden
    yesterday










  • @DanielPryden yes, long enough to notice the downvotes follow me in virtually every post, to have the sense of what is normal and what is hatred. I don't think my questions in general as great as the upvotes that I have received, but certainly not worth the downvotes and close votes
    – Tim
    yesterday








  • 5




    @Tim Some of your downvoted questions seem not useful to me. The UI (the alt text of the button) encourages users to downvote "not useful" questions. Hatred is not a necessary component. Adding a small hint/assertion that a question could be potentially used in some scenario (even if very marginal/improbable) would mostly prevent that knee-jerk reaction. Your questions that I saw are remarkably similar in that they lack any such hint/assertion.
    – kubanczyk
    yesterday








  • 3




    Tim, the diamond moderators have access to some tools that detect pattern voting. Flag them and ask them to look into it. /mod on physics.se
    – dmckee
    yesterday














27












27








27


2





Does an X client necessarily need a window manager to work? Can an X client work with only the X server?



If an X client doesn't have a window, does whether it can work need a window manager?



If an X client can work without a window manager, does the X client necessarily have no window?



Thanks.










share|improve this question















Does an X client necessarily need a window manager to work? Can an X client work with only the X server?



If an X client doesn't have a window, does whether it can work need a window manager?



If an X client can work without a window manager, does the X client necessarily have no window?



Thanks.







x11 window-manager






share|improve this question















share|improve this question













share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited 44 mins ago









hkBst

1032




1032










asked 2 days ago









Tim

25.9k74246454




25.9k74246454








  • 4




    When I first encountered X—that is, quite a long time ago—the fact that you don't need a window manager was discussed in most introductory materials. That doesn't seem to be the case these days, but I suppose that someone might think this obvious or an example of laziness.
    – dmckee
    2 days ago






  • 10




    @Tim: You seem to have been around long enough that you should know that a downvote is not intended to communicate "hatred", "evilness", "cruelty", "discrimination" or anything like that at all. A downvote is simply a content rating system, and some content is less valuable than other content. (For the record, I didn't downvote this question: I think this question is great.) See also: Can we make it more obvious to new users that downvotes on the main site are not insults and in fact can help them help themselves? on Meta Stack Overflow.
    – Daniel Pryden
    yesterday










  • @DanielPryden yes, long enough to notice the downvotes follow me in virtually every post, to have the sense of what is normal and what is hatred. I don't think my questions in general as great as the upvotes that I have received, but certainly not worth the downvotes and close votes
    – Tim
    yesterday








  • 5




    @Tim Some of your downvoted questions seem not useful to me. The UI (the alt text of the button) encourages users to downvote "not useful" questions. Hatred is not a necessary component. Adding a small hint/assertion that a question could be potentially used in some scenario (even if very marginal/improbable) would mostly prevent that knee-jerk reaction. Your questions that I saw are remarkably similar in that they lack any such hint/assertion.
    – kubanczyk
    yesterday








  • 3




    Tim, the diamond moderators have access to some tools that detect pattern voting. Flag them and ask them to look into it. /mod on physics.se
    – dmckee
    yesterday














  • 4




    When I first encountered X—that is, quite a long time ago—the fact that you don't need a window manager was discussed in most introductory materials. That doesn't seem to be the case these days, but I suppose that someone might think this obvious or an example of laziness.
    – dmckee
    2 days ago






  • 10




    @Tim: You seem to have been around long enough that you should know that a downvote is not intended to communicate "hatred", "evilness", "cruelty", "discrimination" or anything like that at all. A downvote is simply a content rating system, and some content is less valuable than other content. (For the record, I didn't downvote this question: I think this question is great.) See also: Can we make it more obvious to new users that downvotes on the main site are not insults and in fact can help them help themselves? on Meta Stack Overflow.
    – Daniel Pryden
    yesterday










  • @DanielPryden yes, long enough to notice the downvotes follow me in virtually every post, to have the sense of what is normal and what is hatred. I don't think my questions in general as great as the upvotes that I have received, but certainly not worth the downvotes and close votes
    – Tim
    yesterday








  • 5




    @Tim Some of your downvoted questions seem not useful to me. The UI (the alt text of the button) encourages users to downvote "not useful" questions. Hatred is not a necessary component. Adding a small hint/assertion that a question could be potentially used in some scenario (even if very marginal/improbable) would mostly prevent that knee-jerk reaction. Your questions that I saw are remarkably similar in that they lack any such hint/assertion.
    – kubanczyk
    yesterday








