Re: [dev] [st] scrollback-mouse patch is broken on 0.8

On Fri, Sep 7, 2018 at 8:15 AM Daniel Tameling wrote: > > you need to apply the normal scrollback patch before the mouse one. > Then it works. Sorry if it wasn't clear from my previous post, but I applied the normal scrollback patch before the mouse one when I encountered the problem.

Re: [dev] [st] solarized light patch colors incorrect

On Fri, Sep 7, 2018 at 4:25 PM, Egmont Koblinger wrote: > Hi Silvan, > >> Patches welcome! > > My sole intent was to report a bug, leaving it up to you how you handle it. I should have thanked you for your bug report too. Thanks for that! I am just afraid that if you won't take the time to fix

Re: [dev] [st] solarized light patch colors incorrect

> Whoa whoa whoa... could we stop here for a sec, please? WOW!! > First of all, before filing this bugreport I checked suckless's > homepage, which says on its Community page: "dev@suckless.org - for > dwm/dmenu/st/… users, development discussion, bug reports and general > discussion". I did

Re: [dev] [st] scrollback-mouse patch is broken on 0.8

On Fri, Sep 07, 2018 at 10:10:44AM -0700, Devin Neal wrote: > On Fri, Sep 7, 2018 at 8:15 AM Daniel Tameling > wrote: > > > > you need to apply the normal scrollback patch before the mouse one. > > Then it works. > > Sorry if it wasn't clear from my previous post, but I applied the > normal

Re: [dev] [st] solarized light patch colors incorrect

On 07/09/18 18:21, Peter Nagy wrote: > Is it a crime to be a consumer? Do you really suggest him to go buy an Apple > product just because he won't contribute code? I don't think I read about > elitism in the suckless philosophy pages. >From https://dwm.suckless.org/: "Because dwm is customized

[dev] [st] solarized light patch colors incorrect

Hi, I came across patches for the Solarized color scheme under https://st.suckless.org/patches/solarized/ . I wuold like to point out that the "light" variant, along with its screenshot, is incorrect. According to the Solarized homepage https://ethanschoonover.com/solarized/ , the section "The

Re: [dev] [st] scrollback-mouse patch is broken on 0.8

On Thu, Sep 06, 2018 at 01:18:26PM -0700, Devin Neal wrote: > There appears to be a problem with one of the patches to enable mouse > scrolling at https://st.suckless.org/patches/scrollback/. > > It seems that this patch is incorrect, though I'm not discounting the > possibility that I've done

Re: [dev] [st] solarized light patch colors incorrect

Is it a crime to be a consumer? Do you really suggest him to go buy an Apple product just because he won't contribute code? I don't think I read about elitism in the suckless philosophy pages. -- Peter Nagy - To reach a goal one has to enjoy the journey On September 7, 2018 2:59:56 PM UTC,

Re: [dev] [st] solarized light patch colors incorrect

Hi On Fri, Sep 7, 2018 at 2:31 PM, Egmont Koblinger wrote: > I came across patches for the Solarized color scheme under > https://st.suckless.org/patches/solarized/ . > > I wuold like to point out that the "light" variant, along with its > screenshot, is incorrect. > > According to the Solarized

Re: [dev] [st] solarized light patch colors incorrect

> My sole intent was to report a bug, leaving it up to you how you handle it. Thank you consumer, please forward to your nearest Apple Store Geniuses

Re: [dev] [st] solarized light patch colors incorrect

Whoa whoa whoa... could we stop here for a sec, please? First of all, before filing this bugreport I checked suckless's homepage, which says on its Community page: "dev@suckless.org - for dwm/dmenu/st/… users, development discussion, bug reports and general discussion". I did look up that this is

Re: [dev] [st] solarized light patch colors incorrect

Hi Silvan, > Patches welcome! My sole intent was to report a bug, leaving it up to you how you handle it. Thanks for your understanding, egmont On Fri, Sep 7, 2018 at 2:35 PM, Silvan Jegen wrote: > Hi > > On Fri, Sep 7, 2018 at 2:31 PM, Egmont Koblinger wrote: >> I came across patches for

Re: [dev] [st] solarized light patch colors incorrect

On September 7, 2018 2:59:56 PM UTC, Quentin Rameau wrote: > > My sole intent was to report a bug, leaving it up to you how you > handle it. > > Thank you consumer, please forward to your nearest Apple Store > Geniuses And you would reply the same way to a security-related bug report without a

Re: [dev] [st] solarized light patch colors incorrect

> > Third‐party patches are what they are. If you don't read and/or > > understand what you apply, you're on your own. > > "We don't support third-party patches, fix it yourself or contact the person > who developed the patch." That wasn't hard to say. I'm glad you got it. > It's your role to

Re: [dev] [st] solarized light patch colors incorrect

So, back to that question about security-related bug reports. You haven't commented. -- wowaname Please use detailed subject lines and reply below quoted text whenever possible.

Re: [dev] [st] solarized light patch colors incorrect

> Third‐party patches are what they are. If you don't read and/or > understand what you apply, you're on your own. "We don't support third-party patches, fix it yourself or contact the person who developed the patch." That wasn't hard to say. It's your role to make not only the code, but also

Re: [dev] [st] solarized light patch colors incorrect

> So, back to that question about security-related bug reports. You haven't > commented. Maybe it's a misplaced consumer^Wgrown up habbit which makes you feel like your entitled to a comment? If you had the decency to at least read the answers to the questions for which you demand an answer,

Re: [dev] [st] solarized light patch colors incorrect

> Maybe it's a misplaced consumer^Wgrown up habbit which makes you feel > like your entitled to a comment? It's called making conversation > If you had the decency to at least read the answers to the questions > for which you demand an answer, you'd had seen I already did. Oh yes: > I would reply

Re: [dev] [st] solarized light patch colors incorrect

I am currently LOL'ing @ the thread. It ain't no CVE, it's a freakin color scheme crap. Found a bug -> fix the damn thing. Don't need no MS in CS. -- caóc

Re: [dev] [st] solarized light patch colors incorrect

> And you would reply the same way to a security-related bug report without a > patch? I would reply in a worse way, according to your standards (if I understand correctly). Third‐party patches are what they are. If you don't read and/or understand what you apply, you're on your own. > Grow up,

Re: [dev] [st] solarized light patch colors incorrect

On September 7, 2018 9:34:44 PM UTC, "Cág" wrote: > I am currently LOL'ing @ the thread. > > It ain't no CVE, it's a freakin color scheme crap. Found a bug -> fix > the damn thing. Don't need no MS in CS. > > -- > caóc Look at any other dev project and you'll see that this is a childish

Re: [dev] [st] scrollback-mouse patch is broken on 0.8

On Fri, Sep 7, 2018 at 8:15 AM Daniel Tameling wrote: > if there is already an existing config.h, you get the error you described. It turns out that this error occurred precisely because I ran make (which created a config.h file) in between applying the two patches. I think this error is subtle