[dev] Surf 0.4 issues
I've just begun using surf and it looks very nice. dwm is my desktop environment on a Slackware 13.1 system, and surf integrates nicely with it. Having said that, I have seen some problems that I'd like to report. Issues (version 0.4): 1. Gmail complains that your browser has cookies disabled unless the sessiontime variable in config.def.h is set to something non-zero. Perhaps something non-zero should be the default (said without understanding the implications of that). 2. When I change config.def.h and redo the make, config.h does *not* get replaced with the new config.def.h. I think the config.h target in the makefile is missing a dependency on config.def.h. 3. Scrolling from the keyboard (ctrl-k, ctrl-j or the up-down arrows) does not work in gmail. 4. Gmail sessions periodically crash. I will try running compiled -g and under gdb to try to get more info on this. I've seen this problem repeatedly. It's independent of whether I run with tabbed. /Don Allen
Re: [dev] Surf 0.4 issues
I guess you should make your configuration changes to config.h instead of config.def.h. the latter one is there to have some 'reference configuration' if you have f***ed up your config.h. regards
Re: [dev] Surf 0.4 issues
On Mon, Jun 21, 2010 at 09:13:44AM -0400, Donald Allen wrote: 1. Gmail complains that your browser has cookies disabled unless the sessiontime variable in config.def.h is set to something non-zero. Perhaps something non-zero should be the default (said without understanding the implications of that). Already fixed in 0.4.1. 2. When I change config.def.h and redo the make, config.h does *not* get replaced with the new config.def.h. I think the config.h target in the makefile is missing a dependency on config.def.h. http://lists.suckless.org/dev/1005/4363.html Maybe that way your config.h don't get replaced when you update sources from hg? But I think config.def.h should be a dependency of config.h beacuse config.h can't be created automatically without it.
Re: [dev] Surf 0.4 issues
On Mon, Jun 21, 2010 at 9:21 AM, Nicolai Waniek roc...@rochus.net wrote: I guess you should make your configuration changes to config.h instead of config.def.h. the latter one is there to have some 'reference configuration' if you have f***ed up your config.h. Ah. Before making changes to something like this, I always check things into RCS (from emacs VC), so I always have an audit trail. But I understand your point, which probably explains why the makefile is designed as it is. /Don regards
Re: [dev] Surf 0.4 issues
On 21 Jun 2010, at 14:13, Donald Allen wrote: 2. When I change config.def.h and redo the make, config.h does *not* get replaced with the new config.def.h. I think the config.h target in the makefile is missing a dependency on config.def.h. Looks like it's the same as dwm, which I made this mistake on first time around. config.def.h is the default configuration. It's not named config.h because you don't want your config overwritten every time you untar an updated version. The makefile doesn't copy it if config.h exists because you don't want your config overwritten every time you compile. :) -- Simplicity does not precede complexity, but follows it. -- Alan Perlis
Re: [dev] Surf 0.4 issues
On Mon, Jun 21, 2010 at 9:44 AM, Ethan Grammatikidis eeke...@fastmail.fmwrote: On 21 Jun 2010, at 14:13, Donald Allen wrote: 2. When I change config.def.h and redo the make, config.h does *not* get replaced with the new config.def.h. I think the config.h target in the makefile is missing a dependency on config.def.h. Looks like it's the same as dwm, which I made this mistake on first time around. config.def.h is the default configuration. It's not named config.h because you don't want your config overwritten every time you untar an updated version. The makefile doesn't copy it if config.h exists because you don't want your config overwritten every time you compile. :) Well, except if you untar an updated version, the base config file (config.def.h) might have changed, and so some merging might be needed to bring your config.h into conformance with the new version of surf/dwm/etc. This whole issue strikes me as exactly what version management software is about, and therefore would be better handled with cvs or one of its successors (svn, hg, git). In other words, I'd prefer to get my new versions of surf/dwm/etc from the suckless repository with version-management software, which would assist me in managing my local changes to config.h. /Don -- Simplicity does not precede complexity, but follows it. -- Alan Perlis
