On 2013-12-13 14:31:51 +0800, Patrick wrote:
> Maybe give him the benefit of the doubt that he meant something like
> 'maintains hierarchical taxonomy'.
/2013/12/01/foo.html or /2013/12/01/foo/ -- I certainly don't care, but
specifically trying to get the latter over the former is just insanity.
On 2013-12-13 14:25, Chris Down wrote:
> > Is there an easier way to encourage clean URLs?
> If masking files with directories is considered "clean", then I don't
> want to live on this planet any more.
Maybe give him the benefit of the doubt that he meant something like
'maintains hierarchical ta
On 2013-12-13 14:23:25 +0800, Kai Hendry wrote:
> On 13 December 2013 14:20, Chris Down wrote:
> > Did you really just say that every file should just be abstracted as a
> > directory... how much of that web 2.0 Kool-Aid did you drink?
>
> Is there an easier way to encourage clean URLs?
If maski
On 13 December 2013 14:20, Chris Down wrote:
> Did you really just say that every file should just be abstracted as a
> directory... how much of that web 2.0 Kool-Aid did you drink?
Is there an easier way to encourage clean URLs?
Without resorting to crazy rewrites?
On 2013-12-13 14:09:25 +0800, Kai Hendry wrote:
> you want foo.html to be exposed by your httpd as /foo/ ?
No.
> Only generate one index.html per directory. Simples.
Did you really just say that every file should just be abstracted as a
directory... how much of that web 2.0 Kool-Aid did you drin
On 13 December 2013 14:01, Chris Down wrote:
>> You generate .html URLs. bit 90s and fugly. urls should be clean
>> /2013/blogpost/
> Huh? That's the job of the web server.
how?
you want foo.html to be exposed by your httpd as /foo/ ?
Only generate one index.html per directory. Simples.
On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 11:00 PM, Kai Hendry wrote:
> RSS is dead. why bother?
Why bother? The troves of people who cried at Google Reader shutting
down would say otherwise. RSS is "dying" because companies like
Google, Facebook, Twitter want to *own* the flow of information, and
they can't do t
Oh Kai :-)
On 2013-12-13 12:00:46 +0800, Kai Hendry wrote:
> This sucks
>
> Why mksh? Can't you use POSIX shell?
Enjoy your lack of useful functionality for no reason. At least mksh is
reasonable (disclaimer: I have not looked at the code).
> config files suck https://twitter.com/rob_pike/statu
On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 8:00 PM, Kai Hendry wrote:
> You generate .html URLs. bit 90s and fugly. urls should be clean
> /2013/blogpost/
Not the job of the static website generator.
This sucks
Why mksh? Can't you use POSIX shell?
.wshtml is used in your README. Actually only TXT works by default.
smu is on my path, why interp?
config files suck https://twitter.com/rob_pike/status/360557625756229632
setting up prefix in the Makefile sucks
RSS is dead. why bother?
You gen
Quoth Thorsten Glaser:
> I absolutely d̲e̲t̲e̲s̲t̲ Markdown.
Really? Why? I quite like it (at least smu's subset). Works for the
simple usecases I need it, and keeps the angle brackets of doom away
from me.
>> On Dec 12, 2013, at 4:10 PM, "Fernando C.V." wrote:
>> On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 10:49 PM, Fernando C.V. wrote:
>> This way could do something like:
>>
>> $ when -t ssh host
>>> xmessage DONE!
>
> Well... even if you didn't prompt it to the user interactively, it
> would still be nice for alia
On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 02:32:03PM -0500, Andrew Gwozdziewycz wrote:
> find(1) seems very un-unixy, but it's very powerful.
