On 10/30/05, Thomas Adam [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello all,
This is really just a bit of fun, but I thought I'd send it to
fvwm-workers, rather than the FVWM mailing-list, since the people
predominantly on this list do a lot for FVWM.
I've created a Frappr map, so that we can see at a
Hi
I've already posted a bug report on the fvwm mailing list some weeks
ago regarding this, but no one answered. Today I switched to
xorg-7.0.0 and the problem is still there, so it must be fvwm.
The problem I found is related to the composite extension of xorg:
when I run xcompmgr (the
On 11/7/05, Dan Espen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
seventh guardian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Hi
I've already posted a bug report on the fvwm mailing list some weeks
ago regarding this, but no one answered. Today I switched to
xorg-7.0.0 and the problem is still there, so it must be fvwm
On 2/1/06, Marc Lehmann [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi!
The new argb visuals introduced by xorg have a serious drawback, namely,
they don't work correctly unless the toplevel window has an ARGB visual.
With my limited knowledge, I'd say this is a design problem within Xorg, but
I seem to be
On 2/2/06, Dominik Vogt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Feb 01, 2006 at 02:58:27PM +, seventh guardian wrote:
Hi.
First of all, there's a minor bug in libs/Module.h: the funcion
SendFinishedStartupNotification() is declared twice (on lines 147 and
166).
With that asside, I'm
On 2/2/06, Dominik Vogt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So, the work can be split into several smaller steps:
1. Make all the modules use ParseModuleArgs() and copy the fds
from the ModuleArgs struct to the arrays that are currently
used by the modules.
2. Remove the fd arrays in the modules
On 2/2/06, Dominik Vogt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So, the work can be split into several smaller steps:
1. Make all the modules use ParseModuleArgs() and copy the fds
from the ModuleArgs struct to the arrays that are currently
used by the modules.
2. Remove the fd arrays in the modules
On 2/4/06, seventh guardian [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 2/2/06, Dominik Vogt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So, the work can be split into several smaller steps:
1. Make all the modules use ParseModuleArgs() and copy the fds
from the ModuleArgs struct to the arrays that are currently
On 2/4/06, Dan Espen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think you need to keep the asterisk at the front of the name.
There are times when you need it there, and times when you don't.
It's easier to put it there in the first place rather than trying
to stick it back when you need it.
Yes, it is far
On 2/4/06, Dan Espen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
seventh guardian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On 2/4/06, Dan Espen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think you need to keep the asterisk at the front of the name.
There are times when you need it there, and times when you don't.
It's easier to put
On 2/4/06, Mikhael Goikhman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 04 Feb 2006 16:56:47 +, seventh guardian wrote:
existing structure only stores the name, and not the asterisk. Of
course we could use the existing char* MyName, but that would defeat
the whole purpose of using
Here goes the patch for making FvwmAuto use the ParseModuleArgs(),
just like with FvwmAnimate.
I must confess this was really straight-forward. I should have started
from this one..
Cheers!
Renato Caldas
FvwmAuto.patch
Description: Binary data
Hi.
I'm changing the official modules to use the new ParseModuleArgs
function, and I have a question regarding the module Alias argument.
Is it in fact a protocol standard or is it something some modules use?
I say that because some modules do use the argv[6] as an alias, but
others get the name
Hi.
Here goes a patch for FvwmConsole. I've noticed there was an excess of
vars for dealing with the module's name. I've corrected that too.
I've tested it myself and it works ok.
One question: there is a #define for a constant FARGS, the minimum
number of args required for the module. It was
On 2/8/06, Dominik Vogt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, Feb 07, 2006 at 09:01:34PM +, seventh guardian wrote:
On 2/5/06, Dominik Vogt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, Feb 04, 2006 at 02:27:20PM +, seventh guardian wrote:
On 2/2/06, Dominik Vogt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote
Sure. Here goes the patch against cvs. (I'll work on the cvs version
from now on)
OOPS again.. forgot the actual patch..
