Re: [dwm] [OT] frequency scaling and power consumption
On Sat, May 9, 2009 at 7:29 AM, Kurt H Maier wrote: > From a physics standpoint if you're generating less heat you're > consuming less power. > > # Kurt H Maier > > And you generate less heat when you allow the cpu to take advantage of it's high frequencies at high loads, because you can put it back into a lower power state early. It didn't use to be this way though with older cpus, so you should definitely subscribe to the powertop mailinglist if that is of real concern to you.
Re: [dwm] [idea] mwm - minimal/minimun/monocle window manager
I'm sorry, this was related to Szabolcs' comment: >why would one post ideas, questions,.. to some random web forum when >there is a dedicated mailing list (and irc channel) for the given >topic? On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 7:07 PM, Preben Randhol wrote: > On Mon, 27 Apr 2009 15:12:12 +0200 > hiro <23h...@googlemail.com> wrote: > >> Forums are a disease, but they are successful, because people are >> always glad about the neat, animated smiley's, there are proudly >> occupied moderators, and a lot of cool features for the administrator >> to play with. Mathml support, flash games and reading private messages >> comes to mind. These people definitely have too much time, and >> probably patience, and are thus more friendly to newbies. They almost >> always like what they are doing and seldom get upset about their new >> and only friends. >> Does that make sense? > > Sorry, I don't get the relevance. > >
Re: [dwm] [idea] mwm - minimal/minimun/monocle window manager
> But here is the URL to wikipedia if you prefer that: > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C_(programming_language) He probably means this page: http://cm.bell-labs.com/cm/cs/cbook/ But I guess his point was that you should have provided that standard information (copied from above web page): The C Programming Language, Second Edition by Brian W. Kernighan and Dennis M. Ritchie. Prentice Hall, Inc., 1988. ISBN 0-13-110362-8 (paperback), 0-13-110370-9 (hardback). Forums are a disease, but they are successful, because people are always glad about the neat, animated smiley's, there are proudly occupied moderators, and a lot of cool features for the administrator to play with. Mathml support, flash games and reading private messages comes to mind. These people definitely have too much time, and probably patience, and are thus more friendly to newbies. They almost always like what they are doing and seldom get upset about their new and only friends. Does that make sense?
Re: [dwm] uzbl. A browser that adheres to the unix philosophy.
Thanks, that sounds great! Now we only need a working flash replacement:( But I'm eager to try this out at home this evening. On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 5:21 PM, Dusan wrote: > Just to notify community: > > http://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=70700&p=1 > > Web kit minimal browser, you will find it very interesting. > > >
Re: [dwm] autoconf
Discuss this on the autoconf mailinglist, please... We're all users and thus don't want to waste our time on this stuff from hell.
Re: [dwm] autoconf
> hm probably "(c)" would be better there (and in the license) utf-8 is great *especially* in the license:)
Re: [dwm] suckless.org stylesheet glitch
Me neither. Here with opera I see that it will only be fast if it has already resolved the host name. After clearing the cache every single subdomain of suckless.org takes several seconds to load up at the first time, whereas cat-v.org will always show up instantly. I have no idea how to debug this, but perhaps someone can reproduce? On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 11:05 AM, Uriel wrote: > Nope. > > uriel > > On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 10:15 AM, Anselm R Garbe wrote: >> 2009/3/13 Uriel : >>> I run http://cat-v.org on xen, and even really long pages like >>> http://ninetimes.cat-v.org take a couple of seconds to load. >>> >>> Something was wrong with suckless.org, sometimes a small page could >>> take ten seconds, it is better now but still on the slow side of >>> things. >> >> I guess you use ipv6? >> >> Kind regards, >> --Anselm >> >> > >
Re: [dwm] Suckess Code Management
> but there is a very good (and suckless!) digital vinyl emulation software > for Unix: http://www.xwax.co.uk/ Thanks. So far I've been playing only with analog vinyl and this evercrashing windows stuff;) I found some other comments, which sound really promising, so I think I will give this a try: >This is just the first version, but man the makers of this software really >need to get down with some better skinning. The interface looks like po.