It's not, though, because ultimately it's just a file system walk with a
system for querying stat(2). No, the problem I have with find is that
its output is not necessarily s
YpN dixit:
>I wrote a shell script using mksh, which generates websites. You need to write
Just for completeness: I’ve written MirWebseite as a non-generic
thing to generate static XHTML websites, too, and even got a second
only slightly related installation (which, ofc, by now deviates quite
a b
On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 5:30 PM, Andrew Gwozdziewycz wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 5:26 PM, Bobby Powers wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> Andrew Gwozdziewycz wrote:
$ time find / | grep 'bin' > /dev/null
real0m8.122s
user0m3.101s
sys 0m2.519s
$ time find / -rege
On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 5:26 PM, Bobby Powers wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Andrew Gwozdziewycz wrote:
>>> $ time find / | grep 'bin' > /dev/null
>>> real0m8.122s
>>> user0m3.101s
>>> sys 0m2.519s
>>>
>>> $ time find / -regex 'bin' | grep
>>> real0m18.795s
>>> user0m3.394s
>>> sys 0m
Hello,
Andrew Gwozdziewycz wrote:
>> $ time find / | grep 'bin' > /dev/null
>> real0m8.122s
>> user0m3.101s
>> sys 0m2.519s
>>
>> $ time find / -regex 'bin' | grep
>> real0m18.795s
>> user0m3.394s
>> sys 0m3.401s
I get a different story on Linux 3.12.4:
[bpowers@fina ~]$
Huge copy paste fail!
> Also, just for kicks I ran a comparison:
>
> $ time find / | grep 'bin' > /dev/null
> real0m8.122s
> user0m3.101s
> sys 0m2.519s
>
> $ time find / -regex 'bin' | grep
> real0m18.795s
> user0m3.394s
> sys 0m3.401s
That should have been
$ time find
On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 3:36 PM, Troels Henriksen wrote:
> Troels Henriksen writes:
>
>> Andrew Gwozdziewycz writes:
>>
>>> Assume that each filter halves the fileset of, say, 256 files (my /etc
>>> directory on this OSX machine has just 247 files). That's less than
>>> 512 calls with a few filt
On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 10:49 PM, Fernando C.V. wrote:
> This way could do something like:
>
> $ when -t ssh host
>> xmessage DONE!
Well... even if you didn't prompt it to the user interactively, it
would still be nice for aliases.
Probably most of the time you just want to get notfications:
$
An alternative would be to read one of the commands from stdin.
This way could do something like:
$ when -t ssh host
> xmessage DONE!
You won't get tab-completion and other interactive fancyness, but it
won't be missed for simple notification commands.
--
Fernando
On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 7:32 PM, Andrew Gwozdziewycz wrote:
> Thoughts? Pointers to tools that already do this?
When I need to do something like that, I use rc(1) and the plan9
version of ls(1). It shell-quotes the filenames by default which is
very useful!
--
__
Raphaël Proust
On Thu 12 Dec 2013 at 11:32:03 PST Andrew Gwozdziewycz wrote:
walk - (implements find $1)
AT&T Research has a tool called tw ("treewalk") that does this:
http://www2.research.att.com/sw/download/man/man1/tw.html
Assuming the sourcecode I downloaded a while ago is still current, it's
licensed
On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 7:36 PM, Chris Down wrote:
> On 2013-12-12 14:32:03 -0500, Andrew Gwozdziewycz wrote:
>> So, to find all files in /etc modified within the last hour...
>>
>> walk /etc | agep -1H -
>>
>> Or,
>>
>> walk /etc | xargs agep -1H
>
> The problem here is speed. For any non-trivial
Troels Henriksen writes:
> Andrew Gwozdziewycz writes:
>
>> Assume that each filter halves the fileset of, say, 256 files (my /etc
>> directory on this OSX machine has just 247 files). That's less than
>> 512 calls with a few filters. Is that really so bad on modern
>> hardware?
>
> If you have
Andrew Gwozdziewycz writes:
> Assume that each filter halves the fileset of, say, 256 files (my /etc
> directory on this OSX machine has just 247 files). That's less than
> 512 calls with a few filters. Is that really so bad on modern
> hardware?
If you have only 256 files, you can do almost any
On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 2:36 PM, Chris Down wrote:
> On 2013-12-12 14:32:03 -0500, Andrew Gwozdziewycz wrote:
>> So, to find all files in /etc modified within the last hour...
