Re: bbkeys misbehavior
Circa 2002-Jan-23 22:18:12 -0800 dixit Sean 'Shaleh' Perry: : > Not bbkeys, I think. There'd have to be some way to tel blackbox to : > ignore the window and not pass focus to it. Bbkeys is trying to get the : > focus on whatever you chose in the menu. As long as bbkeys is separate : > from blackbox, i can't see this going away, without some kludgy extra : > code in blackbox, which i also can't see happening. Sorry. : > : : It being late and my being cold maybe I am pulling things out of the clouds : but it seems that there should be a way for a window to say 'I do not get : focus, ever, thanks'. From the XSetWMHints() man page (talking about the 'input' member of the XWMHints structure, selected using the InputHint mask): The input member is used to communicate to the window man ager the input focus model used by the application. Applications that expect input but never explicitly set focus to any of their subwindows (that is, use the push model of focus management), such as X Version 10 style applications that use real-estate driven focus, should set this member to True. Similarly, applications that set input focus to their subwindows only when it is given to their top-level window by a window manager should also set this member to True. Applications that manage their own input focus by explicitly setting focus to one of their subwindows whenever they want keyboard input (that is, use the pull model of focus management) should set this member to False. Applications that never expect any keyboard ^ input also should set this member to False. ^ Pull model window managers should make it possible for push model applications to get input by setting input focus to the top-level windows of applications whose input member is True. Push model window managers should make sure that pull model applications do not break them by resetting input focus to PointerRoot when it is appropri ate (for example, whenever an application whose input mem ber is False sets input focus to one of its subwindows). That may be the answer you're looking for; then again, it may not. I don't know enough about the internal structure of either Blackbox or bbkeys. -- jim knoble | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://www.pobox.com/~jmknoble/ (GnuPG fingerprint: 31C4:8AAC:F24E:A70C:4000::BBF4:289F:EAA8:1381:1491) msg05129/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: .blackboxrc keeps resetting the value of slit.onTop
Um. This has never made sense to me. Is there any good reason that
blackbox should overwrite its rc-file every time it exits? I really,
really think this needs to be changed. At some point, I'm going to add
a bbconf plugin that lets the user make changes to his/her blackbox
rc-file. This will be an impossible task as long as blackbox insists on
overwriting its rc-file at exit.
Sean--are you open to changing this? Does anyone have a good reason why
it shouldn't change? I understand the importance of blackbox trying to
make sure it has a good rc-file for the next time it opens, but I think
the current implementation of the solution for whatever problem this was
trying to solve is incorrect.
On Thu, 2002-01-24 at 01:35, Sean 'Shaleh' Perry wrote:
>
> blackbox writes out the rc file when it exits. The ONLY safe way to edit the
> rc file is to exit blackbox, then edit, then restart blackbox.
>
> Note, blackbox will still maximize a window into the area the slit fills, it
> will just be under the slit and not on top.
>
--
%<--%<
Jason Kasper (vanRijn)
bash$ :(){ :|:&};:
Numbers 6:24-26
Re: .blackboxrc keeps resetting the value of slit.onTop
"Jason 'vanRijn' Kasper" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> felt like writing: > Um. This has never made sense to me. Is there any good reason that > blackbox should overwrite its rc-file every time it exits? I really, > really think this needs to be changed. At some point, I'm going to > add a bbconf plugin that lets the user make changes to his/her > blackbox rc-file. This will be an impossible task as long as > blackbox insists on overwriting its rc-file at exit. > > Sean--are you open to changing this? Does anyone have a good reason > why it shouldn't change? i believe the original reason why it was done this way was because blackbox doesn't write out the rc-file immediatly after you changed some config-option from the gui (ie adding a new workspace, change workspace name, etc). at least, this is what i'm experiencing when changing something, but maybe i'm wrong. regards, lenix aka. guido -- www: http://www.lenix.de fon: +49 - 173 - 80 99 196 No, CTRL-ALT-DEL is not the proper way to end a programm. (RFC 1882)
Re: .blackboxrc keeps resetting the value of slit.onTop
That's what I was thinking too. Sean--wouldn't it be better if blackbox
rewrote its rc-file if and only if and immediately after blackbox
changed any of its config options?
