Nothing in the dep list looks horrible to me personally (as my used apps
have pulled most of those in already).
But I'd really hate to see dwm start to suffer from the same type of "must
install plan9" dependencies that wmii had. It really doesn't matter how
small/compact your window manager is i
Don Stewart wrote:
> tobiasu:
>
>> Keep in mind that this locks out a number of users not running bleeding
>> edge stuff...
>>
>
> I think this is the biggest concern. Just look at the dependencies:
>
> http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=18981
>
> cairo-xcb
> dbus
> gt
2008/9/14 Donald Chai <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On Sep 14, 2008, at 3:02 AM, Johannes Wegener wrote:
>
>> I recently read that awesome is going to use XCB over Xlib and says that
>> it is faster becouse it is asynchronous.
>> Does XCB realy its job faster than Xlib?
>> And if this is the case is dwm g
2008/9/14 Tobias Ulmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On Sun, Sep 14, 2008 at 12:32:25PM +0100, Anselm R Garbe wrote:
>> 2008/9/14 Johannes Wegener <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>> > I recently read that awesome is going to use XCB over Xlib and says that
>> > it is faster becouse it is asynchronous.
>> > Does XCB
tobiasu:
> On Sun, Sep 14, 2008 at 12:32:25PM +0100, Anselm R Garbe wrote:
> > 2008/9/14 Johannes Wegener <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > > I recently read that awesome is going to use XCB over Xlib and says that
> > > it is faster becouse it is asynchronous.
> > > Does XCB realy its job faster than Xlib?
On Sun, Sep 14, 2008 at 12:32:25PM +0100, Anselm R Garbe wrote:
> 2008/9/14 Johannes Wegener <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > I recently read that awesome is going to use XCB over Xlib and says that
> > it is faster becouse it is asynchronous.
> > Does XCB realy its job faster than Xlib?
> > And if this is
On Sep 14, 2008, at 3:02 AM, Johannes Wegener wrote:
I recently read that awesome is going to use XCB over Xlib and says
that
it is faster becouse it is asynchronous.
Does XCB realy its job faster than Xlib?
And if this is the case is dwm going to use XCB in any further
release?
IMHO, asy
2008/9/14 Johannes Wegener <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> I recently read that awesome is going to use XCB over Xlib and says that
> it is faster becouse it is asynchronous.
> Does XCB realy its job faster than Xlib?
> And if this is the case is dwm going to use XCB in any further release?
I'd be interest
I recently read that awesome is going to use XCB over Xlib and says that
it is faster becouse it is asynchronous.
Does XCB realy its job faster than Xlib?
And if this is the case is dwm going to use XCB in any further release?
Just some stupid questions - don't take them to serious - I like dwm an
