[awesome bugs] #496 - Set number of master windows in layout

THIS IS AN AUTOMATED MESSAGE, DO NOT REPLY. A new Flyspray task has been opened. Details are below. User who did this - Shrimant Saxena (shrimants) Attached to Project - awesome Summary - Set number of master windows in layout Task Type - Bug Report Category - Layouts Status - Unconfirmed A

Re: [Patch] naughty: add opacity option

At 1239391714 time_t, Gregor Best wrote: > Any news on this? Sorry, totally missed your patch. Pushed, of course. Cheers, -- Julien Danjou // ᐰhttp://julien.danjou.info // 9A0D 5FD9 EB42 22F6 8974 C95C A462 B51E C2FE E5CD // Trust no one. signature.asc Description: Digital signature

Re: [Patch] naughty: add opacity option

At Wed, 8 Apr 2009 18:00:32 +0200 Gregor Best wrote: > At Wed, 8 Apr 2009 17:46:22 +0200 > Julien Danjou wrote: > > > At 1239204183 time_t, Gregor Best wrote: > > > the attached patch adds an opacity option for naughty to enable it to show > > > transparent wiboxes. It's an element of the three d

Last day of sale

Are you ready to change your life and make girls admire your man's strength? http://wiesbt.goodearthlawncare.at/ -- To unsubscribe, send mail to awesome-devel-unsubscr...@naquadah.org.

Re: [PATCH] client_stack(): Only stack windows once per mainloop

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Julien Danjou wrote: > At 1239378506 time_t, Uli Schlachter wrote: >> Here is the new version of the patch, rebased on top of latest master. > > Pushed. > > PS: I'd suggest you publish a branch online so I can merge, since you are > sending a lot of

Re: [PATCH] client_stack(): Only stack windows once per mainloop

At 1239378506 time_t, Uli Schlachter wrote: > Here is the new version of the patch, rebased on top of latest master. Pushed. PS: I'd suggest you publish a branch online so I can merge, since you are sending a lot of patch. I can then cherry-pick/merge easily. Cheers, -- Julien Danjou // ᐰht

Re: [PATCH] Remove the argument to awesome_refresh()

At 1239378164 time_t, Uli Schlachter wrote: > awesome_refresh() had a xcb_connection_t as first argument. Since there is > only one connection to the X server, this argument doesn't really have any > alternatives to globalconf.connection and thus makes no sense. Pushed. Cheers, -- Julien Danjou

Re: [PATCH] client_stack(): Only stack windows once per mainloop

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Uli Schlachter wrote: > Julien Danjou wrote: >> At 1239357411 time_t, Uli Schlachter wrote: >>> This patch makes client_stack() only set a flag which is later checked. This >>> should reduce the number of restacks to the bare minimum. With this patch,

[PATCH] Remove the argument to awesome_refresh()

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 awesome_refresh() had a xcb_connection_t as first argument. Since there is only one connection to the X server, this argument doesn't really have any alternatives to globalconf.connection and thus makes no sense. Uli - -- "Do you know that books smel

Re: [PATCH] wibox: Don't display garbage when a wibox is made visible

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Julien Danjou wrote: > At 1239369215 time_t, Uli Schlachter wrote: >> attached is the new version of that patch. It adds a new function wibox_map() >> which maps the wibox's window and makes sure it is correctly drawn. In my >> testing this results in

[awesome bugs] #495 - one keysymbol for multiple keycodes not supported

THIS IS AN AUTOMATED MESSAGE, DO NOT REPLY. The following task has a new comment added: FS#495 - one keysymbol for multiple keycodes not supported User who did this - Julien Danjou (jd) -- Actually it should work, xev reports this correctly. -- More information can be found at

[awesome bugs] #495 - one keysymbol for multiple keycodes not supported

THIS IS AN AUTOMATED MESSAGE, DO NOT REPLY. The following task has a new comment added: FS#495 - one keysymbol for multiple keycodes not supported User who did this - Julien Danjou (jd) -- As far as I can tell, this is not a bug from awesome. In X: When you grab a key, you grab a keycod