On Thu, 2002-01-24 at 08:11, Guido 'lenix' Boehm wrote:
> "Jason 'vanRijn' Kasper" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> felt like writing:
> > Um. This has never made sense to me. Is there any good reason that
> > blackbox should overwrite its rc-file every time it exits? I really,
> > really think this needs to be changed. At some point, I'm going to
> > add a bbconf plugin that lets the user make changes to his/her
> > blackbox rc-file. This will be an impossible task as long as
> > blackbox insists on overwriting its rc-file at exit.
> >
> > Sean--are you open to changing this? Does anyone have a good reason
> > why it shouldn't change?
>
> i believe the original reason why it was done this way was because
> blackbox doesn't write out the rc-file immediatly after you changed
> some config-option from the gui (ie adding a new workspace, change
> workspace name, etc). at least, this is what i'm experiencing when
> changing something, but maybe i'm wrong.
>
>
> regards, lenix aka. guido
> --
> www: http://www.lenix.de
> fon: +49 - 173 - 80 99 196
> No, CTRL-ALT-DEL is not the proper way to end a programm. (RFC 1882)
>
--
%<--%<
Jason Kasper (vanRijn)
bash$ :(){ :|:&};:
Numbers 6:24-26
Re: .blackboxrc keeps resetting the value of slit.onTop
> Sean--are you open to changing this? Does anyone have a good reason why > it shouldn't change? I understand the importance of blackbox trying to > make sure it has a good rc-file for the next time it opens, but I think > the current implementation of the solution for whatever problem this was > trying to solve is incorrect. > I agree, this is an issue that needs to be addressed. My intention is to look into it when I begin work on Screen.cc which is the home for nearly every ugly line of blackbox code (placeWindow lives in Workspace.cc).
Re: Toolbar vs slit, was: Comments desired....
On Thu, Jan 24, 2002 at 12:25:47AM -0500, scott wrote: > Marco wrote: > > >>On Mon, 21 Jan 2002, Marco wrote: > >> > >> > >>>There is no need for *both* toolbar *and* slit in BB, > >>>meaning that for the end user they functionally overlap, [...] > >>> > > > >It *is* absolutely true. > > > Not at all. > > The toolbar tells you where you are, and the slit houses > dock-apps. I use the slit for bbkeys (and others) but keep > it auto-hidden so that i don't have to stare at it all the > time, whereas my toolbar is always visible, so i know what > workspace i'm on and what time/date it is. (and so i can > get to the menu when i'm working with maximized windows) > > I don't see how that's an overlap of functionality... One thing I really liked about gnome was its generalization of the toolbar/slit into a generallized "panel" that's very customizable. Effectively they let you make what we call a toolbar by making a panel with small icons that is bottom-centered with no autohide and a slit by making a autohide corner panel. And others could have slits in each corner, etc. If we generalize like gnome does we can also get cusomizability to the toolbar too. Would this necessarily bloat blackbox? -- Tony
bbmail and bbpager
Hello, I just found in my dselect of Debian Potato 'bbmail' and 'bbpager'. I use blackbox 0.61.1-1.1. bbmail is version 0.6.2-2 and bbpager is 0.1.6-1. So, I installed both and tried to start those tools. But nothing happened. No message, nothing. There was nothing when I tried to add "--help" or to take a look at the manpage (there was none). Are those version too old or am I doing something wrong to include them into my desktop? Best regards, Arvid -- .''`. [Arvid Warnecke] [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] [05323-715724] : :' : [IRC madhatter] [ http://up.to/suck ] [PGP-Subject: get pgp key] `. `' Linux 2.4.16 i686 XFree86 Version 4.1.0 Uptime: 22:46 `-- msg05135/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: getting fonts to work with bb
* Anh Lai ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > hello, I am new to Blackbox, but not to linux. Some themes come with > ansi fonts(.pcf), I have no problems installing them to allow Eterm > and Xterm to use them correctly. > I do this: > cp them to /usr/X11R6/lib/X11/fonts/misc as root > mkfontdir as root > as user: xset fp rehash > > this allows my terminals to use them correctly, but i cannot get BB to > use them correctly. What am i missing here? > > thanks in advance > > -- > Anh Lai <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > Did you get an answer for this? I had the same problem then I installed bbconf. Great tool for configuring bb stuff.
