Which jwm are we suppose to be using with tc2.4rc4?

[bigpcman]

I lost track of the jwm situation. Is the snapshot or "regular" jwm best for tc2.4rc4. I have been using "regular" jwm today for testing apps and it seems to work fine. According to the repository it's only 66k and has no dependencies. Do I have this right?

edit: I know the snapshot is a newer release but is it necessary to get all tc2.4rc4 functionality to work?

[jls]

if u use jwm, better to use microcore

[roberts]

The jwm.tcz has had an adjustment for use with 2.4.

Since 2.4 is not released yet, it and its support files are all located in the release candidate area.
The latest jwm.tcz can be found .http://distro.ibiblio.org/pub/linux/distributions/tinycorelinux/2.x/release_candidates/microcore/jwm.tcz

As no one has provided feedback, as to the fact that this adjusted jwm will work with prior releases, it remains in released cadidate status.

[K_evin]

if u use jwm, better to use microcore

A step by step guide, how to do that, would be very helpful.

I started Sun Virtual Box with microcore_2.4rc4.iso and got a window prompting 'tc@box:~$

Asking on #freenode #tinycorelinux channel I learned that it is possible to type the command 'tce-load -w -i jwm.tcz' after that prompt.

Doing so jwm.tcz was loaded successfully.

But I don't succeed to start it. Typing 'jwm' after the prompt I get the error: 'libX11.so.6' no such file or directory.

Any help appreciated.

[Guy]

I hope this helps.

[removed due to policy violation]/microcore.html

[K_evin]

Thx Guy, your hint was really helpful.

I detected that the repo got core folders containing extensions which aren't shown in TC Appbrowser.

I even managed to download and local tce-load them into Virtual Box microcore, what's a bit tricky as first a windows share has to be set up.

But success is limited. Instead of the 'libX11.so.6 not found'-error now I get a 'could not open display'-error.

Before investing more worktime I added file sizes:
microcore_2.4rc4 = 7,300 K
Xprogs.core.tczl =     700  K
Xlibs.core.tczl     =  3,200 K
Xvesa.core.tcz   =     300 K

Total                  =  11.500 K

Compared to          11.500 K of tinycore_2.4rc4.iso

It seems that putting together the microcore parts results just in a kind of  tinycore and I wonder where is the advantage wasting so much working time on microcore instead of directly using tinycore?

Why, exactly do you mean, jls-legalize, should jvm better be used with microcore?

[Guy]

Tiny Core is a combination of the parts of Microcore.

Some people may want to run it in a specific way without particular parts. Those people can use Microcore.

It was suggested, it is better to use microcore, as Tiny Core contains flwm. If you use jwm, you include flwm which is not needed. There is no harm. It runs ok.

Tiny Core is easier for new users. I suggest they get Tiny Core working properly before trying Microcore.

[roberts]

if u use jwm, better to use microcore

Guy wrote:

It was suggested, it is better to use microcore, as Tiny Core contains flwm. If you use jwm, you include flwm which is not needed. There is no harm. It runs ok.

flwm is a  basic window manager, just as ash is a basic shell, just as busybox is basic *nix utils, and on and on with many core items

You don't complain because Tiny Core only has busybox, you grab the extension(s) that suit your needs. Using jwm, openbox, or other alternate window managers is just as easy as downloading any other extension.

To say that to use jwm one should use microcore is wrong.

[tclfan]

I started Sun Virtual Box with microcore_2.4rc4.iso and got a window prompting 'tc@box:~$
.........
But I don't succeed to start it. Typing 'jwm' after the prompt I get the error: 'libX11.so.6' no such file or directory.

Any help appreciated.

It is not my role to point out, but I would suggest that for the sake of testing TC system it is beter for such testing to be done on plain-vanilla TinyCore booted as standalone, rather than within Virtual Box. This is to eliminate the factor such virtual machine may play in behaviour of TinyCore...
I am a big fan of virtual environment myself and run it daily, but I am just conscious of possibility of impact it might have, where system itself is being tested...
If it is not my business to point this out, I apologize...

[^thehatsrule^: fixed quote]