I am really liking Fluxbox these days and am looking at installing one of the terms that supports transparency. Is one of aterm or eterm any more compatible with Slack than the other? For example, it looks like eterm is somewhat related to Elightenment and uses some of the Elightenment libraries. I know that Pat V. removed Elightenment from Slack because the libraries it uses were outdated, didn't appear to maintained, etc (at least I think that's what I read somewhere). Because of that, I tend to avoid things that are Elightenment related (maybe a bit paranoid on my part??).

But is one of aterm or eterm more "compatible" with Slackware? I.e. is one easier to install, uses more of the existing Slack -current libraries, etc? I don't like to stray too far from Pat V.'s logic!

Does one of these terms more easily configured and implemented that the other?

Thanks.

hi there,

if everything that you want is transparency why don't you try rxvt ???
it quite similar to xterm... man rxvt
it is included in Slackware and runs ok with fluxbox...

give it a try...

rxvt -tr

cheers

aterm is slightly easier to install and works great, and everything I've read says that it has much lower memory usage than eterm. It's an excellent program. There is a collection of slackware packages for eterm and it's dependencies at the eterm site, it is a good way to get Esetroot (for added transparency for your fluxbox desktop).

Thanks, you are correct with that, but I when I pull the rxvt window over other application windows, the other apps don't show through. With aterm and eterm the other app windows should show through, right?

Also, how do I get rid ot the borders and scoll bar on the rxvt window? I am trying to go for a very clean look. I'd like it to apply just to the rxvt window and not to my other app windows.

Thanks!

Thanks Kovacs. So there is no problem installing the additional libraries with the eterms package (I just downloaded it from the site). It won't break anything in current?? Do I just execute the install.sh and all the packages will be installed in their proper order? Sorry, I know I'm being a bit of a noob...

Thanks!

Okay...so I answered my own question and downloaded eterm successuflly and added it to my flux menu. I tried to read the eterm docs to create transperancy, but it's a bit too technical for me to understand. Is there some good understandable documentation on the web for creating the transparent term window (and getting rid of the scrollbars, borders, etc.) and for using other transparency features via Esetroot for the flux desktop? Flux is just way too much fun!!

I use aterm as a terminal emulator, and just have eterm for Esetroot (which is apparently difficult to build by itself). Aterm has transparency built in, just add something like this to your ~.Xdefaults:

aterm*tinting:#ffffff
aterm*transparent:true
aterm*shading:30
aterm*background:white
aterm*foreground:grey
aterm*scrollBar:false
aterm*fade: 60
aterm*geometry:85x30
aterm*truetintingType:True

For more info, and details of what all that does, man aterm.

Esetroot enables you to make parts of fluxbox (eg. the menu or the toolbar) transparent (via the fluxbox menu and by editing themes) - some other wallpaper setting progs don't allow you to do that. There's a lot more info about fluxbox theming at the fluxbox site.

Great. Thanks. I don't have a file .Xdefaults in my home directory. So do I just create one and add the code? I tried that but it didn't take effect when I opened aterm.

No, Aterm, Eterm, rxvt and so on only support pseudo transparency, so they only copy the root window background (your wallpaper)

Real transparency and more eye-candy is possible with the new FDO Xserver; it's still in development and not recommended for production use, yet.
http://freedesktop.org/Software/xserver

I just started using Aterm, and like it a lot.

make sure the .Xdefaults file is readable by the user.
I guess you will also need to restart the X server

~/.Xdefaults is read every time an application starts, so you should be able to make changes to it and see the results when you next start the application. I have no idea why it wouldn't work, unless for maybe permissions (like tobyl said) or maybe just a syntax error.