bbpager + another mouse button
Hello, Long time listener, first time caller here. I was wondering : I use BBpager a lot, but I find that I absolutely hate my middle-mouse-button for pushing, since it's a scroll-button. Is it possible to assign one of the other two mousebuttons to BBPager, using a configuration option either during compile time or (preferebly) using a .bbpagerrc ? It would make it _so_ much easier to click :-) . -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]> blackbox 0.62 on Debian GNU/Linux with XFree 4.1 and BBPager 0.3.something
Re: Eterm transparency with blackbox?
I use wmsetbg to set my background. it comes from windowmaker. You could install LibPropList and then build windowmaker and install wmsetbg manually. works like a charm. * Anh Lai ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > oh man, that sucks, i refuest to install GNOME. oh well, I can live > without it. > > > ... On 01/13/02, Martijn Houtman decided to write ... > > > On Sunday 13 January 2002 15:44, you wrote: > > > Is there anyway to get Eterm working with Transparent background with > > > blackbox? Or must I use Aterm to get this feature working? > > > > Yes, but you must use a gnome utility to set the background, like Esetroot, > > else it won't work. > > > > -- tinus > > > > -- > Anh Lai <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > >
Re: bbpager + another mouse button
On Thu, 24 Jan 2002 22:22:37 +0100 Maarten <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hello, > > Long time listener, first time caller here. > > I was wondering : I use BBpager a lot, but I find that I absolutely hate > my middle-mouse-button for pushing, since it's a scroll-button. > > Is it possible to assign one of the other two mousebuttons to BBPager, > using a configuration option either during compile time or (preferebly) > using a .bbpagerrc ? > > It would make it _so_ much easier to click :-) . Look at /usr/local/share/bbtools/bbpager.bb ;-) _ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: bbpager + another mouse button
On Thu, Jan 24, 2002 at 10:22:37PM +0100, Maarten wrote: > Hello, > > Long time listener, first time caller here. > > I was wondering : I use BBpager a lot, but I find that I absolutely hate > my middle-mouse-button for pushing, since it's a scroll-button. > > Is it possible to assign one of the other two mousebuttons to BBPager, > using a configuration option either during compile time or (preferebly) > using a .bbpagerrc ? > > It would make it _so_ much easier to click :-) . I changed the configuration of bbpager to use different mouse buttons by editing the contents of ~/.bbtools/bbpager.bb The relevant lines are: bbpager.desktopChangeButton:1 bbpager.windowMoveButton: 2 bbpager.windowFocusButton: 3 bbpager.windowRaiseButton: 3 Hope that helps, James. -- | James Robinson | | Graphics + IP research group, Staffordshire University | | http://research.soc.staffs.ac.uk/~james | | "A PC without Windows is like a chocolate cake without mustard." |
newbies ..
Don't know if too many people are aware of my project but I thought there might be some newbies or experts alike which would be interested. I have been working on a configuration tool for blackbox for about a year now in my spare time (which is not so plentiful). Its at a point where I think its pretty solid so I thought you might like to check it out. Its GTK based so its pretty quick. It can be found at http://whitebox.sourceforge.net/. Give it a try and let me know what you think. -luke P.S. Sorry for the plug .. but it might be useful to some.
Re: bbmail and bbpager
On 24-Jan-2002 Arvid Warnecke wrote: > Hello, > > I just found in my dselect of Debian Potato 'bbmail' and 'bbpager'. > I use blackbox 0.61.1-1.1. bbmail is version 0.6.2-2 and bbpager is > 0.1.6-1. > So, I installed both and tried to start those tools. But nothing > happened. No message, nothing. There was nothing when I tried to add > "--help" or to take a look at the manpage (there was none). > Are those version too old or am I doing something wrong to include them > into my desktop? > yes they are out of date. you need at least a 0.2.x version of bbpager.
