[xmonad] Re: A New Solution to Removing the GHC Dependency

Braden Shepherdson Braden.Shepherdson at gmail.com
Tue Jul 22 09:13:50 EDT 2008

brian wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 4:31 AM, Miernik <public at public.miernik.name> wrote:
>> This is perfectly true. Someone here said that "124 MB is not a lot, are
>> you sure its a problem?". Well, it bloody is, its just killing the idea
>> of using a light window manager. If I wanted to scuk 124 MB just to
>> manage my windows, I would install Gnome or KDE. I am in the market for
>> lightweight tiling window managers, because I like to keep my software
>> light.
> XMonad is light in terms of lines of source and errors per line. If
> you're in some kind of disk space crisis that nobody else in the world
> knows anything about, you can definitely get some WM that takes fewer
> bytes on disk. But maybe just think for a minute about whether that
> would make any sense.

Liking to keep software light is similar to liking to compile from 
source. You can try to make a technical argument for it, but it doesn't 
come out very convincing. It's mostly a psychological and aesthetic 
thing, not technical. Which certainly makes it no less real! Whether or 
not you understand the viewpoint, the fact remains that the weight of 
xmonad's dependencies hurts its spread.

Braden Shepherdson

More information about the xmonad mailing list