[dwm] Re: What happened here?
I recently switched from dwm to xmonad. I did not like the rigid constraint on a certain number of code lines. The resulting way of doing it with patches in my opinion is not very sincere. I needed only two - and they did not match. Though I do not know haskell at all I find it very simple to configure xmonad, took me an hour or so to get things done. But on the other hand being no coder I do not fit into the dwm target group anyhow. ;) henry
[dwm] Re: pertag patch
On Sa, Jan 03 2009, daniel fusser wrote: > 2009/1/3 henry atting > >> On Fr, Jan 02 2009, v4hn wrote: >> >> dwm.c:1743: error: redefinition of 'viewnext' >> dwm.c:1709: error: previous definition of 'viewnext' was here >> dwm.c:1760: error: redefinition of 'viewprevious' >> dwm.c:1726: error: previous definition of 'viewprevious' was here >> make: *** [dwm.o] Fehler 1 >> >> As far as I see I have to decide for either the pertag or the arrownav >> patch, so I decided for the latter. >> >> Thanks >> henry >> >> >> > Hi, > > I had the same problem some time ago but i managed to make them both work. > > I removed the pertag variables in dwm.c and put them into my config.h where > I also put the viewnext() and viewprevious() functions. These two functions > have to be modified as well to make them work with the pertag patch > otherwise the values won't get stored when the function is called (which > means if you use the arrowkeys to change tags the pertag patch stuff has no > effect). > > I can't remember what exactly caused the redefiniton errors but it works for > me this way... Unfortunately it does not work for me, dwm crashes when switching to another tag. But anyway it's a good start, thanks, I will further look into it when I have a little more time. henry
[dwm] Re: pertag patch
On Fr, Jan 02 2009, v4hn wrote: > On Fri, Jan 02, 2009 at 08:41:08PM +0100, henry atting wrote: >> Okay, I have three tags, suppose the layout of all is tiled. I switch to the >> third tag and change the layout to floating. As a result all three tags now >> have a floating layout. > > I suppose you didn't apply the patch clean/at all(?). > Take a look at how to do so and give it another try. I now gave it even more than one try. It applies well. Hunk #1 succeeded at 199 (offset 2 lines). Hunk #2 succeeded at 242 (offset 2 lines). Hunk #3 succeeded at 1251 (offset 15 lines). Hunk #4 succeeded at 1268 (offset 15 lines). Hunk #5 succeeded at 1316 (offset 15 lines). Hunk #6 succeeded at 1456 (offset 18 lines). Hunk #7 succeeded at 1489 (offset 18 lines). Hunk #8 succeeded at 1680 (offset 18 lines). But the moment this patch `dwm-5.4-arrownav.diff' comes into play it fails dwm.c:1743: error: redefinition of ‘viewnext’ dwm.c:1709: error: previous definition of ‘viewnext’ was here dwm.c:1760: error: redefinition of ‘viewprevious’ dwm.c:1726: error: previous definition of ‘viewprevious’ was here make: *** [dwm.o] Fehler 1 As far as I see I have to decide for either the pertag or the arrownav patch, so I decided for the latter. Thanks henry
[dwm] Re: pertag patch
On Fr, Jan 02 2009, v4hn wrote: > On Fri, Jan 02, 2009 at 06:12:45PM +0100, henry atting wrote: >> Mmh, I must have got it wrong. >> I expected if I change the layout of one tag - let's say from tiled to >> bottomstack - it would not change the layout of all tags but only the >> current one. >> As far as I can see this is not what pertag does... > > That's what it _should_ do and does for me. > What's the problem? Okay, I have three tags, suppose the layout of all is tiled. I switch to the third tag and change the layout to floating. As a result all three tags now have a floating layout. henry