  • 3




    Tim, the diamond moderators have access to some tools that detect pattern voting. Flag them and ask them to look into it. /mod on physics.se
    – dmckee
    yesterday








4




4




When I first encountered X—that is, quite a long time ago—the fact that you don't need a window manager was discussed in most introductory materials. That doesn't seem to be the case these days, but I suppose that someone might think this obvious or an example of laziness.
– dmckee
2 days ago




When I first encountered X—that is, quite a long time ago—the fact that you don't need a window manager was discussed in most introductory materials. That doesn't seem to be the case these days, but I suppose that someone might think this obvious or an example of laziness.
– dmckee
2 days ago




10




10




@Tim: You seem to have been around long enough that you should know that a downvote is not intended to communicate "hatred", "evilness", "cruelty", "discrimination" or anything like that at all. A downvote is simply a content rating system, and some content is less valuable than other content. (For the record, I didn't downvote this question: I think this question is great.) See also: Can we make it more obvious to new users that downvotes on the main site are not insults and in fact can help them help themselves? on Meta Stack Overflow.
– Daniel Pryden
yesterday




@Tim: You seem to have been around long enough that you should know that a downvote is not intended to communicate "hatred", "evilness", "cruelty", "discrimination" or anything like that at all. A downvote is simply a content rating system, and some content is less valuable than other content. (For the record, I didn't downvote this question: I think this question is great.) See also: Can we make it more obvious to new users that downvotes on the main site are not insults and in fact can help them help themselves? on Meta Stack Overflow.
– Daniel Pryden
yesterday












@DanielPryden yes, long enough to notice the downvotes follow me in virtually every post, to have the sense of what is normal and what is hatred. I don't think my questions in general as great as the upvotes that I have received, but certainly not worth the downvotes and close votes
– Tim
yesterday






@DanielPryden yes, long enough to notice the downvotes follow me in virtually every post, to have the sense of what is normal and what is hatred. I don't think my questions in general as great as the upvotes that I have received, but certainly not worth the downvotes and close votes
– Tim
yesterday






5




5




@Tim Some of your downvoted questions seem not useful to me. The UI (the alt text of the button) encourages users to downvote "not useful" questions. Hatred is not a necessary component. Adding a small hint/assertion that a question could be potentially used in some scenario (even if very marginal/improbable) would mostly prevent that knee-jerk reaction. Your questions that I saw are remarkably similar in that they lack any such hint/assertion.
– kubanczyk
yesterday






@Tim Some of your downvoted questions seem not useful to me. The UI (the alt text of the button) encourages users to downvote "not useful" questions. Hatred is not a necessary component. Adding a small hint/assertion that a question could be potentially used in some scenario (even if very marginal/improbable) would mostly prevent that knee-jerk reaction. Your questions that I saw are remarkably similar in that they lack any such hint/assertion.
– kubanczyk
yesterday






3




3




Tim, the diamond moderators have access to some tools that detect pattern voting. Flag them and ask them to look into it. /mod on physics.se
– dmckee
yesterday




Tim, the diamond moderators have access to some tools that detect pattern voting. Flag them and ask them to look into it. /mod on physics.se
– dmckee
yesterday










4 Answers
4






active

oldest

votes


















30














No, you don't need to be running a window manager to allow an X client to work. Some systems provide an option to just run a terminal at startup, and from that you can start additional programs, including window managers. Some kiosk setups which only want one application to run don't need a window manager. Some implementations of X for microsoft windows avoid an X window manager by letting the OS manage the windows.



Without a window manager you typically need to specify the geometry to the programs so you don't have everything placed in the top left corner.



In X, the window manager is just another X client. This was unusual at the time, but made it easy to have different window managers.



Another way to look at the question is to observe that you can change window managers on the fly, so there is a time between the first one stopping and the second one taking control, but as all your applications don't crash they must be able to work without.






share|improve this answer

















  • 1




    Hint: there is a tool called xwit which really helps when experimenting with wm-less configurations.
    – rackandboneman
    yesterday



















21














No. Well written apps don't need a window manager.



But some "modern" broken apps will not work fine without a window manager (eg. firefox and its address bar suggestions which won't drop down [1]).



