Geany: September 2008 Archives

Not that anything approaching brain-surgery-level thinking was in any way involved here, but I figured out why and how it's easy to get paragraphs to automatically indent when writing in the Geany text editor.

First of all, it's not called automatic tabbing or paragraph inentation. The correct term for what I'm enjoying so much is auto-indentation and it can be turned on and off under the Document menu in Geany. The defaults for auto-indentation can also be set in the Edit menu under Preferences--Editor.

When writing for print, where I don't need — and can't stand — having two returns between paragraphs. After transferring the file from this laptop to my newspaper's print publishing system, those double-returns demand that I delete one of them. That's because in most non-Web publishing, indented first lines make paragraphs distinct from one another, not extra linefeeds.

So having the indents on the first line of every paragraph helps me seen where each paragraph begins.

I know that programmers use indents to help structure their code. But when something so right for coding in C also helps hacks like me, making traditional word processing applications less needed, everybody wins.

(This post was originally written on May 22, 2008; since that time, I've added the RAM, and it does indeed make a difference. It's still not easy to live with 144 MB of RAM and 233 MHz of CPU, but it's easier than having less than half of that M. What I can say is that 500 MHz of CPU and 256 MB of RAM is positively picnic-ish. Also, I finally did the OpenBSD 4.2-to-4.3 upgrade on the VIA box. It wasn't easy, but I did get it done.)

If the question is "how low can you go" in terms of computer memory, it's all about applications.

If you stayed in the Linux console and never ran X, just about anybody could be happy with 32 MB of RAM. It might be hard to actually run Linux or a BSD in 16 MB, but I've heard of Linux distributions that will do it, Damn Small Linux, Tom's RtBt (is that the right spelling?) and DeLi Linux among them.

But as much as the hard-core users talk about how they stay at the command line all the time, it's hard to get much done strictly in a console when you're a regular person. Sure you can use Lynx for text-only Web browsing, you can set up Mutt (and Postfix/Sendmail/msmtp/esmtp, Procmail and whatever other helper apps are needed) with highly customized configuration files designed to handle and filter multiple mail accounts, use Vi or Emacs for text editing and all that.

But the bottom line for me is that I need a Web browser. A "real" Web browser, something that works with Movable Type and Google Docs, and that pretty much means Firefox or some Iceweaselish derivative.

I don't tend to use OpenOffice very much (although it runs better in Debian with 64 MB that you'd think), I barely even use AbiWord these days. I'm not saying that I won't need OpenOffice in the future, but at present I'm most comfortable using various X text editors, including Geany in most Linuxes and BSDs, Gedit when I'm in GNOME, and Google Docs half the time just for the easy portability of my copy.

And while Geany doesn't load super quickly from a "traditionally" installed distribution (but is quite quick when loaded into memory as it is in Puppy Linux, once it's loaded it runs very well indeed.

And the Dillo Web browser -- which looks better in its OpenBSD incarnation than it does anywhere else -- performs quite well in 64 MB of RAM. The only problem is that Dillo can't do everything I need to do on the Web. At least the Dillo in Puppy and DSL has https support. That's not turned on in OpenBSD, and the app needs to be recompiled to add it. I can manage to turn on cookies in OpenBSD, which helps me with some sites, but for anything remotely complicated, Firefox is essential.

And while Firefox will run in 64 MB of RAM, it does so very poorly. There just isn't enough memory to keep the program from swapping to the drive incessantly whenever doing just about anything.

In this very 64 MB, I've run just about everything that will load on this Compaq laptop: Puppy, DSL, Debian (the Xfce install, plus a "standard" install with Fluxbox), Slackware (without KDE) and OpenBSD.

Truth be told, Almost all of these OSes run just about the same. Damn Small Linux has a bit of an edge, and if DSL 4.3 ran as well as 4.0, its inclusion of Firefox 2 would put it over the top. As it is, I've lost my desktop wallpaper, and I can't figure out how to display the menu in Fluxbox (even though I prefer to run JWM).

Puppy definitely needs more memory, especially to run the Mozilla-derived Seamonkey Web suite.

Debian Etch was OK. While the Xfce install is odd in many ways, as I say, I was surprised to see OpenOffice run at all -- and not too badly at that. Iceweasel was, again, an exercise in frustration. But Debian remains a distinct possibility for this machine.

