On Tue, Mar 04, 2008 at 05:11:02PM +0100, Anselm R. Garbe wrote:
On Tue, Mar 04, 2008 at 04:44:34PM +0100, Joerg van den Hoff wrote:
On Tue, Mar 04, 2008 at 05:51:30PM +0300, Alexander Polakov wrote:
* Joerg van den Hoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] [080304 17:21]:
question 1: should not the
On Wed, Mar 05, 2008 at 12:54:33PM +0100, Joerg van den Hoff wrote:
On Tue, Mar 04, 2008 at 05:11:02PM +0100, Anselm R. Garbe wrote:
On Tue, Mar 04, 2008 at 04:44:34PM +0100, Joerg van den Hoff wrote:
On Tue, Mar 04, 2008 at 05:51:30PM +0300, Alexander Polakov wrote:
* Joerg van den Hoff
On Wed, Mar 05, 2008 at 01:21:14PM +0100, Anselm R. Garbe wrote:
On Wed, Mar 05, 2008 at 12:54:33PM +0100, Joerg van den Hoff wrote:
On Tue, Mar 04, 2008 at 05:11:02PM +0100, Anselm R. Garbe wrote:
On Tue, Mar 04, 2008 at 04:44:34PM +0100, Joerg van den Hoff wrote:
On Tue, Mar 04, 2008
On 3/5/08, Joerg van den Hoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
but that was not my point. sorry, if I have not been clear
enough: I really mean the old 'mod1-m' functionality in the
tiled layout: toggle maximization status of the focused
window. this is still desirable, despite availability of
On Wed, Mar 05, 2008 at 01:47:16PM +0100, Szabolcs Nagy wrote:
On 3/5/08, Joerg van den Hoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
but that was not my point. sorry, if I have not been clear
enough: I really mean the old 'mod1-m' functionality in the
tiled layout: toggle maximization status of the
On Wed, Mar 05, 2008 at 02:18:25PM +0100, Anselm R. Garbe wrote:
On Wed, Mar 05, 2008 at 01:47:16PM +0100, Szabolcs Nagy wrote:
On 3/5/08, Joerg van den Hoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
but that was not my point. sorry, if I have not been clear
enough: I really mean the old 'mod1-m'
On Wed, Mar 05, 2008 at 02:18:25PM +0100, Anselm R. Garbe wrote:
On Wed, Mar 05, 2008 at 01:47:16PM +0100, Szabolcs Nagy wrote:
On 3/5/08, Joerg van den Hoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
but that was not my point. sorry, if I have not been clear
enough: I really mean the old 'mod1-m'
Btw. I plan to introduce 3 additional key bindings:
Mod1-f (Apply floating layout)
Mod1-m (Apply monocle layout)
Mod1-t (Apply tiled layout)
I agree with that
Kind regards,
--
Anselm R. Garbe http://www.suckless.org/ GPG key: 0D73F361
Do you have a quick solution
On Wed, Mar 05, 2008 at 03:45:09PM +0100, Szabolcs Nagy wrote:
On 3/5/08, Jeremy O'Brien [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Do you have a quick solution for maximizing floating windows?
an ugly solution would be a key binding for:
togglefloat()
monocle()
togglefloat()
tile()
but this way you
On Wed, Mar 05, 2008 at 03:45:09PM +0100, Szabolcs Nagy wrote:
On 3/5/08, Jeremy O'Brien [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Do you have a quick solution for maximizing floating windows?
an ugly solution would be a key binding for:
togglefloat()
monocle()
togglefloat()
tile()
but this way you
On Wed, Mar 05, 2008 at 02:18:25PM +0100, Anselm R. Garbe wrote:
On Wed, Mar 05, 2008 at 01:47:16PM +0100, Szabolcs Nagy wrote:
On 3/5/08, Joerg van den Hoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
but that was not my point. sorry, if I have not been clear
enough: I really mean the old 'mod1-m'
On Wed, Mar 05, 2008 at 04:37:23PM +0100, Joerg van den Hoff wrote:
On Wed, Mar 05, 2008 at 02:18:25PM +0100, Anselm R. Garbe wrote:
On Wed, Mar 05, 2008 at 01:47:16PM +0100, Szabolcs Nagy wrote:
On 3/5/08, Joerg van den Hoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
but that was not my point. sorry, if
On 3/5/08, Anselm R. Garbe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well, I'd like to get rid of the toggling at all, just directly
applying a certain layout.
i always used layouts that way and it works fine (except i use mod-q
mod-w mod-e ..)
but it's a config.h thing..
On Wed, Mar 05, 2008 at 05:28:50PM +0100, Szabolcs Nagy wrote:
On 3/5/08, Anselm R. Garbe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well, I'd like to get rid of the toggling at all, just directly
applying a certain layout.
i always used layouts that way and it works fine (except i use mod-q
mod-w mod-e
I think that if these changes will let you to release now, it is ok.
We can see later if there is something we can get rid of. Without
having a look at the current code it seems reasonable to me. So:
thumbs up!
--
- yiyus || JGL .
Hi guys,
I already asked on IRC, but the ML may be more appropriate for the
problem. This concerns very recent builds of firefox-current
(3.0_pre_blabla).
Since a few days it has been exhibiting very strange behaviour with dwm.
I get a tiny one-pixel-wide and 19-pixels-tall omnipresent window.