Many other shitty apps not only assume a window manager, but to add insult to injury, a click to focus window manager. For instance, it used to be that any java app will simply steal the focus on startup.



If you want to test, install Xephyr (a "nested" X11 server), run it with Xephyr :1, and then start your apps with DISPLAY=:1 in their environment.



[1] the "awesome bar" of firefox won't open its suggestions pane when typed into or clicked on the history button unless there's a window manager running. The auto-hide menu won't work either.






share|improve this answer























  • Is there an open bug in firefox for the issue you mentioned? I think firefox's open source nature would be willing to accomodate a bug fix for that issue.
    – t3dodson
    yesterday






  • 4




    @t3dodson You can trying submitting one, but it's highly doubtful that anybody will care to review a patch fixing that. Running firefox is not really supported without a window manager, session manager, and recently, a pulseaudio server running. Of course, you can fork it, but having to maintain a firefox fork is not something I would wish on my worst enemy ;-)
    – mosvy
    yesterday



















4














To add to other answers, I have developed and released an open source app which works without a window manager (meaning you can start it directly from xinitrc). There is some extra steps the application should do in this case besides managing geometry and Z-order of its dialogs, but this is totally manageable.






share|improve this answer





























    2














    A window manager is a convenience for users.



    In the good^Wbad old days, I used to have a ~/.Xclients file that read:



    #!/bin/sh

    HOST=`uname -n | sed 's/..*$//'`

    xv -root -rmode 5 $HOME/misc/millennium/theme/Wallpaper.gif -quit &

    xterm -geometry 80x24+0+85 #52x71-104+0 -n $HOST -T $HOST &
    xterm -geometry 80x24+510+429 #52x71-52+0 -n $HOST -T $HOST &
    xclock -digital -update 1 -geometry +1059+982 &
    xscreensaver -nosplash &
    exec /usr/local/lib/X11/fvwm/fvwm


    This file would be run when I started X with startx. When this script finishes then the X server will shut down.



    Note the last line: exec .../fvwm. This is the line that started my window manager (fvwm). All the previous applications (xv, xterm, xclock, xscreensaver) were running before the window manager started. Because the call to fvwm was the last line and not put in the background it meant that when fvwm terminated then X would close down.



    The X startup even had a "fall back" default... if there were no configuration files then start X with a single xterm running. Closing that xterm would end the X session.






    share|improve this answer





















    • What was the advantage of not backgrounding fvwm?
      – Alex Hajnal
      7 hours ago










    • We need the script to not terminate because if it does then the X server terminates; by not backgrounding fvwm (and running it by exec) we ensure there's still a process keeping the X server from shutting down. By making that last process fvwm allows for an "exit" menu item to work as expected.
      – Stephen Harris
      6 hours ago










    • Got it. It's been a while since I did much low-level with X. Must say though that fvwm 2 is one of my two favorite window managers (the other being kwin 3).
      – Alex Hajnal
      6 hours ago










    • In my case, fvwm-1.24r was my favourite window manager :-)
      – Stephen Harris
      6 hours ago










    • I hear you on that. I seem to recall that v2 was more customizable than v1 though (with all config options in a single text file and reloadable on-the-fly?). Pretty light-weight too, especially by today's standards. I last used it daily in the P-II era IIRC.
      – Alex Hajnal
      6 hours ago













    Your Answer








    StackExchange.ready(function() {
    var channelOptions = {
    tags: "".split(" "),
    id: "106"
    };
    initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

    StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
    // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
    if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
    StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
    createEditor();
    });
    }
    else {
    createEditor();
    }
    });

    function createEditor() {
    StackExchange.prepareEditor({
    heartbeatType: 'answer',
    autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
    convertImagesToLinks: false,
    noModals: true,
    showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
    reputationToPostImages: null,
    bindNavPrevention: true,
    postfix: "",
    imageUploader: {
    brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
    contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
    allowUrls: true
    },
    onDemand: true,
    discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
    ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
    });


    }
    });














    draft saved

    draft discarded


















    StackExchange.ready(
    function () {
    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2funix.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f491161%2fdoes-an-x-client-necessarily-need-a-window-manager-to-work%23new-answer', 'question_page');
    }
    );

    Post as a guest















    Required, but never shown

























    4 Answers
    4






    active

    oldest

    votes








    4 Answers
    4






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes









    30














    No, you don't need to be running a window manager to allow an X client to work. Some systems provide an option to just run a terminal at startup, and from that you can start additional programs, including window managers. Some kiosk setups which only want one application to run don't need a window manager. Some implementations of X for microsoft windows avoid an X window manager by letting the OS manage the windows.