Re: [PATCH] Move the definition of globalconf into a header file

At 1239363048 time_t, Uli Schlachter wrote: > Pretty much every single source file needs this struct, so it makes sense to > define it in a common header instead of in every single .c file. Merged. Cheers, -- Julien Danjou // ᐰhttp://julien.danjou.info // 9A0D 5FD9 EB42 22F6 8974 C95C A462

Re: [PATCH] wibox: Don't display garbage when a wibox is made visible

At 1239369215 time_t, Uli Schlachter wrote: > attached is the new version of that patch. It adds a new function wibox_map() > which maps the wibox's window and makes sure it is correctly drawn. In my > testing this results in no garbage drawn at all. Your solution probably works but I still raise

Re: [PATCH] wibox: Don't display garbage when a wibox is made visible

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Julien Danjou wrote: > At 1239354821 time_t, Uli Schlachter wrote: >> local w = wibox({ position = "floating", bg = "#ff" }) >> w.visible = false >> w.screen = 1 >> >> w.visible = true > > Good catch. > >> --- >> wibox.c |2 ++ >> 1 files c

IL FOTOVOLTAICO CON FINANZIAMENTO AGEVOLATO

L'impianto Fotovoltaico con finanziamento agevolato. Peccato non approfittarne. Ci sono importanti novità concernenti finanziamenti agevolati finalizzati all'acquisto, installazione o ampliamento di impianti fotovoltaici, sia per la Famiglia che per Soggetti con partita IVA. Scopri Ringrazian

Re: [PATCH] Call awesome_refresh() after handling dbus calls

At 1239364098 time_t, Uli Schlachter wrote: > Without this, e.g. wiboxes created in a dbus call are not properly displayed. Yup, I've already this patch in my local branch for now. Thanks anyway. :) Cheers, -- Julien Danjou // ᐰhttp://julien.danjou.info // 9A0D 5FD9 EB42 22F6 8974 C95C A46

[PATCH] Call awesome_refresh() after handling dbus calls

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Without this, e.g. wiboxes created in a dbus call are not properly displayed. Uli P.S.: From now on I'll attach the git format-patch output and only have the commit message in the mail. It seems like thunderbird doesn't want me to send inline patches

Re: [PATCH] client_stack(): Only stack windows once per mainloop

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Julien Danjou wrote: > At 1239357411 time_t, Uli Schlachter wrote: >> This patch makes client_stack() only set a flag which is later checked. This >> should reduce the number of restacks to the bare minimum. With this patch, >> neither xcb_configure_wi

Re: [PATCH] Rename LAYER_OUTOFSPACE to LAYER_COUNT

At 1239358295 time_t, Uli Schlachter wrote: > The name LAYER_OUTOFSPACE suggests that this is a real layer on which windows > can be put, but it's only used as an integer which describes the maximum > allowed / used layer. > Therefor, renaming it to LAYER_COUNT and adding a comment which describes

[PATCH] Move the definition of globalconf into a header file

Pretty much every single source file needs this struct, so it makes sense to define it in a common header instead of in every single .c file. Signed-off-by: Uli Schlachter --- client.c |2 -- dbus.c|2 -- draw.c|2 -- event.c

Re: [PATCH] client_stack(): Only stack windows once per mainloop

At 1239357411 time_t, Uli Schlachter wrote: > This patch makes client_stack() only set a flag which is later checked. This > should reduce the number of restacks to the bare minimum. With this patch, > neither xcb_configure_window() nor anything else client_stack() related shows > up as having a lo

[PATCH] Rename LAYER_OUTOFSPACE to LAYER_COUNT

The name LAYER_OUTOFSPACE suggests that this is a real layer on which windows can be put, but it's only used as an integer which describes the maximum allowed / used layer. Therefor, renaming it to LAYER_COUNT and adding a comment which describes this might make sense. Signed-off-by: Uli Schlachte