Re: newbies ..
On 25-Jan-2002 Luke Freeman wrote: > Don't know if too many people are aware of my project but I thought > there might be some newbies or experts alike which would be interested. > > I have been working on a configuration tool for blackbox for about a > year now in my spare time (which is not so plentiful). Its at a point > where I think its pretty solid so I thought you might like to check it > out. > > Its GTK based so its pretty quick. It can be found at > http://whitebox.sourceforge.net/. Give it a try and let me know what you > think. > > -luke > > P.S. Sorry for the plug .. but it might be useful to some. Not to jab, but other than it being GTK based, why not use bbconf?
Re: bbpager + another mouse button
On Thu, 2002-01-24 at 13:22, Maarten wrote: > Hello, > > Long time listener, first time caller here. > > I was wondering : I use BBpager a lot, but I find that I absolutely hate > my middle-mouse-button for pushing, since it's a scroll-button. > > Is it possible to assign one of the other two mousebuttons to BBPager, > using a configuration option either during compile time or (preferebly) > using a .bbpagerrc ? > > It would make it _so_ much easier to click :-) . > > > > > -- > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> > blackbox 0.62 on Debian GNU/Linux with XFree 4.1 > and BBPager 0.3.something > I find the same. If you do a search of your hard drive you should find an example file somewhere called bbpager.bb. Put that file in your ~/.bbtools directory and then change the line: bbpager.desktopChangeButton:2 to bbpager.desktopChangeButton:1 You'll probably also want to change the config option that was 1 to 2, though I haven't actually tested what happens if you don't.
Re: newbies ..
> On Fri, 2002-01-25 at 11:56, Sean 'Shaleh' Perry wrote: > > Not to jab, but other than it being GTK based, why not use bbconf? Well, if you are looking purely at the configuration aspects (menu/style editors) of blackbox there is no real difference between bbconf and whiteBOX. I think as a menu editor and style editor they are pretty much evenly matched. bbconf does feature an excellent frontend for bbkeys, a feature which is still under development for whiteBOX, but not currently included. So .. maybe thats a reason to use bbconf. My main emphasis was to employ plugins which are bb specific first (menu/style), and then start moving on to plugins which, whilst not bb specific, allowed the user to customise their desktop. I had already developed the background tool as a standalone earlier and decided it could be useful in enhancing ones desktop (more easily). But, I suppose it really comes down to whether or not you like GTK or QT, like you said. Personally I prefer GTK to QT purely because i like the GTK LnF and I regularly have trouble compiling them on RedHat (coincidence?). I think you should probably try both and decide for yourself. Variety is generally always a good thing ... -luke
Re: newbies ..
And, let me just say, nice job Luke! =:) I'd had bbconf in mind for
the last year (didn't know there was a whiteBOX in the world) before I
wrote it, and if it wasn't for xOr's help, bbconf would have taken MUCH
longer than the month we took to crank out the first release. So, I
definitely understand and appreciate the hard work you've put into your
app. To be applauded, for sure!! =:)
On Thu, 2002-01-24 at 20:26, Luke Freeman wrote:
> > On Fri, 2002-01-25 at 11:56, Sean 'Shaleh' Perry wrote:
> >
> > Not to jab, but other than it being GTK based, why not use bbconf?
>
>
> Well, if you are looking purely at the configuration aspects (menu/style
> editors) of blackbox there is no real difference between bbconf and
> whiteBOX. I think as a menu editor and style editor they are pretty much
> evenly matched.
>
> bbconf does feature an excellent frontend for bbkeys, a feature which is
> still under development for whiteBOX, but not currently included. So ..
> maybe thats a reason to use bbconf.
>
> My main emphasis was to employ plugins which are bb specific first
> (menu/style), and then start moving on to plugins which, whilst not bb
> specific, allowed the user to customise their desktop. I had already
> developed the background tool as a standalone earlier and decided it
> could be useful in enhancing ones desktop (more easily).