Renato Caldas
patch
Description: Binary data
On 2/8/06, seventh guardian [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Sure. Here goes the patch against cvs. (I'll work on the cvs version
from now on)
OOPS again.. forgot the actual patch..
Renato Caldas
Sorry, I had a bug in the previous patch. This new one is corrected.
Cheers,
Renato Caldas
On 2/4/06, Dan Espen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
seventh guardian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On 2/4/06, Dan Espen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think you need to keep the asterisk at the front of the name.
There are times when you need it there, and times when you don't.
It's easier to put
On 2/9/06, Dominik Vogt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Feb 08, 2006 at 02:05:14PM +, seventh guardian wrote:
I've committed the patch to CVS (and removed the FARGS macro from
FvwmConsole). For further patches, please always add a list of
modified functions to the ChangeLog after
On 2/9/06, Dominik Vogt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, Feb 09, 2006 at 03:32:44PM +, seventh guardian wrote:
On 2/9/06, Dominik Vogt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Feb 08, 2006 at 02:05:14PM +, seventh guardian wrote:
I've committed the patch to CVS (and removed the FARGS
On 2/9/06, Dominik Vogt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, Feb 09, 2006 at 04:08:00PM +, seventh guardian wrote:
On 2/9/06, Dominik Vogt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, Feb 09, 2006 at 03:32:44PM +, seventh guardian wrote:
On 2/9/06, Dominik Vogt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote
On 2/10/06, Dominik Vogt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, Feb 09, 2006 at 11:25:42PM +, seventh guardian wrote:
On 2/9/06, Dominik Vogt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, Feb 09, 2006 at 04:08:00PM +, seventh guardian wrote:
On 2/9/06, Dominik Vogt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote
On 2/10/06, Mikhael Goikhman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The module interface should be redesigned. Together with the module
syntaxes. We may do it cleanly in 2.7 or 2.9 versions. The compatibility
may be slightly broken then. I strongly prefer, however, to release 2.6
first, before any changes
On 2/10/06, Giladi Mati-R57914 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
I'm running RedHat3 WS U6 on my desktop.
How do I configure the session in the Login screen to be able to choose FVWM
also ( now the user can choose KDE and GNOME only ).
I build the fvwm-2.4.19-1.src.rpm.
Best Regards,
On 2/10/06, Mikhael Goikhman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 10 Feb 2006 08:35:04 +0100, Dominik Vogt wrote:
On Fri, Feb 10, 2006 at 01:19:26AM +, seventh guardian wrote:
Then we have two options:
- Modules don't pass a matching string to fvwm and fvwm is entirely
responsible
Hi.
After giving a look at the todo-2.6 list I got curious about what
FvwmProxy actually does, and the name is a bit misleading. It's so
nice I've just binded SendToModule FvwmProxy ShowToggle to the
Super_L key.
Anyway, on that list there's the entry E6, saying FvwmProxy should be
renamed. I
On 2/10/06, Thomas Adam [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, Feb 10, 2006 at 05:45:21PM +, seventh guardian wrote:
Anyway, on that list there's the entry E6, saying FvwmProxy should be
renamed. I agree, and suggest FvwmWinTag.
I'm indifferent. Proxy makes sense to me in this case
On 2/10/06, Dominik Vogt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, Feb 10, 2006 at 05:03:09PM +, seventh guardian wrote:
I happende to step on this when I was trying the wiki:
DV What about the future? Well, the work for the next stable series
DV (2.6.x) is proceeding very well. Fvwm will go
On 2/11/06, Mikhael Goikhman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 10 Feb 2006 16:48:49 +, Mikhael Goikhman wrote:
On 10 Feb 2006 08:25:41 +, Nick Fortune wrote:
You'd write
AliasModule FvwmButtons MonitorPanel
DestroyModuleConfig MonitorPanel
*MonitorPanel: (1x1,
Hi.
I found this on the todo-list:
E.7 Fix the FvwmProxy placement algorithm (it may loop and can place windows
off screen)
[dv: added on 02-Mar-2003]
I've looked int othe code, but I really don't know what the bug is.