[dwm] Re: pertag patch
Mmh, I must have got it wrong. I expected if I change the layout of one tag - let's say from tiled to bottomstack - it would not change the layout of all tags but only the current one. As far as I can see this is not what pertag does... henry
[dwm] Re: pertag patch
On Fr, Jan 02 2009, Valentin wrote: > Yes, it is. I updated it a couple of days ago, but for some reason arg > still hasn't put it one the wiki =P > You can get it here: > http://lists.suckless.org/dwm/0812/7209.html Very nice, thanks :) henry
[dwm] pertag patch
I am looking for the pertag patch for 5.4. Is it available anywhere? Kind regards, henry
[dwm] Re: dwm-5.4 stdin; cycle tags
Zitat - Brendan MacDonell * Sa Dez 13 2008 um 19:42 - > On Sat, Dec 13, 2008 at 2:26 PM, henry atting > wrote: >> Patching works without problems but I get this warnings: >> >>dwm.c:1640: warning: 'viewnext' defined but not used >>dwm.c:1657: warning: 'viewprevious' defined but not used >> >> And, what should I say, it *is* not used ;) >> >> henry > That's because you haven't bound those functions to any keys in your > config.h. ;) Oops, sure! Thanks to all. I'm really glad I switched from awesome to dwm. If I had knewn it before it would have spared me some trouble... henry
Re: [dwm] Re: dwm-5.4 stdin; cycle tags
Zitat - James Turner * Sa Dez 13 2008 um 18:43 - > On Sat, Dec 13, 2008 at 06:09:11PM +0100, henry atting wrote: >> Zitat - Anselm R Garbe * Sa Dez 13 2008 um 17:54 - >> >> > 2008/12/13 henry atting : >> >>> 2008/12/13 henry atting : >> >>> The tagging approach didn't change between 5.2 and 5.4, so I assume >> >>> it's just a matter of making the 5.2 patch applying to the 5.4 >> >>> codebase. >> >> >> >> Mmh, I am not very familiar with patching, I did it this way: >> >> >> >> , >> >> | do! patch -p1 < dwm-5.2-arrownav.diff >> >> | missing header for unified diff at line 3 of patch >> >> | can't find file to patch at input line 3 >> >> | Perhaps you used the wrong -p or --strip option? >> >> | The text leading up to this was: >> >> | -- >> >> | |--- config.def.h Tue Sep 9 15:46:17 2008 >> >> | |+++ config.def.h Tue Nov 18 19:26:53 2008 >> >> | -- >> >> | File to patch: config.def.h >> >> | patching file config.def.h >> >> | Hunk #1 succeeded at 62 (offset 1 line). >> >> | missing header for unified diff at line 14 of patch >> >> | can't find file to patch at input line 14 >> >> | Perhaps you used the wrong -p or --strip option? >> >> | The text leading up to this was: >> >> | -- >> >> | |--- dwm.c Tue Sep 9 15:46:17 2008 >> >> | |+++ dwm.c Tue Nov 18 19:31:55 2008 >> >> | -- >> >> | File to patch: dwm.c >> >> | patching file dwm.c >> >> | Hunk #1 succeeded at 197 (offset -1 lines). >> >> | Hunk #2 FAILED at 1668. >> >> | 1 out of 2 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file dwm.c.rej >> >> ` >> > >> > Well as I said, you will need to patch it manually, since the lines >> > have changed and the heuristic approach supported by patch(1) isn't >> > succeeding either. >> > >> > Kind regards, >> > --Anselm >> >> I see, great thanks >> henry > > Henry, > > Attached is an updated arrownav patch [0] that should apply to dwm tip > cleanly. > > [0] http://bsdgroup.org/files/dwm-5.4-arrownav.diff Patching works without problems but I get this warnings: dwm.c:1640: warning: ‘viewnext’ defined but not used dwm.c:1657: warning: ‘viewprevious’ defined but not used And, what should I say, it *is* not used ;) henry
Re: [dwm] Re: dwm-5.4 stdin; cycle tags
