needs more
investigation: it's the primary reason that rxvt-W can't substitute for
(old) rxvt (native mode) right now.
[*] see libW11's cygwin README file for a discussion of the taxonomy of
Win32 Xlib replacement libraries and their internal architectures.
=
On Mar 21 02:34, Charles Wilson wrote:
> So, long term plan:
> (1) obsolete the current rxvt package (maybe not "officially" put
> it in the _obsolete category, but it's still on Corinna's
> missing-maintainer list, so...)
> (2) rxvt-unicode-X and rxvt-unicode-W packages, installed
On Tue, 21 Mar 2006, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> On Mar 21 02:34, Charles Wilson wrote:
> > So, long term plan:
> > (1) obsolete the current rxvt package (maybe not "officially" put
> > it in the _obsolete category, but it's still on Corinna's
> > missing-maintainer list, so...)
> >
On Mar 21 10:13, Igor Peshansky wrote:
> On Tue, 21 Mar 2006, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> > ...how do you plan to replace the old rxvt functionality from the user's
> > perspective? This I don't see in your description. So far the user can
> > call just "rxvt" and gets what the DISPLAY variable sug
(Sorry about the broken thread; webmail sux)
Corinna sez:
> On Mar 21 10:13, Igor Peshansky wrote:
> > On Tue, 21 Mar 2006, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> > > ...how do you plan to replace the old rxvt functionality from the user's
> > > perspective? This I don't see in your description. So far the u
On Mar 21 12:52, Charles Wilson wrote:
> I have one concern with that plan, tho: Would the transparent_exe logic
> ALSO extend to other PATHEXT extensions? Does 'foo' conflict with
> 'foo.bat' (and foo.com, foo.vbs, foo.cmd, foo.wsh, ...) or ONLY with
> 'foo.exe'?
"foo" doesn't conflict with anyt
> Corinna said:
> On Mar 21 12:52, Charles Wilson wrote:
> > I have one concern with that plan, tho: Would the transparent_exe logic
> > ALSO extend to other PATHEXT extensions? Does 'foo' conflict with
> > 'foo.bat' (and foo.com, foo.vbs, foo.cmd, foo.wsh, ...) or ONLY with
> > 'foo.exe'?
>
> "f
On Tue, 21 Mar 2006 14:41:32 -0500, "Charles Wilson"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> > Corinna said:
> > On Mar 21 12:52, Charles Wilson wrote:
> > > There's one other minor issue, too: the batch file (but not the #!
> > > script) would be limited to 9 command-line parameters.
> >
> > Really? I thin
Charles Wilson wrote:
> int main() {
> int rc;
> Display* dpy = XOpenDisplay(NULL); /* null lets XOpenDisplay handle
> querying for $DISPLAY */
> rc = !(dpy == NULL);
> if (dpy) XCloseDisplay(dpy);
> return rc; /* exits with status of 0 if X available */
> }
[snip]
>
> I'd also need to fiddle wi