Can please anyone point me to where to look, and how to trigger
On 2/16/06, seventh guardian [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 2/14/06, Mikhael Goikhman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 14 Feb 2006 13:45:10 +, seventh guardian wrote:
I found this on the todo-list:
E.7 Fix the FvwmProxy placement algorithm (it may loop and can place
windows
On 2/14/06, Mikhael Goikhman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 14 Feb 2006 13:45:10 +, seventh guardian wrote:
I found this on the todo-list:
E.7 Fix the FvwmProxy placement algorithm (it may loop and can place windows
off screen)
[dv: added on 02-Mar-2003]
I've looked
On 4/3/06, Serge (gentoosiast) Koksharov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Good (day|morning|night) everyone,
During examination of FvwmM4 '--debug' option I decided to examine FVWM's
temporary file creation mechanism. Can you believe what I dig out:
In libs/System.c there is a pragma '#ifdef
On 4/7/06, Serge (gentoosiast) Koksharov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi, dear developers,
1) First of all, the entire FvwmTaskBar module is broken in the current
CVS tree. Because of incorrect module-namelen calculation it does not
parses its configuration entries properly. I fixed this,
On 6/6/06, David Maciver [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello devs,
I've created a patchset[1] to try to improve the way fvwm looks. I've been
using it for a while and made various themes and it seems to work ok. Some
of it is inefficient and incomplete, but I can clean it up if you want.
I was
On 6/24/06, Mikhael Goikhman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 24 Jun 2006 16:35:21 +0200, Dominik Vogt wrote:
On Sat, Jun 24, 2006 at 02:08:43PM +, Mikhael Goikhman wrote:
I can't say I am very happy about this. Actually, I would not be happy
about any new feature added without discussion
On 6/24/06, Thomas Adam [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, Jun 24, 2006 at 10:09:03PM +0100, seventh guardian wrote:
Can we release a 2.6.0-rc1 and move on? Then while some would
maintain it until a real 2.6.0, some would be working on 2.7. For the
volunteers it's a matter of deciding to either
On 6/28/06, Scott Smedley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Mikhael,
DefineFunc would behave much like AddToFunc except for 3 differences:
1. It would generate a warning message if the function already existed.
This is bad. Configs should usually be re-read-able. Instead, it should
silently
Hi.
I have found FVWM_DEBUG_MSGS and DEBUG ifdef's all over the code (as
expected). But it seems to me they are allways used at the same time,
one defining the other, and thus replaceable just by one of them. Is
this true or do they have distinct purposes?
This supports my theory (from
On 7/5/06, seventh guardian [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi.
I have found FVWM_DEBUG_MSGS and DEBUG ifdef's all over the code (as
expected). But it seems to me they are allways used at the same time,
one defining the other, and thus replaceable just by one of them. Is
this true or do they have
On 7/6/06, Dominik Vogt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Jul 05, 2006 at 02:35:10PM +0100, seventh guardian wrote:
On 7/5/06, seventh guardian [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi.
I have found FVWM_DEBUG_MSGS and DEBUG ifdef's all over the code (as
expected). But it seems to me they are allways
Hi.
This is a debug code cleanup patch:
It removes most of the FvwmPager debug code (very old), also removing
useless debug code from fvwmsignal.c and fvmwsignal.h.
It also removes an unused #define from libs/PictureUtils.c, which
Olivier forgot to remove :P
I've only put safe changes on this
On 7/6/06, Dominik Vogt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, Jul 06, 2006 at 05:20:14PM +0100, seventh guardian wrote:
Hi.
This is a debug code cleanup patch:
It removes most of the FvwmPager debug code (very old), also removing
useless debug code from fvwmsignal.c and fvmwsignal.h.
It also
On 7/7/06, Dan Espen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Bob Woodside [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Thursday 06 July 2006 16:19, Dominik Vogt wrote:
On Thu, Jul 06, 2006 at 08:23:50PM +0100, seventh guardian wrote:
On 7/6/06, Dominik Vogt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The patch looks fine. I'll commit
On 7/7/06, Dan Espen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
seventh guardian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Hi.