>>
>> walk /etc | agep -1H -
>>
>> Or,
>>
>> walk /etc | xargs agep -1H
>
> The problem here is speed. For any non-trivial
On 2013-12-12 14:32:03 -0500, Andrew Gwozdziewycz wrote:
> So, to find all files in /etc modified within the last hour...
>
> walk /etc | agep -1H -
>
> Or,
>
> walk /etc | xargs agep -1H
The problem here is speed. For any non-trivial number of files, this
will become non-negligibly slower due
find(1) seems very un-unixy, but it's very powerful. Let's assume for
a minute that find didn't exist. How would you do the following:
1. execute a command for each file (find . -exec whatever {} \;)
2. find files that are > 8M
3. find files that are older than 20 days
4. find all files that a
On 12/12/2013, Troels Henriksen wrote:
> No, that was year 100. 2014 is the year of MMXIV.
Anyhow, this is actually the year 44.
On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 11:27 AM, Ryan O’Hara wrote:
> Jekyll seems pretty decent to me. What is there to object to? Markdown and
> Ruby?
>
> The rest of the things you mention don’t have much to do with offline
> website generation. They’re just languages that compile to other
> languages. Jade,
So you're saying that this is better than Coffeescript? That
comparison is completely unintelligible.If you're saying that we
should step back and return to a simpler approach to web
design/development - I completely agree, but how does a static site
generator compare to Coffeescript/LESS/Jade at a
On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 9:23 AM, Nicholas Hall wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 11:13 AM, Ryan O’Hara wrote:
>> On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 9:06 AM, Nicholas Hall wrote:
>>> On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 8:57 AM, YpN wrote:
I wrote a shell script using mksh, which generates websites.
>>>
>>> This lo
On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 11:13 AM, Ryan O’Hara wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 9:06 AM, Nicholas Hall wrote:
>> On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 8:57 AM, YpN wrote:
>>> I wrote a shell script using mksh, which generates websites.
>>
>> This looks pretty cool. I'm sick of all the shitty hip offline
>> we
On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 9:06 AM, Nicholas Hall wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 8:57 AM, YpN wrote:
>> I wrote a shell script using mksh, which generates websites.
>
> This looks pretty cool. I'm sick of all the shitty hip offline
> website generators, and the direction web development is headed
---
Heyho,
When using tabbed for surf the content mostly has a bright background.
When using tabbed for st the terminal at least for me has a dark background.
Since I did not find a color configuration for tabbed which works for both use
cases, I wrote this patch. Since I don't think arg.h allows
On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 8:57 AM, YpN wrote:
> I wrote a shell script using mksh, which generates websites.
This looks pretty cool. I'm sick of all the shitty hip offline
website generators, and the direction web development is headed in
general -- layer upon layer upon layer. Seriously, these g
consider submitting when to the moreutils package
On 11 December 2013 11:31, Andrew Gwozdziewycz wrote:
> Hey all,
>
> If you've used watch(1) you know that running a command repeatedly is
> useful. What I wished for yesterday though, is for a mechanism that
> notified me when a command succeeded
sin writes:
> On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 05:11:06PM +0100, YpN wrote:
>> > C is generally more and efficient, I suppose.
>> >
>> > On 12/12/2013 16:04, sin wrote:
>> > > On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 03:42:52PM +, Neo Romantique wrote:
>> > >> Why Shell, and not C?
>> > >> Otherwise tool looks intere
On 12/12/2013 16:22, sin wrote:
On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 04:20:32PM +, Neo Romantique wrote:
I've meant to write "Generally more readable and efficient", but
then after having a second thought I've deleted the readable part,
but had some leftover. :)
Don't top post.
Readable code depends m
On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 04:20:32PM +, Neo Romantique wrote:
> I've meant to write "Generally more readable and efficient", but
> then after having a second thought I've deleted the readable part,
> but had some leftover. :)
Don't top post.
Readable code depends mostly on the programmer.