    Without a window manager you typically need to specify the geometry to the programs so you don't have everything placed in the top left corner.



    In X, the window manager is just another X client. This was unusual at the time, but made it easy to have different window managers.



    Another way to look at the question is to observe that you can change window managers on the fly, so there is a time between the first one stopping and the second one taking control, but as all your applications don't crash they must be able to work without.






    share|improve this answer

















    • 1




      Hint: there is a tool called xwit which really helps when experimenting with wm-less configurations.
      – rackandboneman
      yesterday
















    30














    No, you don't need to be running a window manager to allow an X client to work. Some systems provide an option to just run a terminal at startup, and from that you can start additional programs, including window managers. Some kiosk setups which only want one application to run don't need a window manager. Some implementations of X for microsoft windows avoid an X window manager by letting the OS manage the windows.



    Without a window manager you typically need to specify the geometry to the programs so you don't have everything placed in the top left corner.



    In X, the window manager is just another X client. This was unusual at the time, but made it easy to have different window managers.



    Another way to look at the question is to observe that you can change window managers on the fly, so there is a time between the first one stopping and the second one taking control, but as all your applications don't crash they must be able to work without.






    share|improve this answer

















    • 1




      Hint: there is a tool called xwit which really helps when experimenting with wm-less configurations.
      – rackandboneman
      yesterday














    30












    30








    30






    No, you don't need to be running a window manager to allow an X client to work. Some systems provide an option to just run a terminal at startup, and from that you can start additional programs, including window managers. Some kiosk setups which only want one application to run don't need a window manager. Some implementations of X for microsoft windows avoid an X window manager by letting the OS manage the windows.



    Without a window manager you typically need to specify the geometry to the programs so you don't have everything placed in the top left corner.



    In X, the window manager is just another X client. This was unusual at the time, but made it easy to have different window managers.



    Another way to look at the question is to observe that you can change window managers on the fly, so there is a time between the first one stopping and the second one taking control, but as all your applications don't crash they must be able to work without.






    share|improve this answer












    No, you don't need to be running a window manager to allow an X client to work. Some systems provide an option to just run a terminal at startup, and from that you can start additional programs, including window managers. Some kiosk setups which only want one application to run don't need a window manager. Some implementations of X for microsoft windows avoid an X window manager by letting the OS manage the windows.



    Without a window manager you typically need to specify the geometry to the programs so you don't have everything placed in the top left corner.



    In X, the window manager is just another X client. This was unusual at the time, but made it easy to have different window managers.



    Another way to look at the question is to observe that you can change window managers on the fly, so there is a time between the first one stopping and the second one taking control, but as all your applications don't crash they must be able to work without.







    share|improve this answer












    share|improve this answer



    share|improve this answer










    answered 2 days ago









    icarus

    5,5831929




    5,5831929








    • 1




      Hint: there is a tool called xwit which really helps when experimenting with wm-less configurations.
      – rackandboneman
      yesterday














    • 1




      Hint: there is a tool called xwit which really helps when experimenting with wm-less configurations.
      – rackandboneman
      yesterday








    1




    1




    Hint: there is a tool called xwit which really helps when experimenting with wm-less configurations.
    – rackandboneman
    yesterday




    Hint: there is a tool called xwit which really helps when experimenting with wm-less configurations.
    – rackandboneman
    yesterday













    21














    No. Well written apps don't need a window manager.



    But some "modern" broken apps will not work fine without a window manager (eg. firefox and its address bar suggestions which won't drop down [1]).



    Many other shitty apps not only assume a window manager, but to add insult to injury, a click to focus window manager. For instance, it used to be that any java app will simply steal the focus on startup.



    If you want to test, install Xephyr (a "nested" X11 server), run it with Xephyr :1, and then start your apps with DISPLAY=:1 in their environment.



