Nevermind, I see the problem. Browsing to your site gives me this (yes I'm at work):
&*%@! Corporate Nanny-bots! BoB give me slack! Guess I'll download them at home!

about memory consumption: empiric measuring of busy memory (caches don't count) with free -m after booting with lxde, xfce, razor-qt and kde-4.7.4 (with a terminal to execute free :) ) on slackware64-current (kernel 3.1.6) with nvidia driver (memory hungry):
lxde: 125 Mb
xfce: 131 Mb
razor-qt: 208 Mb
kde: 458 Mb

It's nice to be invisible. :rolleyes: Well, I was asking about Andromeda, but I see I won't get an answer, unless I get it myself. Considering it's Qt4 (bloat) and your stats don't show it to be lightweight enough, I don't see an incentive to do so. Well, good luck with your playing with Razor.

sorry bob for not answering before: tried now qtfm and seems to work.
I was just sticking to razor-qt devs' hints for andromeda but, obviously, you can use any file manager you want.
And, as you said, you could have tried it yourself ;)
Ah, what do you mean by "icon manager"?

To make it clear: I'm not pushing anyone in using this desktop environment, I'm happily playing with lxde pretty much everywhere in these days :)
Offering an easy way to build a full razorqt-desktop with sbopkg, I'm just trying to give slackers the possibility to test it theirself if they want, nothing more.

At first I thougt it doesn't come with file manager, so that's why I mentioned the piece of software that I did. I saw the screenshots with something that looked like dolphin, not really like new/different file manager. And than you mentioned Andromeda (I lost you there). As I wanted to write a bit more on Razor elsewhere, I was asking you to clear the things up for me. Does it or does it not come with fm and what is Andromeda?

Btw, file/icon manager as in nautilus/konqueror/dolphin/pcmanfm. That is, file manager with desktop icons.

And I hope we cleared up the missunderstanding. :) Sorry for posting qtfm on your thread, I really thought it would be usefull, as I tought Razor doesn't come with a file manager. ;)

Btw, I'm not associated in any way with qtfm, and don't even usually use Qt applications. I run XFCE. :)

the razor-qt main package does not include a file manager.
Managing of icons on the desktop is integrated, it's not done through the filemanager like, for example, pcmanfm does for the lxde desktop when launched with the --desktop option (I think nautilus/konqueror/dolphin are not involved in managing icons on the desktop for their respective DEs).

Andromeda is mentioned as the QtDesktop file manager by the razort-qt developers in their wiki (good source of infos), on the page "3rd party applications" that I linked twice before:

https://github.com/Razor-qt/razor-qt...y-applications

Just a suggestion: if you like to write something on the matter, maybe it's better if you try this stuff yourself (as I wrote, I tried to make this as easier as possible without distributing packages) instead of basing your considerations on what I say :D

Re Icons:
I think you are right. I think Nautilus (pretty sure about this one) and Konqueror were responsible some time ago, but not anymore (Gnome 3, KDE 4). :) I'm not sure about Dolphin.

Re 3rd party apps link on the wiki:
Sorry I didn't see that. :)

Re suggestion:
Probably a good suggestion, I just wanted to hear the first-hand experience before that. ;)

Thanks. :)

Thanks for providing these figures, ponce! Just wanted to add, that after boot in runlevel 3 (multiuser, network, no X) logged in as a normal user free -m indicates 323 MB of used memory. Among the most efficient environment seems to be Fluxbox at only 272 MB, including Kmix and Kopete as autostart apps in the tray. So the console uses more memory than Fluxbox, LXDE, Razor-Qt and Xfce. Surprisingly, Enlightenment DR17 with all its eyecandy doesn't need much more memory than these.

Though I have to say, that the figures I get for Xfce and Razor-Qt are slightly bigger than yours, but still in the same order of magnitude. ;)
It's about 370 MB for Xfce and 308 MB for Razor-Qt. For Xfce the difference might be caused by the fact that I have installed a few extensions from SBo, and maybe session management takes a few additional MB of RAM. For Razor-Qt I am not sure: Actually I haven't tweaked or modified it in any way...

Funny statistics! :)

So, the numbers make Razor-Qt attractive as a platform for Qt and KDE applications for use on older machines. In fact I have been wondering for while, when someone would start such a project, something like LXDE, but based on Qt. Maybe this is it! Only other option would be to solve the problem with new hardware, and Xmas is close, isn't it? ;)

gargamel

I tried others, for completness, on this same machine

console: 70 Mb
X and just an xterm: 99 Mb
enlightenment: 136 Mb
fluxbox: 100 Mb
windowmaker + pcmanfm --desktop: 105Mb (pcmanfm launched this way needs 5Mb)
fvwm2: 102 Mb

wmaker, fluxbox and fvwm2 are weightless :-o

Strange, I get these:
For xfce:
and for fluxbox:
Must be the number of buffers?

sorry for the late reply: don't know really why you have much more busy ram, can be your video card, supplementary processes (qps is very handy in this case), etc...
you can check if a simple X and an xterminal already need that lot of ram: to test that here, I first backupped my ~/.xinitrc and then
BTW, the additional build scripts, besides Robby's razorqt.SlackBuild, to complete the Qt-desktop suggested by the razor-qt devs, are now on slackbuilds.org :)

No problem. I'm not really bothered by those differences, considering the amount of RAM that's available.

I got similar numbers, first, when I just logged off from KDE and logged in to the other environments to run mem -f in an xterm window. Obviously, memory is not freed when a user logs off. Services like Akonadi continue to run.

ponce did it exactly right: To get more reliable figures, you'll have to reboot every time and execute the measurment before starting anything else than the xterm and running free -m. That's time-consuming, of course, so thanks for this, too, to ponce, but more, of course, for making this very promising new DE available to us!

Does anyone have a recommendation for a Qt based email client for use in Razor-Qt, that is not in symbiosis with a monster like Akonadi? ;)

gargamel


P. S.: In order not to be gotten wrong: Akonadi is a great effort from a software architecture point of view, but it's unfortunately very big, too, and the real benefits for a typical home user aren't all that obvious.