Re: [dwm] Suckess Code Management
> 8. music - turntables and mpd/sonata Do you have multiple instances of mpd and control them with your turntables?
Re: [dwm] suckless.org stylesheet glitch
On 3/11/09, twfb wrote: > On 00:59 Wed 11 Mar , Uriel wrote: > > Also, www.suckless.org is *SLOW* to the point of being unusable > > Slight exaggeration perhaps... but it is a little bit slow and was > indeed slow even before the switch to werc. Nothing dramatic but > noticable slow for such a low graphic website. > > -- > TWFB - PGP: D7A420B3 > > I experienced up to 10 seconds to connect, but now everything is ok again here. Could be that there have been some temporary dns issues.
Re: [dwm] [OT] Personal Website and CSS
> I think the only way is dropping HTML and CSS altogether and going > with something new. I'd be very interested in contributing. I think > the replacement should not only focus on presentation but equally on > forming a base for less suckish applications which are highly network > transparent. > > Kind regards, > --Anselm > > Not sure if OP really wanted to do this, but such alternatives have always existed. Look at gopher for example. I would export 9p filetrees and mount them in acme. You can use text files and plumbing if you want hyperlinks. I very much enjoy reading 9fans that way. But I admit this not being beauty typesetting. > browsers like Mozilla Firefox have terrible default typographic style > and using text-mode browsers like links often seems to be only solution > when reading longer texts. I don't really get this: Where can we find real typographic style in links? Perhaps we need a combination of Troff's beauty and web browser's dynamics.
Re: [dwm] [OT] Personal Website and CSS
Well, you should use flash, it looks the same on all browsers. My favourite HTML tag is . You will need great luck. On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 10:10 PM, Matthias-Christian Ott wrote: > Hi, > since several years I have been planed to launch a personal website. I > used to do quite aesthetical web design before I have subscribed to > minimalism. What annoyed me then and now was CSS and its implementations > in modern browsers. > > When I tried to design a minimalist website (just some typographic > enhancements to make texts more read- and printable), I realised that > there seems to be no agreed standard for a default CSS stylesheet merely a > recommendation from the CSS standard [1] (which is incomplete) and a lot > of people seem to be concerned about resetting the browser CSS defaults - > even the W3C does so in their stylesheets [2]. Most people seems to have > installed nearly all popular browsers, test with those and incorporate > workarounds if necessary. > > All in all this seems very absurd to me and I would like to know how > you approached this problem. > > At the moment I'm just aware of The Anti-web Manifesto [3] that someone > linked to on this mailing list. Although I mainly subscribe to it, > browsers like Mozilla Firefox have terrible default typographic style > and using text-mode browsers like links often seems to be only solution > when reading longer texts. > > Any ideas? > > Regards, > Matthias-Christian > > [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/sample.html > [2] http://www.w3.org/StyleSheets/Core/Steely > [3] http://port70.net/webless/antiweb.html > >
Re: [OT] OFFTOPIC (was: Re: [dwm] Bottom-posting and reply trimming (was: Bottom Stack Patch))
yeah thank you too. Next time I will include the [sarcasm] tag for you... On 2/10/09, Enno Gottox Boland wrote: > don't introduce totally senseless rules noone respects. > > btw stfu. :) > > thanks. > > Gottox > > 2009/2/10, hiro <23h...@googlemail.com>: >> how about that? >> >> On 2/10/09, markus schnalke wrote: >> > [2009-02-10 06:51] Kurt H Maier >> >> >> >> Please mark mailing-list etiquette posts as off-topic, so my mail >> >> client and filter them appropriately. Thanks. >> > >> > Can you please tell me how to do so. >> > >> > I know people who use ... . Do you mean that? >> > >> > >> > meillo >> > >> >> > > > -- > http://www.gnuffy.org - Real Community Distro > http://www.gnuffy.org/index.php/GnuEm - Gnuffy on Ipaq (Codename Peggy) > >
[OT] OFFTOPIC (was: Re: [dwm] Bottom-posting and reply trimming (was: Bottom Stack Patch))
how about that? On 2/10/09, markus schnalke wrote: > [2009-02-10 06:51] Kurt H Maier >> >> Please mark mailing-list etiquette posts as off-topic, so my mail >> client and filter them appropriately. Thanks. > > Can you please tell me how to do so. > > I know people who use ... . Do you mean that? > > > meillo >
Re: [dwm] Re: What happened here?
