Re: [dwm] [OT] minimalistic bbs/forum
On 4/11/08, Antoni Grzymala [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Don't touch PHP even with a stick. It gives you intestine cancer and agreed There's a minimalist Ruby on Rails forum called beast[1]. don't touch ruby on rails with a stick if you need minimalistic code ...and become a webless friend if you can http://port70.net/webless/
Re: [dwm] [OT] minimalistic bbs/forum
pancake dixit (2008-04-11, 12:00): Does anyone has written or knows a minimalistic forum system in cgi or php? Don't touch PHP even with a stick. It gives you intestine cancer and contributes to global warming or a new ice age (whichever is your option). There's a minimalist Ruby on Rails forum called beast[1]. Best, [1] http://beast.caboo.se/ -- [a] signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: [dwm] [OT] minimalistic bbs/forum
you don't like mailing lists? I can't see the use of a forum... -- hiro
Re: [dwm] [OT] minimalistic bbs/forum
you don't like mailing lists? I can't see the use of a forum... -- hiro I love mailings and i dislike forums, but is what my users reclaim... and i dont want to install a fucking buggy/bloated phpbb or drupal. the nice thing of php is that is very common to find servers with php support and apps are easy/fast to write. and...I don't want ruby burning my cpu :) Any other alternative? --pancake
Re: [dwm] [OT] minimalistic bbs/forum
Maybe punbb? (http://punbb.org/)
Re: [dwm] [OT] minimalistic bbs/forum
pancake [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: you don't like mailing lists? I can't see the use of a forum... -- hiro I love mailings and i dislike forums, but is what my users reclaim... and i dont want to install a fucking buggy/bloated phpbb or drupal. the nice thing of php is that is very common to find servers with php support and apps are easy/fast to write. and...I don't want ruby burning my cpu :) What about writing a telnet bbs, I suppose you can create such system with 1000 lines of C code. Maybe you can add support for html rendering as well, if you need hyperlinks. Or you could write something like diri in 500 LOC. Regards Matthias-Christian
Re: [dwm] Preventing xterm from closing by killclient()
On Fri, Apr 11, 2008 at 12:26:04PM +0200, Anselm R. Garbe wrote:
Just extend struct Client with Bool iskillable and set this
value at the same point as isfloating is set in applyrules, then
you just need to check c-iskillable in killclient().
Thanks for the hint, that is a lot better.
Though, I would propose to set c-iskillable to True during
killclient() to allow getting rid of unresponsive clients which
cannot be killed straight away.
I have to admit I don't understand what you mean. Anyway, I can always
use xkill to get rid of unresponsive clients, if thats what you mean.
Thanks again
Martin
diff -up dwm-4.9/config.def.h dwm-4.9-nokill/config.def.h
--- dwm-4.9/config.def.h 2008-04-03 22:57:01.0 +0200
+++ dwm-4.9-nokill/config.def.h 2008-04-11 16:35:49.0 +0200
@@ -14,8 +14,9 @@
const char tags[][MAXTAGLEN] = { 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 };
Rule rules[] = {
- /* class instance title tags ref isfloating */
- { Gimp, NULL, NULL, NULL, True },
+ /* class instance title tags ref isfloating isunkillable*/
+ { Gimp, NULL, NULL, NULL, True , False},
+ { UXTerm, NULL, NULL, NULL, False, True},
};
/* geometries, s{x,y,w,h} and bh are already initualized here */
diff -up dwm-4.9/dwm.c dwm-4.9-nokill/dwm.c
--- dwm-4.9/dwm.c 2008-04-03 22:57:01.0 +0200
+++ dwm-4.9-nokill/dwm.c 2008-04-11 16:44:26.0 +0200
@@ -70,7 +70,7 @@ struct Client {
int minax, maxax, minay, maxay;
long flags;
unsigned int bw, oldbw;
- Bool isbanned, isfixed, isfloating, isurgent;
+ Bool isbanned, isfixed, isfloating, isurgent, isunkillable;
Bool *tags;
Client *next;
Client *prev;
@@ -117,6 +117,7 @@ typedef struct {
const char *title;
const char *tag;
Bool isfloating;
+ Bool isunkillable;
} Rule;
/* function declarations */
@@ -266,6 +267,7 @@ applyrules(Client *c) {
|| (ch.res_name r-instance strstr(ch.res_name, r-instance)))
{
c-isfloating = r-isfloating;
+ c-isunkillable = r-isunkillable;
if(r-tag) {
c-tags[idxoftag(r-tag)] = True;
matched = True;
@@ -967,7 +969,7 @@ void
killclient(const char *arg) {
XEvent ev;
- if(!sel)
+ if(!sel || sel-isunkillable)
return;
if(isprotodel(sel)) {
ev.type = ClientMessage;
Re: [dwm] Preventing xterm from closing by killclient()
On Fri, Apr 11, 2008 at 04:57:29PM +0200, Martin Sander wrote: On Fri, Apr 11, 2008 at 12:26:04PM +0200, Anselm R. Garbe wrote: Though, I would propose to set c-iskillable to True during killclient() to allow getting rid of unresponsive clients which cannot be killed straight away. I have to admit I don't understand what you mean. Anyway, I can always use xkill to get rid of unresponsive clients, if thats what you mean. Yes but there are two cornercases at least: xkill(1) might not be available, and fork() might be not available anymore -- depending how destructive X clients you are running. Of course Ctrl-Alt-Backspace is available. Kind regards, -- Anselm R. Garbe http://www.suckless.org/ GPG key: 0D73F361
Re: [dwm] [OT] minimalistic bbs/forum
pancake wrote: you don't like mailing lists? I can't see the use of a forum... -- hiro I love mailings and i dislike forums, but is what my users reclaim... and i dont want to install a fucking buggy/bloated phpbb or drupal. the nice thing of php is that is very common to find servers with php support and apps are easy/fast to write. and...I don't want ruby burning my cpu :) Any other alternative? --pancake Its perhaps more bbs than forum, but citadel is somewhat pleasant. Its large (but then it can provide a full end-to-end groupware system if you want), but pretty fast ( written in C ) and quite stable...
Re: [dwm] [OT] minimalistic bbs/forum
how about a web interface to a mailing list? you could tell them to get a google account...
Re: [dwm] Preventing xterm from closing by killclient()
On Fri, 11 Apr 2008 12:26:04 +0200 Anselm R. Garbe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Just extend struct Client with Bool iskillable and set this value at the same point as isfloating is set in applyrules, then you just need to check c-iskillable in killclient(). If I do that, iskillable is set to False by default, right? --Valentin -- Didja hear about the dyslexic devil worshipper who sold his soul to Santa?
Re: [dwm] Preventing xterm from closing by killclient()
On Fri, Apr 11, 2008 at 06:32:54PM +0200, Valentin wrote: Just extend struct Client with Bool iskillable and set this value at the same point as isfloating is set in applyrules, then you just need to check c-iskillable in killclient(). If I do that, iskillable is set to False by default, right? Yes, thats why I changed it to isunkillable. Martin