>
> But, I suppose it really comes down to whether or not you like GTK or
> QT, like you said. Personally I prefer GTK to QT purely because i like
> the GTK LnF and I regularly have trouble compiling them on RedHat
> (coincidence?).
>
> I think you should probably try both and decide for yourself. Variety is
> generally always a good thing ...
>
> -luke
>
--
%<--%<
Jason Kasper (vanRijn)
bash$ :(){ :|:&};:
Numbers 6:24-26
Re: newbies ..
On 25 Jan 2002, Luke Freeman wrote: > Well, if you are looking purely at the configuration aspects (menu/style > editors) of blackbox there is no real difference between bbconf and > whiteBOX. I think as a menu editor and style editor they are pretty much > evenly matched. > > bbconf does feature an excellent frontend for bbkeys, a feature which is > still under development for whiteBOX, but not currently included. So .. > maybe thats a reason to use bbconf. > I think you should probably try both and decide for yourself. Variety is > generally always a good thing ... > > -luke > While I loathe GTK+ (and Glade even more), I must say that whileBOX looks to be an excellent program. The style editor reminds me of Toolbox, using trees instead ot tabs, which I much prefer. Oh well, at least I'm not ripping it apart like I did with bbconf-1.0... (Ironically, I send this email using a GTK+ program, although an (in my opinion, of course) excellent MUA, Spruce) --gile -- gile: a cow that bites small children http://www.pointlessmovement.net
64 bit cleanness
Hi all, Have anyone run blackbox as a 64 bit binary? I'm having some quite psychedelic color effects on my x86-64 (AMD Sledgehammer) simulation running on X in 16 bpp. There are other problems that I don't see in TWM (again compiled as a 64 bit binary): - windows can't be moved by grabbing the titlebar and left-alt+mouse1 is difficult to trigger - blackbox crashes if I choose a different style - windows can't be resized I haven't played too much around with it, so there might be more issues. But it compiles cleanly and it at least runs and some of the psychedelic colors looks cool enough that AMD will show it running in LinuxWorld next week. Bo. -- Bo Thorsen | Praestevejen 4 Free software developer| 5290 Marslev SuSE Labs | Denmark
Re: 64 bit cleanness