After some checking around, it seems that the file libs/debug.c isn't
used anymore. The file was created in 1998 as a debuging library, but
it seems to have been replaced by simpler solutions
Hello all.
It all starts with this snip from docs/TODO:
- Implement (or at least investigate) dynamic loading of functions
on systems that support it?
(There is more on that on that file. These are just the first two lines)
Recently I began testing GNU's Libtool on a project of mine,
On 7/8/06, FVWM CVS fvwm-workers@fvwm.org wrote:
CVSROOT:/home/cvs/fvwm
Module name:fvwm
Changes by: renato 06/07/08 09:57:42
fvwm/compat
Update of /home/cvs/fvwm/fvwm/compat
In directory util9.math.uh.edu:/tmp/cvs-serv3957/compat
Log Message:
Directory
Hi.
What do you think of separating the compatibility code (replacement
functions) from libfvwm?
Functions like strncasecmp or strdup are spread all over the code. For
systems that do not have them availiable, libfvwm is responsible for
providing them. But the question is, should this be the
On 7/8/06, Dominik Vogt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, Jul 07, 2006 at 06:34:31PM -0500, fvwm-workers wrote:
CVSROOT: /home/cvs/fvwm
Module name: fvwm
Changes by: renato 06/07/07 18:34:31
Modified files:
. : ChangeLog
fvwm : fvwm.1.in fvwm.c
On 7/8/06, Dominik Vogt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, Jul 08, 2006 at 07:58:46PM +0100, seventh guardian wrote:
Hi.
What do you think of separating the compatibility code (replacement
functions) from libfvwm?
Functions like strncasecmp or strdup are spread all over the code
On 7/8/06, seventh guardian [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 7/8/06, Dominik Vogt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, Jul 07, 2006 at 06:34:31PM -0500, fvwm-workers wrote:
CVSROOT: /home/cvs/fvwm
Module name: fvwm
Changes by: renato 06/07/07 18:34:31
Modified files
On 7/9/06, Dominik Vogt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, Jul 08, 2006 at 11:48:43PM +0100, seventh guardian wrote:
On 7/8/06, seventh guardian [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 7/8/06, Dominik Vogt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, Jul 07, 2006 at 06:34:31PM -0500, fvwm-workers wrote:
CVSROOT
On 7/9/06, Dominik Vogt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, Jul 09, 2006 at 01:00:08AM +0100, seventh guardian wrote:
On 7/9/06, Dominik Vogt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well, we have been very *very* conservative in the past about
backwards compatibility - and that patch breaks it. It's
attention though.. I should have
By the way, I've long wanted to know the significance of
seventh guardian ... ?
LOL Well, seven is kind of a mystical number, it´s the last day of the
week. I'm kind of the last guardian for something.. I'm yet to
discover what.. Anyway, I created
On 7/11/06, Serge (gentoosiast) Koksharov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello,
With current state of things it's impossible to compile 2.5.17 CVS
branch with --debug-msgs configure option. I investigated created a
patch which fixes this problem.
OOPS that was my fault.. Appiled.
BTW, is it my
Hi.
I have a question regarding the use of the ChangeLogs.
Obviously, changes to the fvwm core are reported in the root
ChangeLog. But what about changes to modules? I ask this because I've
allways logged my changes to the root one, but now think I should have
done it to modues/ChangeLog. On
On 7/12/06, Dan Espen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
seventh guardian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Hi.
I have a question regarding the use of the ChangeLogs.
Obviously, changes to the fvwm core are reported in the root
ChangeLog. But what about changes to modules? I ask this because I've
allways
Hello.
Having looked at FvwmGtk code, I realise there's no need for gnome
support, as no gnome specific functions are used. So, there's no
advantage of calling gnome_init vs gtk_init. And from what I see, the
gnome support has been several times mis-used by precompiled distros
(forcing the
On 7/12/06, Thomas Adam [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Jul 12, 2006 at 11:24:57PM +0100, seventh guardian wrote:
Hello.
