Hi,
Anselm R. Garbe [EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb am 11.05.2007 um 15:15:
On Fri, May 11, 2007 at 02:59:36PM +0200, lobzang wrote:
just a simple question , is it possible to have dwm without any status
bar ? (just a blank screen in fact)
It is possible if you hack the code, though it is
On Fri, May 11, 2007 at 02:59:36PM +0200, lobzang wrote:
just a simple question , is it possible to have dwm without any status
bar ? (just a blank screen in fact)
It is possible if you hack the code, though it is dependent from
your intention, there are two motivations for this:
a) You want
I really like the b option and it would be very usefull to my setup. I
hope to see this option soon :D
On 5/11/07, Anselm R. Garbe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, May 11, 2007 at 02:59:36PM +0200, lobzang wrote:
just a simple question , is it possible to have dwm without any status
bar ?
On Fri, May 11, 2007 at 03:15:17PM +0200, Anselm R. Garbe wrote:
On Fri, May 11, 2007 at 02:59:36PM +0200, lobzang wrote:
just a simple question , is it possible to have dwm without any status
bar ? (just a blank screen in fact)
It is possible if you hack the code, though it is dependent
well I'm interested in both a b :)
a) I would then simply use dzen to notify any interesting information
( too much cpu / im conversation..)
b) that would be perfect indeed to show/hide the statusbar, so I could
forget a) !
On Fri, 2007-05-11 at 15:15 +0200, Anselm R. Garbe wrote:
Is b) of
On Fri, May 11, 2007 at 03:15:17PM +0200, Anselm R. Garbe wrote:
|
|What do others thing about my proposal?
b) option is really nice.
ciao
alex
--
Alessandro Dotti Contra | email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bologna, Italy | PGP Key ID: 0x9C84C3DA
http://www.hyboria.org/ | jabber:
Anselm R. Garbe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
a) You want make dwm simplier ...
wasn't the old way to KISS?
customizing should be done by patching source code
right?
yes, a switch like suggested would surely be nice
... but perhaps simple would be better!?
just to think about
Meillo r e t
On Fri, May 11, 2007 at 03:15:17PM +0200, Anselm R. Garbe wrote:
What do others thing about my proposal?
Hello,
I like this idea. I never liked the current #define TOPBAR true/false,
so this seems to me like a more elegant solution with added NOBAR and
runtime switching as a bonus.