> Dwm is also philosophically transformational if you've not previously > absorbed the concept of "Simplicity as a Virtue". I don't understand a word, sorry. And yeah, I understand what simplicity is about...
Re: [dwm] Re: What happened here?
On Sun, Jan 25, 2009 at 6:28 PM, Christian Garbs wrote: > On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 01:42:32PM +0100, hiro wrote: >> On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 11:22 AM, Yoshi Rokuko >> wrote: >> > On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 10:37:58AM +0100, hiro wrote: > >> >> Still, dwm somehow seems very much not unix alike for me. > >> > what do you mean, or what would be a more nix'isch WM? > >> Could be, that X doesn't allow it to be more unixy, and like I said, >> if you don't want to change the configuration, you could say dwm is >> just a simple window manager. > >> But as the task for most people on this list is configuring it like >> crazy, I don't think one should consider dwm unixy in this use case, >> it's not flexible enough. > > In my understanding, the unix way is "do just one thing and do it > good". A single program does not need to be flexible, but instead you > are flexible by stacking simple programs together as you like (shell > scripts, pipes etc.) > I agree and I was specifically thinking about the possibility of splitting dwm's functionality into multiple single programs. A simple library for hiding X could be an other great way... And right, flexibility is rather just an effect of well behaving, simple apps used together. > dwm arranges the windows on the screen, nothing more, nothing less. > No program icons, no desktop environment, no notification services. Dwm is arranging windows dynamically, listens to multiple X events and, as far as I know, provides a status bar. It's doing quite some stuff in my view...
Re: [dwm] Re: What happened here?
On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 2:33 PM, markus schnalke wrote: > [2009-01-20 13:42] hiro <23h...@googlemail.com> >> On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 11:22 AM, Yoshi Rokuko >> wrote: >> > On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 10:37:58AM +0100, hiro wrote: >> >> Still, dwm somehow seems very much not unix alike for me. >> > >> > what do you mean, or what would be a more nix'isch WM? >> >> Could be, that X doesn't allow it to be more unixy, and like I said, >> if you don't want to change the configuration, you could say dwm is >> just a simple window manager. > >> [...] I don't think one should consider dwm unixy in this use case, >> it's not flexible enough. > > Isn't ``unixy'' at first simplicity? > > ``flexible'' however is a difficult term ... remember sendmail which > _is_ flexible but in no way ``unixy''. > > >> But as the task for most people on this list is configuring it like >> crazy [...] > > I don't share this view. I think most people have their flavor or dwm > keep this quite stable. > > Of course, here is a lot of discussion ... but the reason therefore is > primary the ``experimental'' approach of dwm. well, that's why it's not unixy. of course they have to be simple, but being unixy is also about simple, consistent apps and never changing interfaces. But since a display manager is kind of an interface... I don't even have anything against experimenting, just please don't call it unixy...
Re: [dwm] Re: What happened here?
On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 11:22 AM, Yoshi Rokuko wrote: > On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 10:37:58AM +0100, hiro wrote: >> Still, dwm somehow seems very much not unix alike for me. > > what do you mean, or what would be a more nix'isch WM? > > regards, y0shi > > Could be, that X doesn't allow it to be more unixy, and like I said, if you don't want to change the configuration, you could say dwm is just a simple window manager. But as the task for most people on this list is configuring it like crazy, I don't think one should consider dwm unixy in this use case, it's not flexible enough. Perhaps someone should write a window manager consisting of some very simple and small binaries. But I admit, I would not know where to start (I will stick to wmii and it's 9p server approach). just my 2 euros
Re: [dwm] Re: What happened here?