[PATCH] client_stack(): Only stack windows once per mainloop

I was creating 2000 wiboxes in a loop (don't ask) and creating them took forever. According to callgrind, there were about 2 million calls to xcb_configure_window() and most (if not all) of them were from client_stack(). Awesome spent 70% of its cpu time in these client_stack() calls. client_stack

Re: [PATCH] Rename LAYER_OUTOFSPACE to LAYER_MAX

How about MAX_LAYER? Or MAX_LAYER_INDEX? On Fri, Apr 10, 2009 at 10:47:25AM +0200, Julien Danjou wrote: > At 1239353043 time_t, Uli Schlachter wrote: > > The name LAYER_OUTOFSPACE suggests that this is a real layer on which > > windows > > can be put, but it's only used as an integer which descri

Re: [PATCH] wibox: Don't display garbage when a wibox is made visible

At 1239354821 time_t, Uli Schlachter wrote: > local w = wibox({ position = "floating", bg = "#ff" }) > w.visible = false > w.screen = 1 > > w.visible = true Good catch. > --- > wibox.c |2 ++ > 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/wibox.c b/wibox.c > index

Re: [PATCH] Rename LAYER_OUTOFSPACE to LAYER_MAX

At 1239354691 time_t, Uli Schlachter wrote: > Uhm... LAYER_COUNT? NUM_LAYERS? Something like that...? LAYER_COUNT seems fine. :) Cheers, -- Julien Danjou // ᐰhttp://julien.danjou.info // 9A0D 5FD9 EB42 22F6 8974 C95C A462 B51E C2FE E5CD // And thinking so much differently. signature.asc D

[PATCH] wibox: Don't display garbage when a wibox is made visible

I did the following and the wibox displayed garbage: local w = wibox({ position = "floating", bg = "#ff" }) w.visible = false w.screen = 1 w.visible = true Signed-off-by: Uli Schlachter --- wibox.c |2 ++ 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) diff --git a/wibox.c b/wibox.c

Re: [PATCH] Rename LAYER_OUTOFSPACE to LAYER_MAX

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Julien Danjou wrote: > At 1239353043 time_t, Uli Schlachter wrote: >> The name LAYER_OUTOFSPACE suggests that this is a real layer on which windows >> can be put, but it's only used as an integer which describes the maximum >> allowed / used layer. >>

[awesome bugs] #494 - windows disappear after restart if less tags than before are created in rc.lua

THIS IS AN AUTOMATED MESSAGE, DO NOT REPLY. The following task is now closed: FS#494 - windows disappear after restart if less tags than before are created in rc.lua User who did this - Julien Danjou (jd) Reason for closing: Not a bug Additional comments about closing: Agreed, not a bug. More

Re: [PATCH] why hardcode the 'default' tag

At 1239236186 time_t, koniu wrote: > I was wondering if there's a strong reason for having the hardcoded > bit forcing "default" tag to be created if there are no tags in the > screen. I think that this should be left to lua side - with the > current default rc.lua never even touching the problem (

Re: Matching by class, instance, and/or title. A hopeful improvement to the distributed rc.lua.

Hi, Sorry for the delay, I know I promised to review yesterday, but well. :-) I suggest you drop your MUA or configure it to split lines at 72 columns, that'd be very helpful. At 1239225956 time_t, sleepy.freaking.co...@gmail.com wrote: > I hope this has explained any questions you have about th

Re: [PATCH] Rename LAYER_OUTOFSPACE to LAYER_MAX

At 1239353043 time_t, Uli Schlachter wrote: > The name LAYER_OUTOFSPACE suggests that this is a real layer on which windows > can be put, but it's only used as an integer which describes the maximum > allowed / used layer. > Therefor, renaming it to LAYER_MAX and adding a comment which describes th

[PATCH] Rename LAYER_OUTOFSPACE to LAYER_MAX

The name LAYER_OUTOFSPACE suggests that this is a real layer on which windows can be put, but it's only used as an integer which describes the maximum allowed / used layer. Therefor, renaming it to LAYER_MAX and adding a comment which describes this might make sense. Signed-off-by: Uli Schlachter