Re: [dev] [surf] XDG conformity
Hi Janek, > After trying surf recently, I was appalled to see a ".surf" directory in my > home. > Is XDG basedir compliance not natural in suckless software? I won't answer directly this question, as you might be able yourself to look that up. But if you're asking about surf specifically, you can configure the directories used by surf in config.h.
Re: [dev] [surf] XDG conformity
On 21/12/16 09:39, Janek F wrote: > After trying surf recently, I was appalled to see a ".surf" directory in my > home. > Is XDG basedir compliance not natural in suckless software? Suckless software follows the principles that predate X Desktop Group and its specifications, as well as its own principles. Before 2000, it was customary in GNU/Linux to have user-specific configuration files in the user's home directory, starting with a dot. For example, vim's configuration file is ~/.vimrc, joe's configuration file is ~/.joerc and so on. Those files are commonly called "dotfiles", because they literally start with a dot, and programs like ls omit listing them by default (they are "hidden"). In addition, suckless software has its own convention, which is to configure software by changing a header file in its source code, usually located in the file config.h in the source directory of a particular program. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [dev] [surf] XDG conformity
Hi Janek, > After trying surf recently, I was appalled to see a ".surf" > directory in my home. Is XDG basedir compliance not natural in > suckless software? dmenu is the only suckless software I know that does anything related to the XDG basedir spec. I think the suckless way is to implement one simple approach and let users patch in their favorite way. A thread from 2010[1] suggests that many suckless users don't favor the XDG approach. My setup has XDG_* variables, but I wouldn't expect support from suckless out of the box. I hope that helps. 1: https://lists.suckless.org/dev/1012/6624.html