I think andrew's point is about dwm's very own style. You can, though, use dwm without any problems out of the box, and thus I don't fully agree with him. Still, dwm somehow seems very much not unix alike for me.
Re: [dwm] Asustek EEE PC 1000 Atom 1GB 40G SSD Linux Black
On Fri, Sep 5, 2008 at 3:38 PM, Damjan Vrenčur <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Still using X31 almost every day. On (road) trips it is always with me. > Dirt, sand, rough handling ... and it is still alive. When it dies, I > will definitely go for a used X4* or X6*. > Two friends of mine bought eees (first generation) and I was not > impressed when tried to use them. Smaller resolution than Xes and as I > felt a lot smaller durability. > For me X is small enough to go with me everywere I want it to go and at > the same time big enough to do almost all things I want it to do. And with > extended battery you get at least 5 hours of awakeness. > > Don't really know about specifications of eees but from what I saw and tested > X31 is far superior in every aspect of usability. And it is cheaper. > > > > Antoni Grzymala wrote: >> hiro dixit (2008-09-05, 15:03): >> >> >>>> Well give it a try in some shop and I bet you will judge it >>>> differently then. I also thought exactly the same about such small pcs >>>> that they are unusable and wasted money, but now I think I was wrong >>>> after having tested one... >>>> >>>> Kind regards, >>>> --Anselm >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> What's the advantage compared to the thinkpad x series? Or is it just >>> because of the price? >>> >> >> You can get a refurbished X41 (like the spaceinvader got) for about the >> same price as the EeePC 900. For me the choice would obviously be an >> X41, unless I *desperately* wanted something as small as the eee 900. >> >> > > -- > Damjan Vrenčur | http://damjanvrencur.blogspot.com | GPG key: C6A3146F > > right today i came back late in the morning after a lot of free soublaki and retsina and in my bed I booted my x60s, probably to check my mails, watch some porn or something, don't remember. I had it in all timers off mode and therefore was quite dazzled by the light which was coming from the display when I woke up again 8 hours later and lying flat on the keyboard and display. I assume I was too pissed and tired to use the fingerprinting sensor properly... Thinkpads are definitely reliable...
Re: [dwm] Asustek EEE PC 1000 Atom 1GB 40G SSD Linux Black
On Fri, Sep 5, 2008 at 2:50 PM, Anselm R Garbe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > 2008/9/5 Matthias-Christian Ott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >> Anselm R Garbe wrote: >>> What do people think about such an EEE PC as low budget option to run >>> dwm on? Any experiences already if the screen is big enough for daily >>> work? I had an opportunity yesterday to try one, and I must admit I'm >>> keen to order one. The keyboard and keys have surprisingly proper >>> size. >> >> The previous EEE PC models were unusable with dwm (well, pretty much >> unusable with everything), except maybe monocle. >> I don't have one (I think these mini-notebooks are just toys and wasted >> money), but my 17" CRT runs at 1024x768. As far as I know the EEE PC >> has a resolution of 1024x600, so it's compareable. >> Working with 1024x768 makes tiling unusable (except maybe with multiple >> horizontal masters and no stacking area (there were some patches for >> this some time ago)) and you are forced to use tags as workspaces or use >> monocle and floating. > > Well, I used 1024x768 most of my life and it was very usable for me. > All you need to do is using some 10pt font to get some terminals on > the screen. > >> So as far as I can tell, running dwm on everything >19" or >1600x1200 is >> painful and does only have some smaller advantages (like code size, >> keyboard usage, performance) over other WIMP window managers. >> Therefore save our planet and don't buy these e-waste. > > Well give it a try in some shop and I bet you will judge it > differently then. I also thought exactly the same about such small pcs > that they are unusable and wasted money, but now I think I was wrong > after having tested one... > > Kind regards, > --Anselm > > What's the advantage compared to the thinkpad x series? Or is it just because of the price?