    [1] the "awesome bar" of firefox won't open its suggestions pane when typed into or clicked on the history button unless there's a window manager running. The auto-hide menu won't work either.






    share|improve this answer























    • Is there an open bug in firefox for the issue you mentioned? I think firefox's open source nature would be willing to accomodate a bug fix for that issue.
      – t3dodson
      yesterday






    • 4




      @t3dodson You can trying submitting one, but it's highly doubtful that anybody will care to review a patch fixing that. Running firefox is not really supported without a window manager, session manager, and recently, a pulseaudio server running. Of course, you can fork it, but having to maintain a firefox fork is not something I would wish on my worst enemy ;-)
      – mosvy
      yesterday
















    21














    No. Well written apps don't need a window manager.



    But some "modern" broken apps will not work fine without a window manager (eg. firefox and its address bar suggestions which won't drop down [1]).



    Many other shitty apps not only assume a window manager, but to add insult to injury, a click to focus window manager. For instance, it used to be that any java app will simply steal the focus on startup.



    If you want to test, install Xephyr (a "nested" X11 server), run it with Xephyr :1, and then start your apps with DISPLAY=:1 in their environment.



    [1] the "awesome bar" of firefox won't open its suggestions pane when typed into or clicked on the history button unless there's a window manager running. The auto-hide menu won't work either.






    share|improve this answer























    • Is there an open bug in firefox for the issue you mentioned? I think firefox's open source nature would be willing to accomodate a bug fix for that issue.
      – t3dodson
      yesterday






    • 4




      @t3dodson You can trying submitting one, but it's highly doubtful that anybody will care to review a patch fixing that. Running firefox is not really supported without a window manager, session manager, and recently, a pulseaudio server running. Of course, you can fork it, but having to maintain a firefox fork is not something I would wish on my worst enemy ;-)
      – mosvy
      yesterday














    21












    21








    21






    No. Well written apps don't need a window manager.



    But some "modern" broken apps will not work fine without a window manager (eg. firefox and its address bar suggestions which won't drop down [1]).



    Many other shitty apps not only assume a window manager, but to add insult to injury, a click to focus window manager. For instance, it used to be that any java app will simply steal the focus on startup.



    If you want to test, install Xephyr (a "nested" X11 server), run it with Xephyr :1, and then start your apps with DISPLAY=:1 in their environment.



    [1] the "awesome bar" of firefox won't open its suggestions pane when typed into or clicked on the history button unless there's a window manager running. The auto-hide menu won't work either.






    share|improve this answer














    No. Well written apps don't need a window manager.



    But some "modern" broken apps will not work fine without a window manager (eg. firefox and its address bar suggestions which won't drop down [1]).



    Many other shitty apps not only assume a window manager, but to add insult to injury, a click to focus window manager. For instance, it used to be that any java app will simply steal the focus on startup.



    If you want to test, install Xephyr (a "nested" X11 server), run it with Xephyr :1, and then start your apps with DISPLAY=:1 in their environment.



    [1] the "awesome bar" of firefox won't open its suggestions pane when typed into or clicked on the history button unless there's a window manager running. The auto-hide menu won't work either.







    share|improve this answer














    share|improve this answer



    share|improve this answer








    edited yesterday

























    answered 2 days ago









    mosvy

    5,9131325




    5,9131325












    • Is there an open bug in firefox for the issue you mentioned? I think firefox's open source nature would be willing to accomodate a bug fix for that issue.
      – t3dodson
      yesterday






    • 4




      @t3dodson You can trying submitting one, but it's highly doubtful that anybody will care to review a patch fixing that. Running firefox is not really supported without a window manager, session manager, and recently, a pulseaudio server running. Of course, you can fork it, but having to maintain a firefox fork is not something I would wish on my worst enemy ;-)
      – mosvy
      yesterday


















    • Is there an open bug in firefox for the issue you mentioned? I think firefox's open source nature would be willing to accomodate a bug fix for that issue.
      – t3dodson
      yesterday






    • 4




      @t3dodson You can trying submitting one, but it's highly doubtful that anybody will care to review a patch fixing that. Running firefox is not really supported without a window manager, session manager, and recently, a pulseaudio server running. Of course, you can fork it, but having to maintain a firefox fork is not something I would wish on my worst enemy ;-)
      – mosvy
      yesterday
















    Is there an open bug in firefox for the issue you mentioned? I think firefox's open source nature would be willing to accomodate a bug fix for that issue.
    – t3dodson
    yesterday