Zitat - Anselm R Garbe * Sa Dez 13 2008 um 17:54 - > 2008/12/13 henry atting : >>> 2008/12/13 henry atting : >>> The tagging approach didn't change between 5.2 and 5.4, so I assume >>> it's just a matter of making the 5.2 patch applying to the 5.4 >>> codebase. >> >> Mmh, I am not very familiar with patching, I did it this way: >> >> , >> | do! patch -p1 < dwm-5.2-arrownav.diff >> | missing header for unified diff at line 3 of patch >> | can't find file to patch at input line 3 >> | Perhaps you used the wrong -p or --strip option? >> | The text leading up to this was: >> | -- >> | |--- config.def.h Tue Sep 9 15:46:17 2008 >> | |+++ config.def.h Tue Nov 18 19:26:53 2008 >> | -- >> | File to patch: config.def.h >> | patching file config.def.h >> | Hunk #1 succeeded at 62 (offset 1 line). >> | missing header for unified diff at line 14 of patch >> | can't find file to patch at input line 14 >> | Perhaps you used the wrong -p or --strip option? >> | The text leading up to this was: >> | -- >> | |--- dwm.c Tue Sep 9 15:46:17 2008 >> | |+++ dwm.c Tue Nov 18 19:31:55 2008 >> | -- >> | File to patch: dwm.c >> | patching file dwm.c >> | Hunk #1 succeeded at 197 (offset -1 lines). >> | Hunk #2 FAILED at 1668. >> | 1 out of 2 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file dwm.c.rej >> ` > > Well as I said, you will need to patch it manually, since the lines > have changed and the heuristic approach supported by patch(1) isn't > succeeding either. > > Kind regards, > --Anselm I see, great thanks henry
[dwm] Re: dwm-5.4 stdin; cycle tags
Zitat - Anselm R Garbe * Sa Dez 13 2008 um 17:17 - > 2008/12/13 henry atting : >> - A `make clean install' does install dwm but it cannot read from stdin >> which prevents me from displaying time and date on the toolbar. >> >>config.h:15: warning: 'readin' defined but not used > > See the README file for an example, the status text is set using > xsetroot(1) now. > Ah, I read this but thought I could do it either way. It works fine with xsetroot. >> - I found a patch for cycling through tags in this group but it is for >> dwm-5.2 and apparently does not work for 5.4. How can I set up cycling >> through tags for 5.4? > > The tagging approach didn't change between 5.2 and 5.4, so I assume > it's just a matter of making the 5.2 patch applying to the 5.4 > codebase. Mmh, I am not very familiar with patching, I did it this way: , | do! patch -p1 < dwm-5.2-arrownav.diff | missing header for unified diff at line 3 of patch | can't find file to patch at input line 3 | Perhaps you used the wrong -p or --strip option? | The text leading up to this was: | -- | |--- config.def.h Tue Sep 9 15:46:17 2008 | |+++ config.def.h Tue Nov 18 19:26:53 2008 | -- | File to patch: config.def.h | patching file config.def.h | Hunk #1 succeeded at 62 (offset 1 line). | missing header for unified diff at line 14 of patch | can't find file to patch at input line 14 | Perhaps you used the wrong -p or --strip option? | The text leading up to this was: | -- | |--- dwm.c Tue Sep 9 15:46:17 2008 | |+++ dwm.c Tue Nov 18 19:31:55 2008 | -- | File to patch: dwm.c | patching file dwm.c | Hunk #1 succeeded at 197 (offset -1 lines). | Hunk #2 FAILED at 1668. | 1 out of 2 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file dwm.c.rej ` cheers, henry dwm.c.rej Description: Binary data
[dwm] dwm-5.4 stdin; cycle tags
Hello, I recently switched from awesome to dwm which gives me my desktop back ;) I am currently using 5.4 from Mecurial. Two questions: - A `make clean install' does install dwm but it cannot read from stdin which prevents me from displaying time and date on the toolbar. config.h:15: warning: ‘readin’ defined but not used - I found a patch for cycling through tags in this group but it is for dwm-5.2 and apparently does not work for 5.4. How can I set up cycling through tags for 5.4? Cheers, henry