Re: [dwm] DockBox - A Tiling Window Manager for Windows
Thanks, that's interesting.
Re: [dwm] New website launch
cangratiolations, you have reached the next level.
Re: [dwm] Freedom (was: Re: sic ipv6 patch)
> That's our freedom (in your definition). Szabolcs and I can use terms in > another way than you, you hiro can curse on public mailing lists, and I > can decide to stop discussing with people who swear and get personal. This is not politics, it's the internet, boy. Though you could nee some political understanding. I hope you will stay in the software business only. -- hiro
Re: [dwm] Freedom (was: Re: sic ipv6 patch)
On 5/20/08, Matthias Kirschner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > * Sander van Dijk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008-05-20 18:23:43 +0200]: > > > > On Tue, May 20, 2008 at 3:43 PM, Matthias Kirschner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > Why do you think a user who gets DWM in a binary on some device knows a) > > > that this is DWM and b) knows that DWM is licensed under MIT? So this > > > user does not have the freedom to use, study, share and improve the > > > software. > > > > So now software is only free when each and every distributor is forced > > to educate his customers about all the wonderful things they are > > allowed to do with it? > > > For the record: I did not say that. Software is free, when the user has > the freedom to use, study, share and improve it. > > > > This is just another display of your misunderstanding of the concept > > "freedom". Really, buy a dictionary... > > > Thanks for the advise :) Yeah, very funny. This is plain ridiculous -- hiro
Re: [dwm] Freedom (was: Re: sic ipv6 patch)
> yes > lack of knowledge can mean lack of freedom (with my definition) So you have you own definition? Fucking nice! > > Ignorance != lack of freedom (which demonstrates, again, how some > > people try to attribute an incorrect meaning to the word "freedom"). > > > the point is that ppl have no way to determine the origin. > they are not ignorant, but mislead. And you, wise man, are able to force them to sanity. That's again, Fucking nice! > of course it is an indirect consequence of the ruleset, but still a > consequence. better try and look at *all* consequences. > > You're talking about restrictions of the new product, not of the > > original source (see my comments above). > > > yes, but this new product is the result of the permissive license. > in my opinion it makes sense to track the effects of a license further > than direct usage. Some people even think communism must make sense. Because with this great invention you can track effects even of more than just licenses. > > >> - so removing restriction might mean less freedom > > > > _Never_ for the original source. Btw, I really hope that you can see > > the contradiction in your own statement. > > > well i'm talking about the resulting sum of freedom of ppl (for whom > the original src might not be available (lack of knowledge, false > advertisment etc..)) > > (the example was a "proof by contradiction" to show that number of > restriction is not always a good measure of freedom, so the > contradiction is fine there) Well, you *are* a communist, aren't you? > > MIT/BSD just make software free. > > > > GPL on the other hand is not just trying to make software free, but > > also to govern in what way the receiver can use it. Now this may or > > may not be morally right, but that's a discussion all in itself. What > > isn't a discussion is that it's a restriction of freedom. > > > > In some situations, a benevolent dictator may be better for the people > > than total freedom, perhaps even better than democracy. Regardless of > > the level of benevolence though, a benevolent dictator is still a > > dictator, no matter what way you put it. > > > yes, we are talking about different terms > i deliberately used an alternative definition of freedom (and included > all the dictatorship), because it makes sense to me. > > the restrictions in GPL may have moral/political/game theoretical > roots but imho it's valid to call it freedom. Oh so it's valid, because it makes sense to you? Fucking nice! > yet another example (driving rules): > > (a) everyone should drive on the right side of the road > (b) any side of the road can be used > > by "usual" freedom definition (b) is more free, it allows one to use > _either_ side of the road. > in reality with (b) one can use _neither_ side of the road (instant > traffic jam, deadlocks at crossroads). > > with all the restrictions, (a) makes sure that ppl actually can use at > least one side of the road, thus "globally" (a) provides more free > choices (1 insted of 0). The difference is, you can offer an unlimited amount of software apps in closed source and it will not hinder anyone in doing what he'd like to do. Even if they are all copys of the same public domain code... -- hiro
Re: [dwm] Freedom (was: Re: sic ipv6 patch)
