Re: [dev] [dwm] Optional status bar

2012-01-28 Thread Bjartur Thorlacius
Þann lau 28.jan 2012 22:40, skrifaði Suraj N. Kurapati: DBus is overkill. A named pipe or UNIX domain socket would suffice. I think even doing it the Xorg way would be an overkill. I'm in favor of splitting tagging into a separate program drawing to a subwindow of a panel. Some people use tag

Re: [dev] [dwm] Optional status bar

2012-01-28 Thread Suraj N. Kurapati
On Sat 28 Jan 2012 09:03:26 PM PST, Bjartur Thorlacius wrote: > Þann lau 28.jan 2012 19:13, skrifaði Tom Vincent: > > targeting ewmh/icccm is out of the question. How about a new > > "suckless" protocol between dwm and its status bar? > > _NET_WM_TYPE_DOCK support and XEmbed tag switcher would do h

Re: [dev] [dwm] Optional status bar

2012-01-28 Thread Bjartur Thorlacius
Þann lau 28.jan 2012 19:13, skrifaði Tom Vincent: It seems we can conclude targeting ewmh/icccm is out of the question. For tag switching at least.

Re: [dev] [dwm] Optional status bar

2012-01-28 Thread Bjartur Thorlacius
Þann lau 28.jan 2012 19:13, skrifaði Tom Vincent: Thanks for the discussion. It seems we can conclude targeting ewmh/icccm is out of the question. How about a new "suckless" protocol between dwm and its status bar? Much like dmenu handles launching, there's still scope in separating the status

Re: [dev] [dwm] Optional status bar

2012-01-28 Thread Tom Vincent
Thanks for the discussion. It seems we can conclude targeting ewmh/icccm is out of the question. How about a new "suckless" protocol between dwm and its status bar? Much like dmenu handles launching, there's still scope in separating the status bar. Perhaps a compile-time option to disable it com

Re: [dev] [dwm] Optional status bar

2012-01-28 Thread Bjartur Thorlacius
On Sat, 28 Jan 2012 16:35:49 -, Kurt H Maier wrote: On Sat, Jan 28, 2012 at 04:01:09PM -, Bjartur Thorlacius wrote: Dwm creates a dock (status bar) of its own and manages unlike any other x window. Dwm is configured to use a menu that, rather than being managed like any other x win

Re: [dev] [dwm] Optional status bar

2012-01-28 Thread Kurt H Maier
On Sat, Jan 28, 2012 at 04:01:09PM -, Bjartur Thorlacius wrote: > Dwm creates a dock (status bar) of its own and manages unlike any other x > window. Dwm is configured to use a menu that, rather than being managed > like any other x window, requests exemption from window management. By >

Fwd: [dev] [st] new xft branch (FreeType font rendering)

2012-01-28 Thread Peter Hartman
Begin forwarded message: > From: Peter Hartman > Date: January 28, 2012 11:03:39 AM EST > To: Steven Blatchford > Subject: Re: [dev] [st] new xft branch (FreeType font rendering) > > > > > > On Jan 28, 2012, at 10:51 AM, Steven Blatchford wrote: > >> On 10:44 Sat 28 Jan, Bryan Bennett

Re: [dev] [dwm] Optional status bar

2012-01-28 Thread Bjartur Thorlacius
On Sat, 28 Jan 2012 15:28:24 -, Kurt H Maier wrote: This phrasing suggests an implicit approval of the way e.g. ewmh-compliant software handles docks. dwm handles docks perfectly fine -- it renders them like any other x window. if the dock doesn't like it, that is the dock's problem, not

Re: [dev] [st] new xft branch (FreeType font rendering)

2012-01-28 Thread Bryan Bennett
That's strange. I'm using tmux here and every ncurses program I'm using looks great INSIDE tmux - but outside looks like shit. [1] 1: http://ompldr.org/vY2kyag (sorry for the hugeness)

Re: [dev] [st] new xft branch (FreeType font rendering)

2012-01-28 Thread Peter Hartman
On Sat, Jan 28, 2012 at 10:30 AM, Bryan Bennett wrote: > Interestingly enough, if you  launch the affected ncurses programs inside > tmux, everything seems to work fine (which is why I hadn't noticed the bug > until my last post - I wasn't using tmux at work.) s/in/outside/ -- but I've verified:

Re: [dev] [st] new xft branch (FreeType font rendering)

2012-01-28 Thread Bryan Bennett
Interestingly enough, if you launch the affected ncurses programs inside tmux, everything seems to work fine (which is why I hadn't noticed the bug until my last post - I wasn't using tmux at work.)

Re: [dev] [dwm] Optional status bar

2012-01-28 Thread Kurt H Maier
On Sat, Jan 28, 2012 at 02:22:09PM -, Bjartur Thorlacius wrote: > override-redirect window (as docks are not handled properly by dwm). This phrasing suggests an implicit approval of the way e.g. ewmh-compliant software handles docks. dwm handles docks perfectly fine -- it renders them like an

Re: [dev] [dwm] Optional status bar

2012-01-28 Thread Patrick Haller
On 2012-01-28 14:22, Bjartur Thorlacius wrote: > When I think of it, I can't but wonder if we could write a program > that does tagging and tagging only, and a selection of separate > layout managers that automatically tile or maximize mapped windows. > Interoperability with (other) no-wm tools wou

Re: [dev] [dwm] Optional status bar

2012-01-28 Thread Bjartur Thorlacius
On Sat, 28 Jan 2012 12:51:46 -, Tom Vincent wrote: (NB, is there an equivalent to xmonad's [runOrRaise][1] action in dwm?). No. Dwm has a rudimentary built-in application launcher (spawn(), IIRC), but advanced launching is handled externally by dmenu_run, which opens an override-redirec

[dev] [dwm] Optional status bar

2012-01-28 Thread Tom Vincent
I run dwm with the status bar hidden by default. I don't want to be distracted with system info through xsetroot nor need to see the window title. Often, I'll forget about open applications in other tags so sometimes toggle the status bar to find an active tag (NB, is there an equivalent to xmonad'