Antoni Grzymala dixit (2008-03-05, 19:13):
Here's a shot (see the top-left corner) with relevant xwininfo:
http://tkabber.tk/firefox.png
http://theka.tk/firefox.png
Sorry about the screwup.
--
[a]
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Wed, Mar 05, 2008 at 07:12:49PM +0100, y i y u s wrote:
I think that if these changes will let you to release now, it is ok.
We can see later if there is something we can get rid of. Without
having a look at the current code it seems reasonable to me. So:
thumbs up!
I implemented the stuff
Jeremy O'Brien dixit (2008-03-05, 13:27):
Off topic slightly, but could you possibly share your screenrc? I like
the layout at the bottom. :-D
Sure, I'll just post it inline:
escape ^gg
deflogin on
shell -/bin/bash
altscreen on
defscrollback 4096
nethack on
On 3/5/08, Anselm R. Garbe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Mar 05, 2008 at 07:12:49PM +0100, y i y u s wrote:
I think that if these changes will let you to release now, it is ok.
We can see later if there is something we can get rid of. Without
having a look at the current code it seems
On Wed, Mar 05, 2008 at 07:34:17PM +0100, Anselm R. Garbe wrote:
On Wed, Mar 05, 2008 at 07:12:49PM +0100, y i y u s wrote:
I think that if these changes will let you to release now, it is ok.
We can see later if there is something we can get rid of. Without
having a look at the current
On Wed, Mar 05, 2008 at 07:50:32PM +0100, Maarten Maathuis wrote:
On 3/5/08, Anselm R. Garbe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Mar 05, 2008 at 07:12:49PM +0100, y i y u s wrote:
I think that if these changes will let you to release now, it is ok.
We can see later if there is something we
Anselm R. Garbe dixit (2008-03-05, 20:14):
And here is my setup in action (btw. my dwm has 28000 bytes as
binary):
http://www.suckless.org/shots/dwm-4.8-xinerama.png
Not using vimperator? :)
Sad to see so much space wasted for the useless firefox widgets.
Best,
--
[a]
On 3/5/08, Antoni Grzymala [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Not using vimperator? :)
off topic
pff
vimperator didn't even have any usable navigation last time i checked
which makes it pretty unusable
even w3m is easier to handle
Szabolcs Nagy dixit (2008-03-05, 20:44):
On 3/5/08, Antoni Grzymala [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Not using vimperator? :)
off topic
pff
vimperator didn't even have any usable navigation last time i checked
Actually I'm using Opera as my main browser, but what do you mean by
usable
On 3/5/08, Anselm R. Garbe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Mar 05, 2008 at 07:50:32PM +0100, Maarten Maathuis wrote:
On 3/5/08, Anselm R. Garbe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Mar 05, 2008 at 07:12:49PM +0100, y i y u s wrote:
I think that if these changes will let you to release
On 3/5/08, Antoni Grzymala [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I use it vimperator occasionally with firefox and consider it an
excellent piece of software :). If only firefox weren't such a bloat, I
would happily start using it as my main browser.
iirc there is a nice feature of listing the urls of a
Szabolcs Nagy dixit (2008-03-05, 21:16):
I use it vimperator occasionally with firefox and consider it an
excellent piece of software :). If only firefox weren't such a bloat, I
would happily start using it as my main browser.
iirc there is a nice feature of listing the urls of a page or
On Wed, Mar 5, 2008 at 8:54 PM, Maarten Maathuis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 3/5/08, Anselm R. Garbe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Mar 05, 2008 at 07:50:32PM +0100, Maarten Maathuis wrote:
On 3/5/08, Anselm R. Garbe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Mar 05, 2008 at 07:12:49PM
The web is full of visual bloat. That's why your web browser must be
compatible, thus be bloat, too.
Vimperator is no big win. If you want a better web, provide mountable
interfaces to the important services...
And regarding firefox: I tried to print ten pages from firefox
yesterday. It slowly
hiro dixit (2008-03-05, 17:02):
And regarding firefox: I tried to print ten pages from firefox
yesterday. It slowly grew to 200mb in ram, and used all the cpu power,
before i killed it and instantly installed opera. Congratulations to
firefox and all those oss fine arts suckers.
I totally
On Wed, Mar 05, 2008 at 08:06:11PM +0100, Anselm R. Garbe wrote:
On Wed, Mar 05, 2008 at 07:50:32PM +0100, Maarten Maathuis wrote:
On 3/5/08, Anselm R. Garbe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Mar 05, 2008 at 07:12:49PM +0100, y i y u s wrote:
I think that if these changes will let you to
On Wed, Mar 5, 2008 at 12:38 PM, Anselm R. Garbe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
First of all I want to get rid of setmwfact, MWFACT and mwfact,
because I'd like to supply a saner way to setup the bar more
freely. Actually I consider the following values in config.h
(instead of BarPos):
On 3/5/08, Ritesh Kumar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Mar 5, 2008 at 12:38 PM, Anselm R. Garbe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
First of all I want to get rid of setmwfact, MWFACT and mwfact,
because I'd like to supply a saner way to setup the bar more
freely. Actually I consider the following
On 3/5/08, Anselm R. Garbe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
And here is my setup in action (btw. my dwm has 28000 bytes as
binary):
http://www.suckless.org/shots/dwm-4.8-xinerama.png
The left screen is the master, the right screen is the stack
(though, I'd really like to rotate that screen, but
35 matches
Mail list logo