Having looked at FvwmGtk code, I realise there's no need for gnome
support, as no gnome specific functions are used. So, there's no
advantage of calling gnome_init vs
On 7/13/06, Olivier Chapuis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
seventh guardian a écrit :
On 7/12/06, Thomas Adam [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Jul 12, 2006 at 11:24:57PM +0100, seventh guardian wrote:
Hello.
Having looked at FvwmGtk code, I realise there's no need for gnome
support
On 7/13/06, Scott Smedley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Serge,
In question 7.17 of the FVWM FAQ Autohiding FvwmButtons or other
windows module FvwmAuto launched like this:
+ I Module FvwmAuto FvwmAutohide -menter enter_handler
But from reading manpage source code of this module I figured
On 7/13/06, Dominik Vogt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, Jul 13, 2006 at 12:18:02AM +0100, seventh guardian wrote:
On 7/13/06, Olivier Chapuis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
seventh guardian a écrit :
On 7/12/06, Thomas Adam [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Jul 12, 2006 at 11:24:57PM +0100
On 7/14/06, Scott Smedley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Damn this list is busy!
http://gmane.org/plot-rate.php?group=gmane.comp.window-managers.fvwm.develwidth=1000height=400color=red,orange,%234000title=fvwm-workerssmooth=exp
Not that I'm complaining.
Yes.. Summer hollydays are comming in :) I
On 7/16/06, Serge (gentoosiast) Koksharov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, Jul 16, 2006 at 12:51:55PM +0200, Dominik Vogt wrote:
On Sat, Jul 15, 2006 at 03:55:17AM +0400, Serge (gentoosiast) Koksharov wrote:
On Fri, Jul 14, 2006 at 12:28:45AM +0200, Dominik Vogt wrote:
Um, if the manpage
On 7/17/06, Andrei Popov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello Dominik and thanks for you response.
You could add some dummy Gnome application to your start function.
I'm sorry, dummy Gnome application doesn't sound too clear to me,
and Google didn't help me either =) Can you perhaps provide an
On 7/17/06, Thomas Adam [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, Jul 17, 2006 at 10:35:15AM +0100, Leon wrote:
Thomas Adam [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Sun, Jul 16, 2006 at 05:56:18PM +0100, Leon wrote:
However it seems it does nothing at all. All the icons still have
sticky title. Any ideas?
Hi.
I have a question. Is the flag vs. !flag syntax the prefered one? I
ask this because even though some styles only have the !(stylename)
counterpart, some are still documented as (stylename)Off. So if the
flag negation is prefered to the (stylename) vs. (stylename)Off, or
the other way round,
On 7/17/06, Thomas Adam [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, Jul 17, 2006 at 03:26:32PM +0100, seventh guardian wrote:
On 7/17/06, Thomas Adam [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, Jul 17, 2006 at 10:35:15AM +0100, Leon wrote:
Thomas Adam [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Sun, Jul 16, 2006 at 05:56
On 7/17/06, Thomas Adam [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, Jul 17, 2006 at 03:47:13PM +0100, seventh guardian wrote:
Hi.
I have a question. Is the flag vs. !flag syntax the prefered one? I
ask this because even though some styles only have the !(stylename)
counterpart, some are still
On 7/17/06, Thomas Adam [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, Jul 17, 2006 at 04:02:47PM +0100, seventh guardian wrote:
Yes, but then the 2.5 manual should be updated. I'll start doing
that..
Don't be too hasty. :) Things like:
Style foo !Icon
Won't work.
Yes, I know :) But in any case
On 7/17/06, Viktor Griph [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, 17 Jul 2006, Thomas Adam wrote:
On Mon, Jul 17, 2006 at 04:02:47PM +0100, seventh guardian wrote:
Yes, but then the 2.5 manual should be updated. I'll start doing
that..