On 5/20/08, Sylvain Bertrand <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Tue, May 20, 2008 at 4:52 PM, hiro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Hu? There is another license as secure than the GPL to protect against > >> code closing? > > > > You mix everything up. There is no need for protection of open code. > > > Well many disagree with you, many think there is such a need. I would feel ashamed if everyone would agree with me. And keep in mind, that quantity of thoughts is not quality. > Me first. Haha, It's an honour for me, that *you* were first. > > > Everyone has the right of closed code. Just like anybody has the right > > of privacy. > > > You are right, that's why the GPL protects against code closing only > when distribution occurs. > > Damn this license is well done! Yeah it will probably save the world from demise. It probably saved thousands of lifes already. > Sorry, Anselm for feeding the troll... but this one is hungry... You seem like having a lot of social connections. Talking a lot about all that people who are supposedly on your side. If you want me to go, just say so. I will definitely do so in this case. Good luck to you on your path. -- hiro
Re: [dwm] Freedom (was: Re: sic ipv6 patch)
> Hu? There is another license as secure than the GPL to protect against > code closing? You mix everything up. There is no need for protection of open code. Everyone has the right of closed code. Just like anybody has the right of privacy.
Re: [dwm] Freedom (was: Re: sic ipv6 patch)
On 5/20/08, Kurt H Maier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Tue, May 20, 2008 at 8:43 AM, Matthias Kirschner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Why do you think a user who gets DWM in a binary on some device knows a) > > that this is DWM and b) knows that DWM is licensed under MIT? So this > > user does not have the freedom to use, study, share and improve the > > software. > > > You think their ability to hack on dwm is destroyed by the fact that > they can't identify it as dwm? > > I don't see how this follows. Googling "tiling window manager" turns > up a ton of results, most of which are descended from dwm. > > > -- > > # Kurt H Maier > > Perfectly right. Even such closed source adds up, but does not destroys the original software. It even gives a bigger choice to the user. More freedom in this sense.
Re: [dwm] Freedom (was: Re: sic ipv6 patch)
> *you* don't get it (I'm good at personnal attack too): this is a way > to lead on the path of understanding "why the GPL". And do you already know what comes after "understanding" on that path you are talking about? I hope you are going on... You should search for the path of truth. > Another way to see the GPL: "do not close the code". You don't need a GPL for "not closing the code". On 5/20/08, Szabolcs Nagy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 5/20/08, hiro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> What do you think about the freedom to remove the freedom from the code? > > > cut any other's freedom. On the other hand everyone could use your > > code, and noone would even notice. It does *no* harm to others. > > > sure it does > if i start selling dwm for money then it can make harm (economically > and game theoretically) Game theory? Economy? You mean religion? Think again. > there are many possible attitudes and strategies with respect to > software licensing and it's absolutely not trivial which one to chose > to achieve a goal (or which goal to prefer). > it is perfectly justified to talk and reason about the consequences of > certain licensing schemes. It's perfectly justified to do more important things instead. > > > Code has no freedom. people in society want to be free, but the code > > doesn't mind. It is just letters and stuff. neither free nor unfree. > > > imho noone talked abut the freedom of code but the freedom of people > using that code. imho you don't got a clue. Look again at the quote in the context: > What do you think about the freedom to remove the freedom from the code? -- hiro
Re: [dwm] Freedom (was: Re: sic ipv6 patch)
> What do you think about the freedom to remove the freedom from the code? You don't get it, do you? It's elementary for freedom in society to cut others freedom. But this what you're speaking about is not society. You can think whatever you want, create whatever code you want. But this will never cut any other's freedom. On the other hand everyone could use your code, and noone would even notice. It does *no* harm to others. I could understand if you were fighting for real freedom, but this is an imaginary fight about intellectual nonsense. Code has no freedom. people in society want to be free, but the code doesn't mind. It is just letters and stuff. neither free nor unfree. Leave it simple! -- hiro
Re: [dwm] Freedom (was: Re: sic ipv6 patch)
> She's not public domain. :P SHE is public domain. And you can probably get all her stuff from bittorrent. Some people here better give this a try. This is more benefit than reading stupid LICENSEs
Re: [dwm] Freedom (was: Re: sic ipv6 patch)
it's so easy guys. freedom is when you don't mind looking into LICENSE. Ever heard of pipi langstrumpf?