    Is there an open bug in firefox for the issue you mentioned? I think firefox's open source nature would be willing to accomodate a bug fix for that issue.
    – t3dodson
    yesterday




    4




    4




    @t3dodson You can trying submitting one, but it's highly doubtful that anybody will care to review a patch fixing that. Running firefox is not really supported without a window manager, session manager, and recently, a pulseaudio server running. Of course, you can fork it, but having to maintain a firefox fork is not something I would wish on my worst enemy ;-)
    – mosvy
    yesterday




    @t3dodson You can trying submitting one, but it's highly doubtful that anybody will care to review a patch fixing that. Running firefox is not really supported without a window manager, session manager, and recently, a pulseaudio server running. Of course, you can fork it, but having to maintain a firefox fork is not something I would wish on my worst enemy ;-)
    – mosvy
    yesterday











    4














    To add to other answers, I have developed and released an open source app which works without a window manager (meaning you can start it directly from xinitrc). There is some extra steps the application should do in this case besides managing geometry and Z-order of its dialogs, but this is totally manageable.






    share|improve this answer


























      4














      To add to other answers, I have developed and released an open source app which works without a window manager (meaning you can start it directly from xinitrc). There is some extra steps the application should do in this case besides managing geometry and Z-order of its dialogs, but this is totally manageable.






      share|improve this answer
























        4












        4








        4






        To add to other answers, I have developed and released an open source app which works without a window manager (meaning you can start it directly from xinitrc). There is some extra steps the application should do in this case besides managing geometry and Z-order of its dialogs, but this is totally manageable.






        share|improve this answer












        To add to other answers, I have developed and released an open source app which works without a window manager (meaning you can start it directly from xinitrc). There is some extra steps the application should do in this case besides managing geometry and Z-order of its dialogs, but this is totally manageable.







        share|improve this answer












        share|improve this answer



        share|improve this answer










        answered yesterday









        George Y.

        1413




        1413























            2














            A window manager is a convenience for users.



            In the good^Wbad old days, I used to have a ~/.Xclients file that read:



            #!/bin/sh

            HOST=`uname -n | sed 's/..*$//'`

            xv -root -rmode 5 $HOME/misc/millennium/theme/Wallpaper.gif -quit &

            xterm -geometry 80x24+0+85 #52x71-104+0 -n $HOST -T $HOST &
            xterm -geometry 80x24+510+429 #52x71-52+0 -n $HOST -T $HOST &
            xclock -digital -update 1 -geometry +1059+982 &
            xscreensaver -nosplash &
            exec /usr/local/lib/X11/fvwm/fvwm


            This file would be run when I started X with startx. When this script finishes then the X server will shut down.



            Note the last line: exec .../fvwm. This is the line that started my window manager (fvwm). All the previous applications (xv, xterm, xclock, xscreensaver) were running before the window manager started. Because the call to fvwm was the last line and not put in the background it meant that when fvwm terminated then X would close down.



            The X startup even had a "fall back" default... if there were no configuration files then start X with a single xterm running. Closing that xterm would end the X session.






            share|improve this answer





















            • What was the advantage of not backgrounding fvwm?
              – Alex Hajnal
              7 hours ago










            • We need the script to not terminate because if it does then the X server terminates; by not backgrounding fvwm (and running it by exec) we ensure there's still a process keeping the X server from shutting down. By making that last process fvwm allows for an "exit" menu item to work as expected.
              – Stephen Harris
              6 hours ago










            • Got it. It's been a while since I did much low-level with X. Must say though that fvwm 2 is one of my two favorite window managers (the other being kwin 3).
              – Alex Hajnal
              6 hours ago










            • In my case, fvwm-1.24r was my favourite window manager :-)
              – Stephen Harris
              6 hours ago










            • I hear you on that. I seem to recall that v2 was more customizable than v1 though (with all config options in a single text file and reloadable on-the-fly?). Pretty light-weight too, especially by today's standards. I last used it daily in the P-II era IIRC.
              – Alex Hajnal
              6 hours ago


















            2














            A window manager is a convenience for users.



