> Everything in the quoted part seems personal preference.
I've been managing my vim plugins with git submodules via vim's builtin
"packadd" directory structure (~/.config/vim/pack/plugins/start/...).
And I can tell you that trying to do anything remotely non-trivial with
them is simply not a
Hi Greg,
On 2024-03-09 15:34, Greg Reagle wrote:
I have an epub ebook. It is a novel, but when I get this process working, I
want to repeat it for any epub ebook.
I want to read it, with formatting (such as underline or italics), with less.
I am happy to use any software that exists in the
Greg,
thanks for this!
for some personal tastes/usage cases, this, using pandoc's `-t`
option, might be minor-ly simpler:
man --local-file --pager 'less -ir' \
<(pandoc --standalone -t man \
2015.31233.Arab-Geographers-Knowledge-Of-Southern-India.epub) |
less
and,
On Sat, 09 Mar 2024 17:28:49 +0100
Elie Le Vaillant wrote:
> Страхиња Радић wrote:
> > Compiling all programs into one binary is currently an option, and IMHO it
> > should remain an option.
>
> I fully agree. However, the single binary situation should be improved.
>
> > Great, combine
On 24/03/09 05:28PM, Elie Le Vaillant wrote:
> Or is it out-of-scope for us to implement a full-blown shell? I really am
> not sure.
I think it would be interesting to have "official" suckless versions of all of
the mentioned programs, which would at minimum implement their descriptions
from
On Sat, Mar 09, 2024 at 09:34:12AM -0500, Greg Reagle wrote:
> I have an epub ebook. It is a novel, but when I get this process working, I
> want to repeat it for any epub ebook.
>
> I want to read it, with formatting (such as underline or italics), with less.
> I am happy to use any software
On Sat, Mar 9, 2024, at 9:34 AM, Greg Reagle wrote:
> I want to read it, with formatting (such as underline or italics), with
> less.
Or, I would be satisfied with an ebook reader program (either TUI or GUI is
fine) that has the same functionality and keys as less. Of course it can have
some
Страхиња Радић wrote:
> Compiling all programs into one binary is currently an option, and IMHO it
> should remain an option.
I fully agree. However, the single binary situation should be improved.
> Great, combine the two versions of libutil into a single, separate
> libutil repository
I'm
I have an epub ebook. It is a novel, but when I get this process working, I
want to repeat it for any epub ebook.
I want to read it, with formatting (such as underline or italics), with less.
I am happy to use any software that exists in the process, but I MUST use less
in the end to read
On Thu, Jan 25, 2024, at 2:48 PM, Greg Reagle wrote:
> I love the way that the columns patch handles the master area, i.e. the
> ability to control its width and number of windows, and that the
> windows in the master area take up the full height of the display. In
> the stacking area, though,
On Sat, 9 Mar 2024 14:53:07 +0100
Страхиња Радић wrote:
> On 24/03/09 12:59AM, Mattias Andrée wrote:
> > I agree, a single repo (or alternatively making libutil it's own repo) is
> > necessary if we want one binary, and I think we do.
>
> Compiling all programs into one binary is currently an
On 24/03/09 12:59AM, Mattias Andrée wrote:
> I agree, a single repo (or alternatively making libutil it's own repo) is
> necessary if we want one binary, and I think we do.
Compiling all programs into one binary is currently an option, and IMHO it
should remain an option. In my own toy distro[1]
On Sat, 09 Mar 2024 12:10:28 +0100
Eolien55 wrote:
> Mattias Andrée wrote:
> > I think there should be one directory called "portable" containing only
> > tools
> > from sbase, and one directory called "linux" containing the tools from ubase
> > and maybe even symlinks to the tools in
Mattias Andrée wrote:
> I think there should be one directory called "portable" containing only tools
> from sbase, and one directory called "linux" containing the tools from ubase
> and maybe even symlinks to the tools in "portable". This structure would allow
> us to add implementations for
14 matches
Mail list logo