Have
I've meant to write "Generally more readable and efficient", but then
after having a second thought I've deleted the readable part, but had
some leftover. :)
On 12/12/2013 16:18, sin wrote:
On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 11:13:56AM -0500, Strake wrote:
On 12/12/2013, Neo Romantique wrote:
C is gene
On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 11:13:56AM -0500, Strake wrote:
> On 12/12/2013, Neo Romantique wrote:
> > C is generally more and efficient, I suppose.
>
> I assume you mean "more efficient".
I think he meant "generally more and efficient" lol
On 12/12/2013, Neo Romantique wrote:
> C is generally more and efficient, I suppose.
I assume you mean "more efficient".
It may be more for the machine but it's less for the programmer.
We build machines to do tedious work so we needn't.
On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 05:11:06PM +0100, YpN wrote:
> > C is generally more and efficient, I suppose.
> >
> > On 12/12/2013 16:04, sin wrote:
> > > On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 03:42:52PM +, Neo Romantique wrote:
> > >> Why Shell, and not C?
> > >> Otherwise tool looks interesting.
> > > I don't s
> C is generally more and efficient, I suppose.
>
> On 12/12/2013 16:04, sin wrote:
> > On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 03:42:52PM +, Neo Romantique wrote:
> >> Why Shell, and not C?
> >> Otherwise tool looks interesting.
> > I don't see why this has to be done in C.
> >
>
> --
> Regards,
> neo~
> h
On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 04:05:22PM +, Neo Romantique wrote:
> C is generally more and efficient, I suppose.
Nonsense. You are just generating text.
On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 05:51:44PM +0200, Dimitris Zervas wrote:
> That's EXACTLY what I want to do for my blog! I've started the project
> but right now it's a piece of crap.
> However I use C. I don't even use any markdown library, I am making my
> own (I'm not yet sure if that's right or wrong..
C is generally more and efficient, I suppose.
On 12/12/2013 16:04, sin wrote:
On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 03:42:52PM +, Neo Romantique wrote:
Why Shell, and not C?
Otherwise tool looks interesting.
I don't see why this has to be done in C.
--
Regards,
neo~
http://www.inventati.org/neoromanc
On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 03:42:52PM +, Neo Romantique wrote:
> Why Shell, and not C?
> Otherwise tool looks interesting.
I don't see why this has to be done in C.
On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 10:32 AM, Truls Becken wrote:
> On 2013-12-12, at 13:28, Andrew Gwozdziewycz wrote:
>
>> Are you suggesting that the shell handle the command after the &&?
>> Or you let the subshell I spawn do it?
>
> The shell would handle the command after &&. The command after recognize
That's EXACTLY what I want to do for my blog! I've started the project
but right now it's a piece of crap.
However I use C. I don't even use any markdown library, I am making my
own (I'm not yet sure if that's right or wrong...).
On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 5:42 PM, Neo Romantique
wrote:
> Why Shell,
I think he was aiming for something like werc.
Good job!
On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 10:42 AM, Neo Romantique
wrote:
> Why Shell, and not C?
> Otherwise tool looks interesting.
>
>
> On 12/12/2013 14:57, YpN wrote:
>>
>> Hey dudes,
>>
>> I wrote a shell script using mksh, which generates websites. Y
Why Shell, and not C?
Otherwise tool looks interesting.
On 12/12/2013 14:57, YpN wrote:
Hey dudes,
I wrote a shell script using mksh, which generates websites. You need to write
your pages / posts in HTML or markdown (the project supports smu) and then
the script will "create" your website. I k
On 2013-12-12, at 13:28, Andrew Gwozdziewycz wrote:
> Are you suggesting that the shell handle the command after the &&?
> Or you let the subshell I spawn do it?
The shell would handle the command after &&. The command after recognized
arguments is handled using fork + execvp, without a subshell.
On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 10:12:58AM -0500, Strake wrote:
> On 12/12/2013, YpN wrote:
> > Do you think I could add a section about init? I know ignite and busybox
> > init, it might be interesting.
>
> Rich Felker, author of musl, wrote an init too, but I can't find it now.
>
> Here is mine, much
On 12/12/2013, YpN wrote:
> Do you think I could add a section about init? I know ignite and busybox
> init, it might be interesting.