            In the good^Wbad old days, I used to have a ~/.Xclients file that read:



            #!/bin/sh

            HOST=`uname -n | sed 's/..*$//'`

            xv -root -rmode 5 $HOME/misc/millennium/theme/Wallpaper.gif -quit &

            xterm -geometry 80x24+0+85 #52x71-104+0 -n $HOST -T $HOST &
            xterm -geometry 80x24+510+429 #52x71-52+0 -n $HOST -T $HOST &
            xclock -digital -update 1 -geometry +1059+982 &
            xscreensaver -nosplash &
            exec /usr/local/lib/X11/fvwm/fvwm


            This file would be run when I started X with startx. When this script finishes then the X server will shut down.



            Note the last line: exec .../fvwm. This is the line that started my window manager (fvwm). All the previous applications (xv, xterm, xclock, xscreensaver) were running before the window manager started. Because the call to fvwm was the last line and not put in the background it meant that when fvwm terminated then X would close down.



            The X startup even had a "fall back" default... if there were no configuration files then start X with a single xterm running. Closing that xterm would end the X session.






            share|improve this answer





















            • What was the advantage of not backgrounding fvwm?
              – Alex Hajnal
              7 hours ago










            • We need the script to not terminate because if it does then the X server terminates; by not backgrounding fvwm (and running it by exec) we ensure there's still a process keeping the X server from shutting down. By making that last process fvwm allows for an "exit" menu item to work as expected.
              – Stephen Harris
              6 hours ago










            • Got it. It's been a while since I did much low-level with X. Must say though that fvwm 2 is one of my two favorite window managers (the other being kwin 3).
              – Alex Hajnal
              6 hours ago










            • In my case, fvwm-1.24r was my favourite window manager :-)
              – Stephen Harris
              6 hours ago










            • I hear you on that. I seem to recall that v2 was more customizable than v1 though (with all config options in a single text file and reloadable on-the-fly?). Pretty light-weight too, especially by today's standards. I last used it daily in the P-II era IIRC.
              – Alex Hajnal
              6 hours ago
















            2












            2








            2






            A window manager is a convenience for users.



            In the good^Wbad old days, I used to have a ~/.Xclients file that read:



            #!/bin/sh

            HOST=`uname -n | sed 's/..*$//'`

            xv -root -rmode 5 $HOME/misc/millennium/theme/Wallpaper.gif -quit &

            xterm -geometry 80x24+0+85 #52x71-104+0 -n $HOST -T $HOST &
            xterm -geometry 80x24+510+429 #52x71-52+0 -n $HOST -T $HOST &
            xclock -digital -update 1 -geometry +1059+982 &
            xscreensaver -nosplash &
            exec /usr/local/lib/X11/fvwm/fvwm


            This file would be run when I started X with startx. When this script finishes then the X server will shut down.



            Note the last line: exec .../fvwm. This is the line that started my window manager (fvwm). All the previous applications (xv, xterm, xclock, xscreensaver) were running before the window manager started. Because the call to fvwm was the last line and not put in the background it meant that when fvwm terminated then X would close down.



            The X startup even had a "fall back" default... if there were no configuration files then start X with a single xterm running. Closing that xterm would end the X session.






            share|improve this answer












            A window manager is a convenience for users.



            In the good^Wbad old days, I used to have a ~/.Xclients file that read:



            #!/bin/sh

            HOST=`uname -n | sed 's/..*$//'`

            xv -root -rmode 5 $HOME/misc/millennium/theme/Wallpaper.gif -quit &

            xterm -geometry 80x24+0+85 #52x71-104+0 -n $HOST -T $HOST &
            xterm -geometry 80x24+510+429 #52x71-52+0 -n $HOST -T $HOST &
            xclock -digital -update 1 -geometry +1059+982 &
            xscreensaver -nosplash &
            exec /usr/local/lib/X11/fvwm/fvwm


            This file would be run when I started X with startx. When this script finishes then the X server will shut down.



            Note the last line: exec .../fvwm. This is the line that started my window manager (fvwm). All the previous applications (xv, xterm, xclock, xscreensaver) were running before the window manager started. Because the call to fvwm was the last line and not put in the background it meant that when fvwm terminated then X would close down.



