Re: FVWM: Force restore of titles and borders on Gnome applications
Indeed my patch is unnecessary and the same functionality may be achieved by the following line in .fvwmrc Style gthumb !MwmFunctions According to the change log NoFuncHint was the old name of the parameter. There are still references to NoFuncHint though in the documentation, that should be fixed. Thanks! Dov On Tue, Jun 9, 2015 at 2:39 PM, Dov Grobgeld dov.grobg...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Jun 9, 2015 at 11:43 AM, Thomas Adam tho...@fvwm.org wrote: I'm not sure the entire patch is necessary. What's wrong with using NoFuncHint? I wasn't aware of it. Indeed the documentation states exactly the same functionality as I wanted to implement. Unfortunately, I can't get it to work. I.e. With my patch and with Style evince MwmHintsIgnore in .fvwmrc, the frame is shown. But without my patch and with: Style evince NoFuncHint in .fvwmrc, the frame is not shown. Is this a bug, or am I doing something wrong? Regards, Dov -- Thomas Adam
Re: FVWM: Force restore of titles and borders on Gnome applications
On Tue, 9 Jun 2015 14:39:05 +0300 Dov Grobgeld dov.grobg...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Jun 9, 2015 at 11:43 AM, Thomas Adam tho...@fvwm.org wrote: I'm not sure the entire patch is necessary. What's wrong with using NoFuncHint? I wasn't aware of it. Indeed the documentation states exactly the same functionality as I wanted to implement. Unfortunately, I can't get it to work. I.e. With my patch and with Style evince MwmHintsIgnore in .fvwmrc, the frame is shown. But without my patch and with: Style evince NoFuncHint in .fvwmrc, the frame is not shown. Is this a bug, or am I doing something wrong? Regards, Dov -- Thomas Adam I have had some syle settings fail to apply to some Gtk+ app recently. I guessed it was setting WM_CLASS after the window was all set up, if that's even possible. I didn't investigate because I decided years ago to have as little as possible to do with Gnome and the horrid idiots behind freedesktop.org in general. I tried for 13 years to get and keep consistent comfortable workflows on Linux desktops, and in the end I just had to conclude it was never going to happen. It's been about 5 years since I gave up, but within that time, even with minimal use of desktop programs at all, I've had to add Gtk+ to the heap of software I want as little to do with as possible. For most of those 13 years it looked like the idiots were obsessed with emulating industry standards which were vague and poorly chosen in the first place. Now tablets are more popular than desktops the Gnome people are trying new things, but the idiots are still focused on implementing and forcing on their users things they *feel* are are the Latest Greatest Progress, when they collectively haven't got the intelligence to truly judge. Their use of that religious icon of a word, progress, makes them feel they have a right to screw with you and your workflow however they please, and if you complain that makes you rude or a troll and thus worthy of being banned from discussion. -- Developing the austere intellectual discipline of keeping things sufficiently simple is in this environment a formidable challenge, both technically and educationally. -- Dijstraka, EWD898, 1984
Re: FVWM: fvwm startup procedure
On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 11:53 PM, Jaimos Skriletz jaimosskril...@boisestate.edu wrote: Hi Jaimos! Read the man page under INITIALIZATION for a complete description of the start up procedure and how fvwm looks for its config file. Basically it looks in a few places (including old standards) then defaults to a minimal config which is equivalent (afaik) to having a blank config file. Are you the same person who wrote the fvwm beginners guide? If so, thank you so much for that! Yes, I've read the INITIALIZATION section in the man page. That part I understand. I wasn't asking so much about the files fvwm looks for which a user might define, but more trying to understand the bits which come before it. For example, there must be a file somewhere which has some key bindings for default things, or some function definitions, etc., for alt-tab. Is that true? I was wondering where this is documented, if at all. Thanks! Ethan
FVWM: fvwm startup procedure
Hey there, I am looking at trying to understand how fvwm loads its configuration file. Am I correct in thinking that some settings are hardcoded in fvwm? Are there any files which are read before my .fvwm/config file? TIA, Ethan
Re: FVWM: fvwm startup procedure
On 10 June 2015 at 23:56, Ethan Raynor ethanrayno...@gmail.com wrote: For example, there must be a file somewhere which has some key bindings for default things, or some function definitions, etc., for alt-tab. Is that true? I was wondering where this is documented, if at all. http://fvwmforums.org/wiki/Tips/FVWMStartupProcedure/ -- Thomas Adam
Re: FVWM: fvwm startup procedure
On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 12:20 AM, Thomas Adam tho...@fvwm.org wrote: On 10 June 2015 at 23:56, Ethan Raynor ethanrayno...@gmail.com wrote: For example, there must be a file somewhere which has some key bindings for default things, or some function definitions, etc., for alt-tab. Is that true? I was wondering where this is documented, if at all. http://fvwmforums.org/wiki/Tips/FVWMStartupProcedure/ Wowza! This document is amazing! Is there some reason why most of this isn't referenced in the man page, may I ask? Ethan
Re: FVWM: fvwm startup procedure
Ethan Raynor ethanrayno...@gmail.com writes: On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 12:20 AM, Thomas Adam tho...@fvwm.org wrote: On 10 June 2015 at 23:56, Ethan Raynor ethanrayno...@gmail.com wrote: For example, there must be a file somewhere which has some key bindings for default things, or some function definitions, etc., for alt-tab. Is that true? I was wondering where this is documented, if at all. http://fvwmforums.org/wiki/Tips/FVWMStartupProcedure/ Wowza! This document is amazing! Is there some reason why most of this isn't referenced in the man page, may I ask? I agree, really nice. Except for where Thomas talks about function setRCDefaults, I think you'll find it all in the man page. The tutorial style is good for explaining how all the parts work together. The man page is meant to be a complete reference. This means you have to find all the pieces. -- Dan Espen
