-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 22 Nov 2001, Jamin W. Collins wrote:
> On Thu, 2001-11-22 at 21:08, Daniel T. Chen wrote:
> > On Thu, 22 Nov 2001, Peter Szekszardi wrote:
> >
> > [...]
> > > focus errors), but it's ok. The only problem with Blackbox is one thing:
> > > it is in
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Thu, 22 Nov 2001, Daniel T. Chen wrote:
> On Thu, 22 Nov 2001, Peter Szekszardi wrote:
>
> [...]
> > focus errors), but it's ok. The only problem with Blackbox is one thing:
> > it is in a quite "left-alone" state. There are a number of patches
>
* Daniel T. Chen ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> I stand/sit corrected then.
Well, it's not actually that straight forward.:) I am not even certain
how much is not implemented or would have to change for blackbox to be
compliant. Also, I am not even sure how many programs use the standard
or what we
On Thu, 22 Nov 2001, Scott Moynes wrote:
> Well, in some sense, it is broken. One of the claimed goals of
> blackbox has always been standard compliance. There's a "new"
> windowmanager spec that hasn't been completely implemented yet if only
> for the reason that most of us remembered the curren
* Daniel T. Chen ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> On Thu, 22 Nov 2001, Peter Szekszardi wrote:
>
> [...]
> > focus errors), but it's ok. The only problem with Blackbox is one thing:
> > it is in a quite "left-alone" state. There are a number of patches
>
> What is absolutely horrid about this "left-
> Interesting. It seems to me the addition of "new functions" defeats
> the tag "minimal window manager" from bb's current state. ;)
One example I can think of is removal of the numlock "feature", which
will probably add more to usability than to diskspace :)
Jerrold.
On Thu, 2001-11-22 at 21:08, Daniel T. Chen wrote:
> On Thu, 22 Nov 2001, Peter Szekszardi wrote:
>
> [...]
> > focus errors), but it's ok. The only problem with Blackbox is one thing:
> > it is in a quite "left-alone" state. There are a number of patches
>
> Furthermore, I've never been able to
On Thu, 22 Nov 2001, Laszlo Gerencser wrote:
[...]
> I'm sure, everybody would be happy to be able to install a new version.
Sorry, the current version works just fine. Unless there is an
earth-shattering bugfix in a future release, I think I'll leave it on
hold.
---
Dan Chen
On Thu, 22 Nov 2001, Peter Szekszardi wrote:
[...]
> focus errors), but it's ok. The only problem with Blackbox is one thing:
> it is in a quite "left-alone" state. There are a number of patches
What is absolutely horrid about this "left-alone" state? If it ain't
broke, don't fix it. Furthermor
Sean 'Shaleh' Perry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I think we really need a bug tracker. And please not bugzilla.
How about gnats?
-Jan
--
http://www.netmeister.org
http://guinness.cs.stevens-tech.edu/~jschauma/
Laszlo Gerencser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Jan Schaumann wrote:
> > I said, I have not encountered any problems
> > that would require me to patch the source. If there are serious bugs
> > and patches are available, then, sure, they should be included. But
> > it's always (as especially seen
On 22-Nov-2001 Michael Hostbaek wrote:
> Sean 'Shaleh' Perry (shalehperry) writes:
>>
>> I was under the impression that was for FSF sanctioned projects only. Or at
>> least GPL'ed ones.
>
> Well so *was* sourceforge... ;)
>
nah, sourceforge was open source, regardless of license.
> But, who
On Thu, Nov 22, 2001 at 02:28:10PM -0600, Jamin W. Collins wrote:
> On Thu, 2001-11-22 at 14:30, shev wrote:
> > I have no idea what my exact colour depth is..
>
> Check the output of X. If you are running v4.x there should be a log
> file (/var/log/XFree86.0.log).
I find using 'xwininfo' and r
Sean 'Shaleh' Perry (shalehperry) writes:
>
> I was under the impression that was for FSF sanctioned projects only. Or at
> least GPL'ed ones.
Well so *was* sourceforge... ;)
But, who is the admin on the "official" blackbox page ?
--
Best Regards,
Michael Landin Hostbaek
Fr
On Thu, 2001-11-22 at 14:30, shev wrote:
> I have no idea what my exact colour depth is..
Check the output of X. If you are running v4.x there should be a log
file (/var/log/XFree86.0.log).
Jamin W. Collins
I have no idea what my exact colour depth is..