Rich Felker, author of musl, wrote an init too, but I can't find it now.
Here is mine, much alike: https://github.com/strake/init/blob/master/init.c
On 12/12/2013, Strake wrote:
> Rich Felker, author of musl, wrote an init too, but I can't find it now.
Sorry, that ought to be "primary author".
Hey dudes,
I wrote a shell script using mksh, which generates websites. You need to write
your pages / posts in HTML or markdown (the project supports smu) and then
the script will "create" your website. I know we have werc but I wanted to
write my own tools.
Actually it's a bit hard to describe
I've used TinyWMs code to get an idea for how I should begin
implementing a wm, but I don't think it's really worth much beyond
that. No tags or desktops? No thanks...
On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 2:31 PM, sin wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 03:23:02PM +0100, patrick295767 patrick295767 wrote:
>> […]
> What about no window manager? Just run tmux in st.
dvtm
--
__
Raphaël Proust
On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 03:23:02PM +0100, patrick295767 patrick295767 wrote:
> Hi,
>
> The tinywm is a quite minimal. Tinywm is written in not many lines.
> Tinywm works well and is quite basic.
> Link: http://packages.debian.org/sid/tinywm
>
>
> So, j ust for fun, what about having a tinier
> On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 08:53:27AM -0500, Bryan Bennett wrote:
> > On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 8:46 AM, sin wrote:
> > > David Galos wrote a small init which you might be interested in.
> > > Check it out at: http://galos.no-ip.org/qinit
> >
> > This looks really interesting. I might try it out thi
Hi,
The tinywm is a quite minimal. Tinywm is written in not many lines.
Tinywm works well and is quite basic.
Link: http://packages.debian.org/sid/tinywm
So, j ust for fun, what about having a tinier code of the tinywm?
Regards,
Pat
--
For fun:
Fermion tiny wm of 10 lines? ;)
On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 08:53:27AM -0500, Bryan Bennett wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 8:46 AM, sin wrote:
> > David Galos wrote a small init which you might be interested in.
> > Check it out at: http://galos.no-ip.org/qinit
>
> This looks really interesting. I might try it out this weekend. T
On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 08:53:27AM -0500, Bryan Bennett wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 8:46 AM, sin wrote:
> > The busybox init code is far from pretty. I have not personally looked
> > at ignite so I don't know.
>
> I'm personally using minirc[1] on a number of boxes (which makes use of
> bus
Hi,
This is definitely correct, - more than correct:
"The busybox init code is far from pretty."
I would not add it. Furthermore, it is a pretty slow application.
On the other hand: Another application:
Although the dependencies, I like the code of this application. I
believe it is sort
On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 8:46 AM, sin wrote:
> The busybox init code is far from pretty. I have not personally looked
> at ignite so I don't know.
I'm personally using minirc[1] on a number of boxes (which makes use of
busybox's init and busybox's mdev, or some implementation of udev, of
which I'
On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 02:35:11PM +0100, YpN wrote:
>
> Hi,
> I often read the "rocks" page on http://suckless.org and
> I like it. I found some useful programs.
> Do you think I could add a section about init? I know ignite
> and busybox init, it might be interesting.
The busybox init code is
Hi,
I often read the "rocks" page on http://suckless.org and
I like it. I found some useful programs.
Do you think I could add a section about init? I know ignite
and busybox init, it might be interesting.
Regards
From Y.
On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 5:16 AM, Truls Becken wrote:
> On 2013-12-12 at 04:54, Andrew Gwozdziewycz wrote:
>
>> On 2013-12-11 at 19:08, Fernando C.V. wrote:
>>
>>> Sounds like a little nice useful utility, even thoguh I don't like
>>> that the commands have to be passed "quoted", as arguments just
On 2013-12-12 at 04:54, Andrew Gwozdziewycz wrote:
> On 2013-12-11 at 19:08, Fernando C.V. wrote:
>
>> Sounds like a little nice useful utility, even thoguh I don't like
>> that the commands have to be passed "quoted", as arguments just like
>> that. Not sure if there's a much better way to do it
72 matches
Mail list logo