            The X startup even had a "fall back" default... if there were no configuration files then start X with a single xterm running. Closing that xterm would end the X session.







            share|improve this answer












            share|improve this answer



            share|improve this answer










            answered yesterday









            Stephen Harris

            24.7k24477




            24.7k24477












            • What was the advantage of not backgrounding fvwm?
              – Alex Hajnal
              7 hours ago










            • We need the script to not terminate because if it does then the X server terminates; by not backgrounding fvwm (and running it by exec) we ensure there's still a process keeping the X server from shutting down. By making that last process fvwm allows for an "exit" menu item to work as expected.
              – Stephen Harris
              6 hours ago










            • Got it. It's been a while since I did much low-level with X. Must say though that fvwm 2 is one of my two favorite window managers (the other being kwin 3).
              – Alex Hajnal
              6 hours ago










            • In my case, fvwm-1.24r was my favourite window manager :-)
              – Stephen Harris
              6 hours ago










            • I hear you on that. I seem to recall that v2 was more customizable than v1 though (with all config options in a single text file and reloadable on-the-fly?). Pretty light-weight too, especially by today's standards. I last used it daily in the P-II era IIRC.
              – Alex Hajnal
              6 hours ago




















            • What was the advantage of not backgrounding fvwm?
              – Alex Hajnal
              7 hours ago










            • We need the script to not terminate because if it does then the X server terminates; by not backgrounding fvwm (and running it by exec) we ensure there's still a process keeping the X server from shutting down. By making that last process fvwm allows for an "exit" menu item to work as expected.
              – Stephen Harris
              6 hours ago










            • Got it. It's been a while since I did much low-level with X. Must say though that fvwm 2 is one of my two favorite window managers (the other being kwin 3).
              – Alex Hajnal
              6 hours ago










            • In my case, fvwm-1.24r was my favourite window manager :-)
              – Stephen Harris
              6 hours ago










            • I hear you on that. I seem to recall that v2 was more customizable than v1 though (with all config options in a single text file and reloadable on-the-fly?). Pretty light-weight too, especially by today's standards. I last used it daily in the P-II era IIRC.
              – Alex Hajnal
              6 hours ago


















            What was the advantage of not backgrounding fvwm?
            – Alex Hajnal
            7 hours ago




            What was the advantage of not backgrounding fvwm?
            – Alex Hajnal
            7 hours ago












            We need the script to not terminate because if it does then the X server terminates; by not backgrounding fvwm (and running it by exec) we ensure there's still a process keeping the X server from shutting down. By making that last process fvwm allows for an "exit" menu item to work as expected.
            – Stephen Harris
            6 hours ago




            We need the script to not terminate because if it does then the X server terminates; by not backgrounding fvwm (and running it by exec) we ensure there's still a process keeping the X server from shutting down. By making that last process fvwm allows for an "exit" menu item to work as expected.
            – Stephen Harris
            6 hours ago












            Got it. It's been a while since I did much low-level with X. Must say though that fvwm 2 is one of my two favorite window managers (the other being kwin 3).
            – Alex Hajnal
            6 hours ago




            Got it. It's been a while since I did much low-level with X. Must say though that fvwm 2 is one of my two favorite window managers (the other being kwin 3).
            – Alex Hajnal
            6 hours ago












            In my case, fvwm-1.24r was my favourite window manager :-)
            – Stephen Harris
            6 hours ago




            In my case, fvwm-1.24r was my favourite window manager :-)
            – Stephen Harris
            6 hours ago












            I hear you on that. I seem to recall that v2 was more customizable than v1 though (with all config options in a single text file and reloadable on-the-fly?). Pretty light-weight too, especially by today's standards. I last used it daily in the P-II era IIRC.
            – Alex Hajnal
            6 hours ago






            I hear you on that. I seem to recall that v2 was more customizable than v1 though (with all config options in a single text file and reloadable on-the-fly?). Pretty light-weight too, especially by today's standards. I last used it daily in the P-II era IIRC.
            – Alex Hajnal
            6 hours ago




















            draft saved

            draft discarded




















































            Thanks for contributing an answer to Unix & Linux Stack Exchange!


            • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

            But avoid



            • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

            • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


            To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.





            Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.


            Please pay close attention to the following guidance:


            • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

            But avoid



            • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

            • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


            To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




            draft saved


            draft discarded














            StackExchange.ready(
            function () {
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2funix.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f491161%2fdoes-an-x-client-necessarily-need-a-window-manager-to-work%23new-answer', 'question_page');
            }
            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown





















































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown

































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown







            Popular posts from this blog

            Михайлов, Христо

            Гороховецкий артиллерийский полигон

            Центральная группа войск