It's main OS for awhile has been OpenBSD, with a partition set aside for the Linux files generated by the Puppy and DSL live CDs.

OpenBSD runs pretty well, but as I said, Firefox remains an issue.

The question: Will things improve with the boost of RAM from 64 MB to the Compaq Armada 7770dmt's maximum 144 MB? From my past experience, I know that Puppy can run in 128 MB if you have swap space, and DSL is certainly comfortable with 128 MB.

To answer the question, I could reduce the memory in my Via test box from 256 MB to 128 MB and see how OpenBSD (now version 4.3) runs in that configuration. But I'd have to pull the cover from my converted thin client and find a 128 MB SIMM. I've probably got one ... somewhere.

Better to just wait for my Compaq memory to come in the mail (luckily it's cheap).

I've know for awhile that 256 MB is a significant sweet spot for Linux, but I'd love for 144 MB to be just sweet enough to give this laptop a new lease on open-source life.

And while I managed to upgrade my VIA box from OpenBSD 4.2 to 4.3, it takes a lot more work than a simple apt-get, and I'm reluctant to do it

(This post was originally written on April 24, 2008; since then, I've bumped the system up to 144 MB. This entry should set the scene for how much better things are working with the additional memory).

When you're not running X, 64 MB of RAM is plenty. In OpenBSD, or just about any version of Linux for that matter, you just don't need a lot of memory to use the console. Of course, you can't do a whole lot either.

I know, I KNOW, that real geeks use the command line as much as possible. E-mail with Mutt or Pine (and fetchmail, procmail, sendmail, procmail ... did I miss anything (maybe msmtp, which I prefer, or esmtp, exim, postfix ...), text entry with vi (or nano, joe, emacs), text-only Web browsing with Lynx or Elinks.

OK, I do all this stuff, though I did give up on Mutt; it just didn't work for me as well as I needed, and while I put in plenty of time on the configuration, I needed to be way more of an expert than I'll probably ever be). But I really prefer to run X. I get the apps I want, real Web browsing, and a whole lot more overall productivity.

But X takes memory, and while OpenBSD with the Fvwm window manager can run in 64 MB, things take forever and a day due to all the swapping. Unfortunately, my 1999-era laptop -- a Compaq Armada 7770dmt -- maxes out at 144 MB. That's 16 MB on the motherboard, plus two 64 MB EDO SODIMMs.

The memory is on the way (I hope). Right now I have two smaller SODIMMs, a 16 MB and a 32 MB, in the laptop. And yes, I had to do the Compaq memory fix from the OpenBSD FAQ to make the OS recognize the "extra" memory. But it does work.

Anyway, I'm hopeful that OpenBSD will perform dramatically better in X with 144 MB. Since this is a pre-ACPI laptop, I don't have the problems that plague me with my Gateway Solo 1450, on which only Linux, it seems, will turn the fan on and off in response to CPU temperature. In OpenBSD, it's all on. In FreeBSD, it works for a day, and then that's the end of it. Can't figure out that one.

But I'd love to have a laptop devoted to OpenBSD (I'm using vi now ... but I miss Geany, Firefox and the rest of the junk I've got loaded on here). And if OpenBSD can work well on the desktop with only 144 MB, that will be a significant achievement for all of us with hardware in the 10-year-old range.

I'd love to roll OpenBSD onto my 10-year old PC that now runs Windows 2000. It would Do OK with Linux, for sure, but getting OpenBSD on there would be really great. And I have a full 256 MB of RAM on that box. I'm already running that much memory on my test box in the office, and I have no complaints there when it comes to running X apps in OpenBSD.

I started X to finish this post. First I ran Firefox, even though this laptop has only wireless 802.11b networking (and no wired Ethernet, although I've been meaning to get a PCMCIA Ethernet card). Yep, still takes a dog's age to start Firefox, and it's not all that responsive when it's running.

Again, I would love for that NOT to be the case after the memory upgrade.

I started Geany to continue writing. Geany runs pretty well with this 233 MHz processor and 64 MB of RAM.

So does the Dillo browser. And everytime I write about Dillo in OpenBSD, I like to mention that, for some reason, the Dillo menus and buttons look way better in the OpenBSD version of the app (I'm using the package, not the port) than they do in any other operating system in which I've tried it. And I've tried many.