Opps, there was a minor offset issue with the second part of the
patch, it should still patch cleanly but just in case a new patch is
available at http://bsdgroup.org/files/dwm-4.8-bstack.diff or attached
once again.
dwm-4.8-bstack.diff
Description: Binary data
On Jan 14, 2008, at
On Mon, Sep 17, 2007 at 04:28:38PM +0200, Anselm R. Garbe wrote:
On Mon, Sep 17, 2007 at 12:25:40PM +0100, Chris Webb wrote:
Szabolcs Nagy [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On 9/16/07, Julien Danjou [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Except for people applying multiple patch on the now same and uniq
On 9/17/07, Anselm R. Garbe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, Sep 17, 2007 at 12:25:40PM +0100, Chris Webb wrote:
One question: why do you explicitly declare all dwm.c functions static
given that you only have a single source file anyway?
Yeah, that's unnecessary. I remove that - it will
On Mon, Sep 17, 2007 at 07:43:34PM +0200, Szabolcs Nagy wrote:
On 9/17/07, Anselm R. Garbe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, Sep 17, 2007 at 12:25:40PM +0100, Chris Webb wrote:
One question: why do you explicitly declare all dwm.c functions static
given that you only have a single source
On Sun, Sep 16, 2007 at 01:18:24PM +0200, Anselm R. Garbe wrote:
Hi James,
cool, I want to give an example how your patch should be
reorganized that it works with less of a hassle beginning with dwm-4.5:
[snip]
Thanks for the great example, that will especially make things
easier while the
On Sat, Sep 15, 2007 at 06:24:35PM -0400, James Turner wrote:
I've updated the bottom stack patch to work with the new micromizied
version of dwm. It includes my previous main patch as well, so if your
operating system doesn't support strlcpy you will need to remove that
part from the patch.
