Re: [dwm] Java patch
Tuncer Ayaz dixit (2008-04-28, 10:57): > > No I'm not noticing any. I'm using hg 1122, though. > > Cool. > What I'm missing right now in hg tip is Bar=Off but maybe it's > achievable via the new geom settings. Yeah,1122 is the last OldWorld dwm (by mac analogy), and I'm sticking with it for now. Can't see any compelling reason to switch to a newer release for now. No killer features (not for me at least), but a killer amount of relearning, especially with the DEFGEOM stuff. best, -- [a] signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: [dwm] Java patch
On Mon, Apr 28, 2008 at 11:06 AM, Antoni Grzymala <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Tuncer Ayaz dixit (2008-04-28, 10:57): > > > > > No I'm not noticing any. I'm using hg 1122, though. > > > > Cool. > > What I'm missing right now in hg tip is Bar=Off but maybe it's > > achievable via the new geom settings. > > Yeah,1122 is the last OldWorld dwm (by mac analogy), and I'm sticking > with it for now. Can't see any compelling reason to switch to a newer > release for now. No killer features (not for me at least), but a killer > amount of relearning, especially with the DEFGEOM stuff. to be honest I have to admit that after learning a lot of Erlang/OTP, some Scala and Haskell I like FP so much that I tried out Xmonad but only failed at some key bindings and Mod1 being swallowed by Xmonad or something else goind wrong as I cannot use Mod1 in FF2. therefore, having to learn dwm's DEFGEOM changes made me experiment with Xmonad instead. I just wanted to be honest. let's not start a flame war.
Re: [dwm] Java patch
On Mon, Apr 28, 2008 at 11:13 AM, Tuncer Ayaz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Mon, Apr 28, 2008 at 11:06 AM, Antoni Grzymala <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Tuncer Ayaz dixit (2008-04-28, 10:57): > > > > > > > > No I'm not noticing any. I'm using hg 1122, though. > > > > > > Cool. > > > What I'm missing right now in hg tip is Bar=Off but maybe it's > > > achievable via the new geom settings. > > > > Yeah,1122 is the last OldWorld dwm (by mac analogy), and I'm sticking > > with it for now. Can't see any compelling reason to switch to a newer > > release for now. No killer features (not for me at least), but a killer > > amount of relearning, especially with the DEFGEOM stuff. > > to be honest I have to admit that after learning a lot of Erlang/OTP, > some Scala and Haskell I like FP so much that I tried out Xmonad > but only failed at some key bindings and Mod1 being swallowed by Xmonad comprehension fix: 1) failed to configure one or two keybindings I had in dwm's config.h 2) Mod1 does not seem to work in FF2 anyway, this is really off-topic here on dwm@, sorry.
Re: [dwm] Java patch
On Sun, Apr 27, 2008 at 11:25 PM, Antoni Grzymala <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Tuncer Ayaz dixit (2008-04-27, 21:49): > > > > Btw, what about the Tk issues I read here IIRC a long time ago? > > Are there any problem with Tk 8.5? > > No I'm not noticing any. I'm using hg 1122, though. Cool. What I'm missing right now in hg tip is Bar=Off but maybe it's achievable via the new geom settings.
Re: [dwm] Java patch
On Mon, Apr 28, 2008 at 11:15 AM, Tuncer Ayaz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Mon, Apr 28, 2008 at 11:13 AM, Tuncer Ayaz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > On Mon, Apr 28, 2008 at 11:06 AM, Antoni Grzymala <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > Tuncer Ayaz dixit (2008-04-28, 10:57): > > > > > > > > > > > No I'm not noticing any. I'm using hg 1122, though. > > > > > > > > Cool. > > > > What I'm missing right now in hg tip is Bar=Off but maybe it's > > > > achievable via the new geom settings. > > > > > > Yeah,1122 is the last OldWorld dwm (by mac analogy), and I'm sticking > > > with it for now. Can't see any compelling reason to switch to a newer > > > release for now. No killer features (not for me at least), but a killer > > > amount of relearning, especially with the DEFGEOM stuff. > > > > to be honest I have to admit that after learning a lot of Erlang/OTP, > > some Scala and Haskell I like FP so much that I tried out Xmonad > > but only failed at some key bindings and Mod1 being swallowed by Xmonad > > comprehension fix: > 1) failed to configure one or two keybindings I had in dwm's config.h > 2) Mod1 does not seem to work in FF2 > > anyway, this is really off-topic here on dwm@, sorry. fixed Xmonad problems partially, just in case anyone here cares. yeah, sure on the dwm mailing list :) anyway, I took a look at DEFGEOMS and am not sure whether I have to fiddle with bh or something else to emulate BarOff. what's the correct way?
