On 26 May 2014 17:18, lee <l...@yun.yagibdah.de> wrote: > lee <l...@yun.yagibdah.de> writes: > >> Thomas Adam <tho...@fvwm.org> writes: >> >>> So I don't want idle speculation or wonder to permeate the work I'm doing, >>> the only thing FVWM will benefit from this will be bug-fixes, and I've >>> already identified a few memory leaks. It's nice for FVWM in a way, it's >>> being audited for free as a result of this work. >> >> Is the code currently in the repo on github "useful"? "Useful" would >> mean that one could compile it and use it instead of fvwm. > > So I cloned and compiled it, and it works --- even seems to be a lot > faster than the fvwm version in Fedora. > > However, I have > > FvwmRearrange -tile -a -mn 2 -noraise 0 0 100 100 > > in a menu, and it doesn`t work anymore in that it doesn`t seem to do > anything. Is this feature disabled/removed in mvwm?
I think this module has gone now. one thing i am interested to know is if we will be seeing the monitor support in mvwm put back into fvwm. is anyone interested in putting back changes to fvwm? i thought that was the point of mvwm? seperate monitors has been something i've wanted for ages and it seems to be working for me - does it work for anyone else? Michael
