On Mon, Jun 11, 2001 at 05:07:04PM -0500, Jamin Collins wrote:
> Joshua Swink [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
> > I'd suggest that some of these separate programs have existed
> > as a proof of concept long enough, and should be integrated into
> > Blackbox proper, as configure options if need be.
>
> Just because an application has been around for a while doesn't necessarily
> mean that it should be pulled into another. Yes, they've been around for a
> while. From listening to the list traffic, they most likely have quite a
> few users. I however am not one of them. I am happy with these
> applications being seperate choices (and ones I don't have to recompile BB
> to make). The current situation works rather well. If you want the feature
> then: get it, compile it, install it, and add it to how you launch BB.
>
I agree. Except for the extra step you have to go through to associate
the program with BB.
> > But more importantly, I think window managers should be interchangeable
> > at the drop of a hat (correct me if I'm wrong). And with Blackbox and
> > these external goodies like the slit, you have to modify .xinitrc beyond
> > just changing the final "exec" line. Adding some sort of "runme" list in
> > BB's rc file would fix that, and shouldn't raise any creeping
> > featurism fears.
>
> And why not just create a script that contains everything you want have
> started with BB and exec it?
Indeed, that is what I'm forced to do. Any script that changes the
window manager, such as xwmconfig, will have to make a special case
for Blackbox or risk discarding these extra programs.
What I'm feeling here is that they are practically an integral part
of my Blackbox setup, but there's no way to put them in its configuration.
--
Joshua Swink
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