Don't be too hasty. :) Things like:
Style foo !Icon
On 7/17/06, Thomas Adam [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, Jul 17, 2006 at 04:36:08PM +0100, seventh guardian wrote:
On the other hand, BackColor and ForeColor apply to both situations.
Don't get too attached to those though -- they're deprecated in favour
of using colorsets. :)
So you can
Hi.
This idea just came into my head: why not #ifdef'ing the deprecated
code and having configure.ac option --disable-backcompat?
Examples:
User A has an old config. So he downloads the new package, compiles it
and installs it just like he allways did.
User B has a new config and wants to
On 7/17/06, Thomas Adam [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, Jul 17, 2006 at 04:56:18PM +0100, seventh guardian wrote:
Lol.. Yes, but how do you specify if its an and or an or?
Just have two separate lines for them?
Style (title=foo, winstate=normal) .
Style (title=fii, winstate=iconic
On 7/18/06, Viktor Griph [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, 17 Jul 2006, Dominik Vogt wrote:
On Mon, Jul 17, 2006 at 03:47:13PM +0100, seventh guardian wrote:
Hi.
I have a question. Is the flag vs. !flag syntax the prefered one? I
ask this because even though some styles only have
On 7/18/06, seventh guardian [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 7/18/06, Viktor Griph [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, 17 Jul 2006, Dominik Vogt wrote:
On Mon, Jul 17, 2006 at 03:47:13PM +0100, seventh guardian wrote:
Hi.
I have a question. Is the flag vs. !flag syntax the prefered one? I
On 7/21/06, FVWM CVS fvwm-workers@fvwm.org wrote:
CVSROOT:/home/cvs/fvwm
Module name:fvwm-web
Changes by: scott 06/07/20 22:30:23
Modified files:
documentation/manpages/unstable: FvwmAnimate.php FvwmAuto.php
FvwmBacker.php
Hello all.
After some thought and reasoning, here's a preliminary solution to the
man page entry regarding the style negation method. I followed Thomas'
sugestion and here's what is done for the menu styles. Since I hadn't
done any change to this section yet, I've updated the HilightBackOff
Hi.
Some of the MenuStyle (an maybe Style too) options don't have a
negative form on the man page. But the truth is that some can be
negated.
So in order to unify the whole thing, what should be done to those?
Should we add the negative forms to the man page to the ones missing,
or should we
On 7/21/06, Dominik Vogt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, Jul 21, 2006 at 03:56:00PM +0100, seventh guardian wrote:
Hi.
Some of the MenuStyle (an maybe Style too) options don't have a
negative form on the man page. But the truth is that some can be
negated.
So in order to unify the whole
On 7/21/06, Dominik Vogt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, Jul 21, 2006 at 03:38:40PM +0100, seventh guardian wrote:
Hello all.
After some thought and reasoning, here's a preliminary solution to the
man page entry regarding the style negation method. I followed Thomas'
sugestion and here's
On 7/23/06, Jacob Bachmeyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
seventh guardian wrote:
Ok, what about this:
Some options are now deactivated by prefixing ! to the option. This
will eventually be the default, and the old negative options are
now deprecated.
This is a list of MenuStyle deprecated
On 7/23/06, Thomas Adam [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 23/07/06, Peter Daum [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
already for a while now (I think it started shortly after 2.5.15)
the specification of a foreground color for a window (something
like Style * Color red/green or ForeColor red) has been
On 7/24/06, Thomas Adam [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 24/07/06, Jacob Bachmeyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
seventh guardian wrote:
On 7/23/06, Jacob Bachmeyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
seventh guardian wrote:
Ok, what about this:
Some options are now deactivated by prefixing
Hello.
I found this unusual thing in the manual. There is a reference to
ActiveBack/ActiveBackOff all over the place, but aparently the style
doesn't exist any more. It is not documented at all, nor is mentioned
in (both) the ChangeLogs.. Not even in any part of the source code.