> > I haven't played too much around with it, so there might be more issues. But > it compiles cleanly and it at least runs and some of the psychedelic colors > looks cool enough that AMD will show it running in LinuxWorld next week. sweet (-: Seriously now. No one has ever reported on the 64 bit ness of blackbox. I thought we did a good job of using ints for ints and longs for longs. Pointers are always pointers (-: I am fairly sure there is little to none of the usual pointer -> int -> pointer weirdness. Image.cc is the place to look for most of the odd colours. Beyond that, have to attack it file by file. Anyone willing to donate a 64 bit machine to the cause? (-:
more thoughts on Re: 64 bit cleanness
> > I haven't played too much around with it, so there might be more issues. But > it compiles cleanly and it at least runs and some of the psychedelic colors > looks cool enough that AMD will show it running in LinuxWorld next week. > Would a sparc ultra 1 be able to run in 64 bit mode under linux or bsd? I can get one of those for under $400 these days. Of course, someone could fly me to New York and I could hack on blackbox the whole week (-:
Re: 64 bit cleanness
I use blackbox on an dec alpha machine and don't have any of those problems. __ "Yes, but I love gatherings. Isn't it ironic?" "Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned for Sega." http://wckn.clarkson.edu/~cohentl/ On Fri, 25 Jan 2002, Bo Thorsen wrote: > Hi all, > > Have anyone run blackbox as a 64 bit binary? I'm having some quite > psychedelic color effects on my x86-64 (AMD Sledgehammer) simulation running > on X in 16 bpp. > > There are other problems that I don't see in TWM (again compiled as a 64 bit > binary): > > - windows can't be moved by grabbing the titlebar and left-alt+mouse1 is > difficult to trigger > > - blackbox crashes if I choose a different style > > - windows can't be resized > > I haven't played too much around with it, so there might be more issues. But > it compiles cleanly and it at least runs and some of the psychedelic colors > looks cool enough that AMD will show it running in LinuxWorld next week. > > Bo. > > -- > > Bo Thorsen | Praestevejen 4 > Free software developer| 5290 Marslev > SuSE Labs | Denmark >
Re: 64 bit cleanness