My XF86Config has this:
Section "Screen"
Driver "Accel"
Device "Primary Card"
Monitor "Primary Monitor"
DefaultColorDepth 16
SubSection "Display"
Depth 8
Modes "1024x768"
EndSubSection
SubSection "Display"
Depth 15
Modes "1024x768"
EndSub
On 22-Nov-2001 Michael Hostbaek wrote:
> Sean 'Shaleh' Perry (shalehperry) writes:
>> On 22-Nov-2001 Scott Moynes wrote:
>>
>> I know the guys from sourceforge, even if VA went tits up tomorrow they are
>> ok.
>> That said, I am more than willing to let someone else host. CVS is not
>> enough
Sean 'Shaleh' Perry (shalehperry) writes:
> On 22-Nov-2001 Scott Moynes wrote:
>
> I know the guys from sourceforge, even if VA went tits up tomorrow they are ok.
> That said, I am more than willing to let someone else host. CVS is not enough
> though, I think we really need a bug tracker. And
On 22-Nov-2001 Scott Moynes wrote:
> There has been some voicings on IRC similar to this. I believe there
> was a promise of someone hosting CVS and similar amenities to help
> spurn development, but I am not sure how far they've
> gotten. (Unfortunately, most of these people unsubscribed
> from t
> shev wrote:
>
> Hi, I've recently installed and began to use blackbox with KDE,
> however I have been having problems with colour.
>
> When I try to view say, a photograph/picture or any other high
> resolution graphic it appears 'freyed' or scruffy - as if I am in a
> lower colour depth. Does
There has been some voicings on IRC similar to this. I believe there
was a promise of someone hosting CVS and similar amenities to help
spurn development, but I am not sure how far they've
gotten. (Unfortunately, most of these people unsubscribed
from this mailing list long ago.) I hope that we ca
On 22-Nov-2001 shev wrote:
> Hi, I've recently installed and began to use blackbox with KDE, however I
> have been having problems with colour.
>
> When I try to view say, a photograph/picture or any other high resolution
> graphic it appears 'freyed' or scruffy - as if I am in a lower colour dep
Hi, I've recently installed and began to use
blackbox with KDE, however I have been having problems with colour.
When I try to view say, a photograph/picture or any
other high resolution graphic it appears 'freyed' or scruffy - as if I am in a
lower colour depth. Does anyone know how to fix
Sean,
do it! I'm on your side! :-))
--
Laszlo Gerencser
PortoLogic Ltd.
Friends, can someone offer a place to put a bug tracker for blackbox? If not I
am considering starting a sourceforge project for it.
And yes, if Jeff does not stand up and unless nyz complains I plan to step up
and captain the ship.
Most of you know me, I have been here a long time. nyz and I
Jan Schaumann wrote:
>
> Peter Szekszardi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[snip]
> > Patches that provide additional functions may be considered, but there
> > is no doubt that bugfix patches should be applyed into blacbox.
>
> Which ones are those - as I said, I have not encountered any problems
> t
Peter Szekszardi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I disagree. I do not require any of the patches available, and I'm sure
> > there are other people who do not need them either. Having them stay
> > out of BB is a good thing for me.
> Patches that provide additional functions may be considered,
btw is there anybody doing anything for example with those
focusing bugs?
Hi Jan,
> I disagree. I do not require any of the patches available, and I'm sure
> there are other people who do not need them either. Having them stay
> out of BB is a good thing for me.
Patches that provide additional functions may be considered, but there
is no doubt that bugfix patches sho
I'll tell you what I want... to get off this mailing list. The few bugs that
are in BB bother me... and it's lack of support for the keyboard also
bothers me, so I've migrated to Enlightenment. E17 is going to have a
window-manager only portion, and it will serve my needs exactly.
Now, I've sent
On Thu, 2001-11-22 at 09:32, Jan Schaumann wrote:
> I disagree. I do not require any of the patches available, and I'm sure
> there are other people who do not need them either. Having them stay
> out of BB is a good thing for me.
Please, let's not get this "add it, no don't add it" argument/di
Peter Szekszardi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Blackbox is just fine. It has some very small annoying bugs (mostly
> focus errors), but it's ok. The only problem with Blackbox is one thing:
> it is in a quite "left-alone" state. There are a number of patches
> around which should be at least inser
Hi,
Fluxbox is only a clone yet. A promising clone, but not far ahead of
blackbox.
Regards,
Peter
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Take a look at fluxbox, it is a very nice blackbox-clone that can be found
> at fluxbox.sourceforge.net.
>
> > (Hey, who wanna start developing an other bb clone wit
Hi,
Gino Peregrini wrote:
>
> On Wed, 2001-11-21 at 20:13, Sean 'Shaleh' Perry wrote:
> > Go to sf.net and check out waimea. It is the latest of the new wm's based on
> > blackbox. Nifty new features include direct support for Xrender extensions
> > (anti-aliasing) and 'actions'. Seems intere
34 matches
Mail list logo