Is there a
On 7/25/06, Dominik Vogt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I found this unusual thing in the manual. There is a reference to
ActiveBack/ActiveBackOff all over the place, but aparently the style
doesn't exist any more. It is not documented at all, nor is mentioned
in (both) the ChangeLogs.. Not even
On 7/25/06, FVWM CVS fvwm-workers@fvwm.org wrote:
CVSROOT:/home/cvs/fvwm
Module name:fvwm
Changes by: renato 06/07/25 09:24:00
Modified files:
. : ChangeLog
fvwm : fvwm.1.in
Log message:
Created a ! flag explanation in Style similar to
On 8/4/06, Serge (gentoosiast) Koksharov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello,
I want new MenuStyle which disables ability to tear off menu. Reason:
because I have some dynamic menues like this:
Mouse 3 IST A Menu winmenu +0m +0
DestroyMenu winmenu
AddToMenu winmenu Window menu: Title
+
On 8/7/06, Dominik Vogt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Is there any way that the module interface allows keeping track of changes
to the window flags of a window? Currently FvwmPager allows moving of
FixedPosition mini-windows, but the main window does not move. Just
checking for IS_FIXED in
On 8/8/06, Viktor Griph [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, 8 Aug 2006, seventh guardian wrote:
On 8/7/06, Dominik Vogt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Is there any way that the module interface allows keeping track of
changes
to the window flags of a window? Currently FvwmPager allows moving
On 8/8/06, Viktor Griph [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, 8 Aug 2006, seventh guardian wrote:
On 8/8/06, Viktor Griph [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, 8 Aug 2006, seventh guardian wrote:
On 8/7/06, Dominik Vogt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Is there any way that the module interface allows
On 8/8/06, seventh guardian [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 8/8/06, Viktor Griph [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, 8 Aug 2006, seventh guardian wrote:
On 8/8/06, Viktor Griph [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, 8 Aug 2006, seventh guardian wrote:
On 8/7/06, Dominik Vogt [EMAIL PROTECTED
On 8/8/06, seventh guardian [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 8/8/06, seventh guardian [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 8/8/06, Viktor Griph [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, 8 Aug 2006, seventh guardian wrote:
On 8/8/06, Viktor Griph [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, 8 Aug 2006, seventh guardian
On 8/8/06, Dominik Vogt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
As a way to provide backward compatibility and minimizing the effects
of the above VISIBLE changes there could be provided a command that
the modules could use to request an alias. This way the module would
parse the command line alias
On 8/7/06, Serge (gentoosiast) Koksharov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello,
Here some documentation fixes and debug code cleanups in FvwmIconMan.
Please see attached patch's ChangeLog section for more information.
Hello!
Your patch seems ok to me :)
BTW, I've seen some references of manger
On 8/8/06, Thomas Adam [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, 8 Aug 2006 16:18:41 +0100
seventh guardian [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 8/8/06, Dominik Vogt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
As a way to provide backward compatibility and minimizing the
effects of the above VISIBLE changes there could
On 8/7/06, Viktor Griph [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Should the flag tracking icon movement be set by MoveToPage? Currently
it's not, which makes icons jump back to the initial page if do for
example 'Style * IconTitle' if an icon has been moved to another page by
MoveToPage. On a sidenote the same
On 8/8/06, Thomas Adam [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, 8 Aug 2006 16:39:42 +0100
seventh guardian [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 8/7/06, Serge (gentoosiast) Koksharov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello,
Here some documentation fixes and debug code cleanups in FvwmIconMan.
Please see
On 8/8/06, Dominik Vogt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, Aug 08, 2006 at 12:16:44AM +0400, Serge (gentoosiast) Koksharov wrote:
Hello,
Here some documentation fixes and debug code cleanups in FvwmIconMan.
Please see attached patch's ChangeLog section for more information.
The patch looks
On 8/8/06, seventh guardian [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 8/8/06, Dominik Vogt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, Aug 08, 2006 at 12:16:44AM +0400, Serge (gentoosiast) Koksharov wrote:
Hello,
Here some documentation fixes and debug code cleanups in FvwmIconMan.
Please see attached patch's
1 - 100 of 113 matches
Mail list logo
