2012/6/27 Axel Beckert <a...@debian.org>: > Hi Mickaël, Hi
> If you still need a sponsor: I'm curious on that window manager. The > feature description by Serge sounded promising and the screenshots on > the website look neat, too. Yes, i'm still looking for a sponsor :-) I will add more informations to the ITP bug soon. > I'm currently using awesome and ratpoison -- and packaging a > non-tiling window manager myself which I prefer when a tiling doesn't > do the job (think Gimp). Yeah, Gimp (<= 2.6) is a problem with almost every tiling window manager I had the same problem, that's why i switched to Gimp 2.7. > While awesome and ratpoison are fine for my > daily work they still have their usability itches (a few of them were > already mentioned by Serge -- awesome's configuration in Lua is one of > them). > I also tried i3 and scrotwm for a while, and looked at subtle > and herbstluftwm (despite their concepts are too far away from what I > look for). I never tryed Ratpoison, but i used Awesome for a while, and i ended up with a 800 lines long rc.lua. I'm not a big fan of Lua :-p I tryed i3 too, but i don't like the "tree structure", so finally i tryed WMFS and i use it since a little more than a year. That's why i had the idea to package it. > I tried to look at > http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/w/wmfs/wmfs_2~beta201206-3.dsc > and > http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/w/wmfs/wmfs_2~beta201206-3.dsc > but those upload seems incomplete: > > dpkg-source: error: File ./wmfs_2~beta201206.orig.tar.xz has size 53492 > instead of expected 296604 > dpkg-source: error: File ./wmfs_2~beta201206.orig.tar.xz has size 53492 > instead of expected 53512 In fact, the `debian' folder i created for the package is now in the WMFS git repository, so when i want to build it, i create a .orig.tar.xz file with the following command: tar --xz -cvf ../wmfs2~beta201206.orig.tar.xz --exclude=debian ... and then i build the package with `debuild' and i upload it with `dput'. So i think i forgotten to run `make clean' before archiving and there is probably some binaries inside, which whould explain the error message :-/ If you want to try WMFS, you can still use the source: git clone git://github.com/xorg62/wmfs.git cd wmfs && debian/rules binary-all > The newest one which seemed complete was > http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/w/wmfs/wmfs_2\~beta201206.dsc > > Since alone from what I see on the mentors site the newer packages are > quite improved over that one, I'd prefer to have a look at the current > state instead of this out-dated version. As i said in the previous message, i'm currently at work and i go back home only Friday evening, so i can't fix the problem with the orig file till then... Apart from that, i am wondering if it's better to call the package `wmfs' with the version number `2~beta<date>', as i did, or if i should rather call it `wmfs2' with version number `<date>', as WMFS was been completely rewritten since the version 1 ... Have a nice day. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
