Dunno how interesting this will be...
I've recently made some changes to my workflow since I've switched a
number of hefty GUI applications for CLI ones, the advantage being that
they tile a lot better and so don't need dedicated tags. But I'm still
far from comfortable. A key problem is that
On 6 Jun 2010, at 19:26, Antoni Grzymala wrote:
Ethan Grammatikidis dixit (2010-06-06, 12:37):
What is a minor annoyance for me is how the “m”-mode in dwm is
implemented. The clients that aren’t in focus are visible underneath
the focused window. At least I think that’s how it’s done, since
Ethan Grammatikidis dixit (2010-06-06, 12:37):
> >What is a minor annoyance for me is how the “m”-mode in dwm is
> >implemented. The clients that aren’t in focus are visible underneath
> >the focused window. At least I think that’s how it’s done, since I can
> >see Chromium at the bottom of urxvt
On Sun, Jun 06, 2010 at 11:34:08AM +0200, Alexander Teinum wrote:
> I actually prefer cycling between the applications that I work with,
> and I was going to create an alt+tab patch to give it the traditional
> alt+tab behavior. Now I don’t have to. Thanks!
You're welcome!
> What is a minor annoya
On 6 Jun 2010, at 10:34, Alexander Teinum wrote:
What is a minor annoyance for me is how the “m”-mode in dwm is
implemented. The clients that aren’t in focus are visible underneath
the focused window. At least I think that’s how it’s done, since I can
see Chromium at the bottom of urxvtc.
Th
> I think I’m going to keep all the clients that I work with in one tab.
> Spotify, background processes etc. can stay in one of the other tabs.
>
Tag, not tab. ;)
I’ll go and see if I can find find some caffeine…
--
Best regards,
Alexander Teinum
Wow.
I actually prefer cycling between the applications that I work with,
and I was going to create an alt+tab patch to give it the traditional
alt+tab behavior. Now I don’t have to. Thanks!
I think I’m going to keep all the clients that I work with in one tab.
Spotify, background processes etc.
On Fri, Jun 04, 2010 at 07:07:15PM +0200, Alexander Teinum wrote:
> I use four tags:
>
> 1 – Web
> 2 – Editing
> 3 – Terminal
> 4 – Spotify
If you use one client per tag, then you could use only one tag and cycle
between clients (like you actually do with tags).
I usually have 2 tags, 1 with rxv
I use four tags:
1 – Web
2 – Editing
3 – Terminal
4 – Spotify
Since alt+numbers is used for changing tabs in Chromium, I use alt+j,
alt+k, alt+l and alt+; for switching between the tags in dwm. I don't
use much of the more advanced tag features. I have set up these
keyboard shortcuts for launchi
On Tue, Jun 01, 2010 at 01:56:28PM +0200, Moritz Wilhelmy wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 01, 2010 at 01:27:07PM +0200, Mate Nagy wrote:
> > > Using the vim splits may be cheating, but it sure is convenient.
> > sorry for self-reply: I thought that maybe for maximum punishment, the
> > fibonacci layout coul
While we're on macros, I use the following macro for each tag,
so I can spawn an xterm wherever I want, in what mode I want,
just by setting its class, e.g.
$ xterm -class XTerm4f
spawns a floating xterm on tag 4 (1-based indexing)
#define TAG(i) (1 << (i-1))
#define XTERM(n) \
{ "XTerm"#n
On 13:56 Tue 01 Jun, Moritz Wilhelmy wrote:
>> On Tue, Jun 01, 2010 at 01:27:07PM +0200, Mate Nagy wrote:
>> > Using the vim splits may be cheating, but it sure is convenient.
>> sorry for self-reply: I thought that maybe for maximum punishment, the
>> fibonacci layout could support nmaster. (Also
On 1 Jun 2010, at 14:01, Martin Kopta wrote:
Few months ago I set my
$HOME as read only and removed dotfiles and dotdirs what I didn't
create myself
or explicitly want.
Oh! This is something I should have done many years ago. I wish
I'd thought of it. I've lost good data because ther
On Tue, Jun 1, 2010 at 12:56 PM, Moritz Wilhelmy wrote:
>> On Tue, Jun 01, 2010 at 01:27:07PM +0200, Mate Nagy wrote:
>> > Using the vim splits may be cheating, but it sure is convenient.
>> sorry for self-reply: I thought that maybe for maximum punishment, the
>> fibonacci layout could support nm
On 1 Jun 2010, at 12:56, Moritz Wilhelmy wrote:
On Tue, Jun 01, 2010 at 01:27:07PM +0200, Mate Nagy wrote:
Using the vim splits may be cheating, but it sure is convenient.
sorry for self-reply: I thought that maybe for maximum punishment,
the
fibonacci layout could support nmaster. (Also no
On Tue, Jun 01, 2010 at 01:56:28PM +0200, Moritz Wilhelmy wrote:
> Actually tiling doesn't even make much sense on it, when I went with monocle
> on
> the netbook I grew used to it and use it everywhere now.
> Anyone else interested in sharing their way how they use their System? It
> seems
> lik
> On Tue, Jun 01, 2010 at 01:27:07PM +0200, Mate Nagy wrote:
> > Using the vim splits may be cheating, but it sure is convenient.
> sorry for self-reply: I thought that maybe for maximum punishment, the
> fibonacci layout could support nmaster. (Also note that this is a
> 2560x1600 setup, that's wh
17 matches
Mail list logo