Re: [dwm] Java patch
On Mon, Apr 28, 2008 at 04:32:47PM +0200, Tuncer Ayaz wrote: > anyway, I took a look at DEFGEOMS and am not sure whether I > have to fiddle with bh or something else to emulate BarOff. > what's the correct way? DEFGEOM(nobar, 0, -bh, sw, 0, 0, sw, sh, wx, wy, mfact*ww, wh, mx+mw, wy, ww-mw, wh, wx, wy, ww, wh) Kind regards, -- Anselm R. Garbe >< http://www.suckless.org/ >< GPG key: 0D73F361
Re: [dwm] Java patch
Anselm R. Garbe dixit (2008-04-28, 20:06): > On Mon, Apr 28, 2008 at 04:32:47PM +0200, Tuncer Ayaz wrote: > > anyway, I took a look at DEFGEOMS and am not sure whether I > > have to fiddle with bh or something else to emulate BarOff. > > what's the correct way? > > DEFGEOM(nobar, 0, -bh, sw, 0, 0, sw, sh, wx, wy, mfact*ww, wh, > mx+mw, wy, ww-mw, wh, wx, wy, ww, wh) LOL. Sorry, I couldn't resist. Best, -- [a] signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: [dwm] bloq may used to ignore keybindings
On Sun, Apr 27, 2008 at 04:30:24PM +0200, =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Asbj=F8rn_Clemmensen_ wrote: > > Maybe the gnome-settings-daemon (which is also exexuted in my .xinitrc) > > owerwrites this? > > It does seem pretty likely that Gnome messes with it. Yes. I can confirm that this was the case, I don't know why I did'nt try this in the first place. Now I just have to find out how to make the gnome-settings-daemon to load my .xmodmap. I remember a dialog asking about this the first login when I first created ~/.xmodmap but I turned it down. > Sincerely, > > - Asbjørn Regards, KSV
Re: [dwm] Java patch
On Mon, Apr 28, 2008 at 08:21:36PM +0200, Antoni Grzymala wrote: > Anselm R. Garbe dixit (2008-04-28, 20:06): > > > On Mon, Apr 28, 2008 at 04:32:47PM +0200, Tuncer Ayaz wrote: > > > anyway, I took a look at DEFGEOMS and am not sure whether I > > > have to fiddle with bh or something else to emulate BarOff. > > > what's the correct way? > > > > DEFGEOM(nobar, 0, -bh, sw, 0, 0, sw, sh, wx, wy, mfact*ww, wh, > > mx+mw, wy, ww-mw, wh, wx, wy, ww, wh) > > LOL. > > Sorry, I couldn't resist. Well if DEFGEOM would only be used to hide the bar, I could agree that it's ridiculous. Kind regards, -- Anselm R. Garbe >< http://www.suckless.org/ >< GPG key: 0D73F361
Re: [dwm] Java patch
On Mon, Apr 28, 2008 at 8:55 PM, Anselm R. Garbe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Mon, Apr 28, 2008 at 08:21:36PM +0200, Antoni Grzymala wrote: > > Anselm R. Garbe dixit (2008-04-28, 20:06): > > > > > On Mon, Apr 28, 2008 at 04:32:47PM +0200, Tuncer Ayaz wrote: > > > > anyway, I took a look at DEFGEOMS and am not sure whether I > > > > have to fiddle with bh or something else to emulate BarOff. > > > > what's the correct way? > > > > > > DEFGEOM(nobar, 0, -bh, sw, 0, 0, sw, sh, wx, wy, mfact*ww, wh, > > > mx+mw, wy, ww-mw, wh, wx, wy, ww, wh) > > > > LOL. > > > > Sorry, I couldn't resist. > > Well if DEFGEOM would only be used to hide the bar, I could > agree that it's ridiculous. I think Antoni laughed about the two-character variable name and me applying the verb 'fiddle' to it. Actually I had to take a look at my mail for a second to find the funny part :)
Re: [dwm] Java patch
On Mon, Apr 28, 2008 at 8:21 PM, Antoni Grzymala <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Anselm R. Garbe dixit (2008-04-28, 20:06): > > > > On Mon, Apr 28, 2008 at 04:32:47PM +0200, Tuncer Ayaz wrote: > > > anyway, I took a look at DEFGEOMS and am not sure whether I > > > have to fiddle with bh or something else to emulate BarOff. > > > what's the correct way? > > > > DEFGEOM(nobar, 0, -bh, sw, 0, 0, sw, sh, wx, wy, mfact*ww, wh, > > mx+mw, wy, ww-mw, wh, wx, wy, ww, wh) > > LOL. > > Sorry, I couldn't resist. Calling the GEOM nobar instead of simple is completely optional as far as I understand it. Just nod if that's correct.
Re: [dwm] Java patch
On Mon, Apr 28, 2008 at 09:33:59PM +0200, Tuncer Ayaz wrote: > On Mon, Apr 28, 2008 at 8:21 PM, Antoni Grzymala <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Anselm R. Garbe dixit (2008-04-28, 20:06): > > > > > > > On Mon, Apr 28, 2008 at 04:32:47PM +0200, Tuncer Ayaz wrote: > > > > anyway, I took a look at DEFGEOMS and am not sure whether I > > > > have to fiddle with bh or something else to emulate BarOff. > > > > what's the correct way? > > > > > > DEFGEOM(nobar, 0, -bh, sw, 0, 0, sw, sh, wx, wy, mfact*ww, wh, > > > mx+mw, wy, ww-mw, wh, wx, wy, ww, wh) > > > > LOL. > > > > Sorry, I couldn't resist. > > Calling the GEOM nobar instead of simple is > completely optional as far as I understand it. You can call a geom as you like, but bare in mind that the name will be a C function, hence it should not collide with any existing function name (well, you will notice at build time in this case). Kind regards, -- Anselm R. Garbe >< http://www.suckless.org/ >< GPG key: 0D73F361