Consider this a report then :) Freebsd 4.4 AXP. AlphaStation 200 4/233, 233MHz Blackbox works perfectly. __ "Yes, but I love gatherings. Isn't it ironic?" "Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned for Sega." http://wckn.clarkson.edu/~cohentl/ On Thu, 24 Jan 2002, Sean 'Shaleh' Perry wrote: > > > > I haven't played too much around with it, so there might be more issues. But > > it compiles cleanly and it at least runs and some of the psychedelic colors > > looks cool enough that AMD will show it running in LinuxWorld next week. > > sweet (-: > > Seriously now. No one has ever reported on the 64 bit ness of blackbox. I > thought we did a good job of using ints for ints and longs for longs. Pointers > are always pointers (-: I am fairly sure there is little to none of the usual > pointer -> int -> pointer weirdness. > > Image.cc is the place to look for most of the odd colours. Beyond that, have > to attack it file by file. > > Anyone willing to donate a 64 bit machine to the cause? (-: >
Re: newbies ..
On Thu, Jan 24, 2002 at 04:56:37PM -0800, Sean 'Shaleh' Perry wrote: > On 25-Jan-2002 Luke Freeman wrote: > > Its GTK based so its pretty quick. It can be found at > > http://whitebox.sourceforge.net/. Give it a try and let me know what you > > think. > > P.S. Sorry for the plug .. but it might be useful to some. > > Not to jab, but other than it being GTK based, why not use bbconf? Well, not to jab, but why not use WindowMaker instead of blackbox? ^_^ There's always room for tools that might do things differently. -- Marc Wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: newbies ..
On Thu, 2002-01-24 at 18:56, Sean 'Shaleh' Perry wrote: > Not to jab, but other than it being GTK based, why not use bbconf? One reason that jumps to mind is the default window size. The laptop I use (C1VN) has a odd-ball screen size (1024x480) and the default screen from whiteBOX (690x451) fits on the screen whereas the default bbconf screen does not. Note: This is not a dig against bbconf. vanRijn and I have discussed the reasons for the default size and it is being worked on. Jamin W. Collins
洗浴保健的新卖点--"中药浴"
Ï´Ô¡±£½¡µÄÐÂÂôµã--"ÖÐÒ©Ô¡" ÂåÑôÇÇÊ¿ÖÐÒ©Ô¡£¬ÔÚÈ«¹úÐí¶à´ó³ÇÊÐÉèÓаìÊ´¦£¬ÓÉ30¶à¼ÒºÏ×÷µ¥Î»£¬ÉúÒâÐË¡¡£ÒòΪÕâÊÇÕý¹æµÄÒ½ÁƱ£½¡ÏîÄ¿£¬ÅäºÏÕý¹æµÄÒ½ÁƱ£½¡°´Ä¦£¬Êdz¤¾ÃµÄ·¢Õ¹·½Ïò¡£ Ò»£®Èý´óÌص㣺 1£®¹ÅµäʽľͰ£º ¡´1¡µÆÓʵµäÑÅ£¬¹ÅÏã¹ÅÉ«£» ¡´2¡µ±£ÎÂÐԺã¬Ê¹Ó÷½±ã£» ¡´3¡µ¸Ð¾õÊæÊÊ£¬»Ø¹é×ÔÈ»£» 2£®Ò»´ÎÐÔÔ¡´ü£º ¡´1¡µ¸É¾»ÎÀÉú£»±ÜÃâ½»²æ¸ÐȾ£» ¡´2¡µÊ¹Ó÷ÅÐÄ£»Ïû³ýÐÄÀíÕÏ°£» 3£®Ò©ÎïϵÁвúÆ·£º¡´1¡µÊ®ÖÖÅä·½£¬¶ÔÖ¢ÏÂÒ©£¬ÈÎÒâÑ¡Óã» ¡´2¡µ´¿ÖÐÒ©ÖƼÁ£¬ÎÞ¶¾¸±×÷Óã» ¡´3¡µÖÎÁƱ£½¡£¬Á¢¸Í¼ûÓ°¡£ ¶þ£®Èý´óÓŵ㣺¨D¨D 1£®ÖÜÆڶ̣º¡´1¡µÍ¶×ÊС£¬¼ûЧ¿ì£¬ÊʺÏÀϵ¥Î»ÔöÌíÏîÄ¿£» ¡´2¡µÐ½¨µ¥Î»£¬ÕûÌå¹æ»®¸üºÃ¡£ 2£®Ð§Òæ¸ß£º¡´1¡µµ¥ÏîÊÕ·ÑÀûÈó´ó£¬´¿ÀûÈó£ºÒ»ÈË´Î20-30Ôª£» ¡´2¡µ×ÛºÏЧÒæ¸ß£¬ÖÐÒ©Ô¡¿É´ø¶¯°´Ä¦µÈÆäËûÏîÄ¿£» 3£®ÉùÓþºÃ£ºÖÐÒ©Ô¡ÊÇÎÒ¹ú´«Í³Ò½Ñ§µÄ×é³É²¿·Ö£¬¹ýÈ¥Ö»ÔÚ¹¬Í¢Ê¹Ó㬠ÓкܺõÄÖÎÁƱ£½¡×÷Óã¬ÅäºÏ°´Ä¦Ò½ÉúÖÎÁÆ£¬ÊǸ÷½çÈËÊ¿ÐÝÏС¢ÑøÉú¡¢ÖÎÁÆ¡¢±£½¡µÄÀíÏëÑ¡Ôñ¡£ Èý¡¢¼¼Êõ·þÎñ£º ·²ºÏ×÷µ¥Î»£¬¹«Ë¾Ãâ·ÑÌṩ¼¼ÊõÖ¸µ¼¡¢×ÜÌå²ß»®£¬Ãâ·ÑÅàѵ¹ÜÀíÈËÔ±¡´²¿ÃžÀí¡¢Áì°à¡µ¡¢²Ù×÷ÈËÔ±¡´½Ó´ýÔ±¡¢ÊÕÒøÔ±¡¢¼ÇÖÓÔ±¡¢·þÎñÉúµÈ¡µÅàѵ°´Ä¦ÈËÔ±¡´ÊÕÈ¡·ÑÓáµ£¬µ÷Åä¸÷ÖÖÈ˲ţ¬²¢ÅÉÃûÒ½×øÕï·þÎñ£¬±£ÕÏÕý³£¾Óª¡£ »¶ÓÓйص¥Î»ºÏ×÷¿ª·¢ ÖÐ Ò© Ô¡ ÇÇ¿üÔªÏÈÉúÔøµ£ÈÎÖÐÑëºúÇÇľͬ־˽È˱£½¡Ò½Éú£¬ÖøÃû¾±×µ²¡×¨¼Ò¡£Ëû¸ù¾Ý¹¬Í¢ÃØ·½£¬²ÉÓÃÏÖ´ú¹¤ÒÕ£¬ÑÐÖƳöÖÐÒ©ãåÔ¡·ÛµÈϵÁвúÆ·¡£Ê¹ÓùŵäʽľͰ£¬Ò»´ÎÐÔÔ¡´ü£¬Ò»ÈËÒ»»»Ò©£¬Ò»ÈËÒ»»»´ü£¬±ÜÃâ½Ó´¥´«È¾¡£ÊÇÑøÉú±£½¡µÄÀíÏëÑ¡Ôñ¡£ Ê®ÖÖÅä·½ÓÉÄúÑ¡Ó㺠1.¸ÄÉƹýÃôÌåÖÊ£¬·ÀÖÎƤ·ô²¡¡¢Æ¤·ôðþÑ÷¡¢Í·Æ¤Ð¼µÈ¡£ 2.ÖÎÁÆ·çʪ±ÔÍ´¡¢¹Ø½Ú²»Àû¡¢¼¡ÈâÀÍËð¡¢ËáÀ§¡¢ÂéľµÈ¡£ 3.¸ÄÉÆ΢ѻ·£¬»îѪ»¯ðö£¬ÖÎÁƵø´òËðÉË£¬Ô¤·ÀÄÔѪ˨µÈ¡£ 4.ÔöÇ¿ÃâÒß¹¦ÄÜ£¬·ÀÖθÐ𣬽â³ýÆ£ÀÍ£¬ÔöÇ¿ÌåÖʵȡ£ 5.½¡Æ¢ºÍ裬ÖÎÁÆʳÓû¼õÍË¡¢·¦Á¦¡¢Ö«À䡢θº®²»Êʵȡ£ 6.·ÀÖÎÄÔÉñ¾Ë¥Èõ£¬ÈçʧÃß¡¢¶àÃΡ¢½¡ÍüµÈ¡£ 7.²¹Éö׳Ñô£¬·ÀÖÎÉöÐéÑüÍ´¡¢ÐÔ¹¦ÄܼõÍ˵ȡ£ 8.½µÑªÑ¹¡¢Ô¤·ÀÄÔÒçѪµÈ¡£ 9.½µÑªÖ¬£¬¼õ·Ê£¬Ô¤·À¶¯ÂöÓ²»¯¡¢¹ÚÐIJ¡µÈ¡£ 10.×ÌÈóƤ·ô£¬Ìá¸ßµ¯ÐÔ£¬¼õÉÙÖåÎÆ£¬Ïû³ýÉ«°ßµÈ¡£ ½û¼ÉÖ¢£º 1.Ƥ·ôÆÆË𣻠2.Á÷ÐÐÐÔ´«È¾²¡£» 3.¾«Éñ²¡¡¢¿ñÔﲡ¡¢×í¾Æ²»ÄÜ×ÔÀíÕß¡£ ʹÓÃ˵Ã÷£º 1.Ë®ÎÂÔÚ40¡æ×óÓÒ£» 2.ÔÚÔ¡Í°ÄÚãåÔ¡20£30·ÖÖÓ£» 3.³öÔ¡Í°Ç°Õ¾Á¢2£3·ÖÖÓ¡£ °ü ×°£º110g/´ü £¨Ä¾Í°Ê¹Óã© 65g/´ü £¨Ô¡¸×ʹÓã© ¼¶ ±ð£ºA¼¶¡¢ B¼¶¡¢ C¼¶ ÂåÑôÇÇÊ¿ãåÔ¡±£½¡²úÆ·¿ª·¢ÓÐÏÞ¹«Ë¾ ÁªÏµÈË£ºÇÇÏÈÉú µç»°£º£¨0379£©3350881 £¨0£©13937963838 E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.qiaomy.com = ¸ÃÓʼþʹÓà ¿ÆÌØÓʼþȺ·¢Èí¼þ ·¢ËÍ,ÓʼþÄÚÈÝÓë¿ÆÌØÈí¼þÎÞ¹Ø ¿ÆÌØÈí¼þ http://www.caretop.com =
Re: newbies ..
On 25-Jan-2002 Marc Wilson wrote: > On Thu, Jan 24, 2002 at 04:56:37PM -0800, Sean 'Shaleh' Perry wrote: >> On 25-Jan-2002 Luke Freeman wrote: >> > Its GTK based so its pretty quick. It can be found at >> > http://whitebox.sourceforge.net/. Give it a try and let me know what you >> > think. >> > P.S. Sorry for the plug .. but it might be useful to some. >> >> Not to jab, but other than it being GTK based, why not use bbconf? > > Well, not to jab, but why not use WindowMaker instead of blackbox? ^_^ > > There's always room for tools that might do things differently. > I asked because his write up sounded exactly like bbconf (even has plugins). Further discussion has pointed out the tree view and some other differences.