Re: [dwm] sic ipv6 patch
> use single GPL licensed software, use Linux and secure your digital freedom! You think this is freedom?
Re: [dwm] sic ipv6 patch
Why don't you just use the beerware license? It's really easy to understand. And you will get a lot more out of it.
Re: [dwm] snapping bugs with multiple screens
I'm sorry, in rage i haven't looked at this line long enaugh;) > But obviously this does not have to suit all people. Still, compile time options don't solve the problems.
Re: [dwm] snapping bugs with multiple screens
argh. Can you please stop with that semi-solutions and even more stupid compile time options to suit all people??? go buy that stuff from apple or microsoft. I'm sure it will suit a lot more people than dwm.
Re: [dwm] snapping bugs with multiple screens
Hmm, i see. I hold on to my older view: The current implementation is neither flexible, nor in any way simple. Especially supporting two screens, but not i.e. three of them does not seam consistent to me. Monocle is a hack. And Snapping is by far of smallest concern.
Re: [dwm] snapping bugs with multiple screens
btw. what naming convention do bx, by, bw,wx,... follow?
Re: [dwm] snapping bugs with multiple screens
> Come on it's enough now. Do you remember how this pointless discussion > started: > > | Polls are stupid. > > I just wanted to involve the users a bit on this issue. And in fact this > statement is stupid and not polls. > Yes, of course. And this has to be discussed (with a certain "framework" > of course - you can't come along and expect someone to integrate cairo > or so). And this is why we have to make clear what exactly sucks less. > So what's so offensive about this statement that it causes such a noise? > Why don't we just shut up, concentrate on the problem and perhaps > propose a solution, because I think the criticism on dwm's behaviour is > valid. Because you can't come along and expect polls on the dwm mailing list. Like I said, there is a clear and strict framework*g*
Re: [dwm] snapping bugs with multiple screens
> Yes, of course. And this has to be discussed (with a certain "framework" > of course - you can't come along and expect someone to integrate cairo > or so). And this is why we have to make clear what exactly sucks less. > I mean the term itself suggest that we're not developing software on a > solid basis and have to make the best out of it. Yeah, well, we have this framework. We even used to have gods punishing people who suck too much. > > Recently there were all these changes with monocle and xinerama; And > > of course things get more difficult this way, so i would have > > respected i.e. not including such features at all. > > > Well, this depends on your viewpoint, more precisely what you consider > superfluous and what not. For some people xinerama and monocle may have > been a great improvement for a relatively small amount of source code. Yes, exactly, this is ultimately dependant on my viewpoint. And it has nothing to do with whatever it would be an improvement or not. At this point I have *not* said anything against the feature yet. > Well, X11 is a monster and really sucks. All we do here is to tame it so > it doesn't eat us. We have to make the best out of it. > Certainly everyone agrees that X11 should be replaced, but this takes > time and needs people. And because we have none of these resources, we > have to stick to it. > I mean do you think GNU/Linux is the holy grail of operating systems? I don't really care about X11 and my only real use of GNU is viewing multiple rickrolling videos at the same time, of course in tiled windows, non-overlapping. > The aim of dwm is to be simple, small and clear, but sometimes you have > to make trade-offs. And I think in this case multiple monitor support > was a relatively good trade-off. And you are measuring the value of trade-offs in lines of codes. That does not in any way help objective decisions. If there is a feature, which one decides to support, probably because of it's big value, one should not make any more trade-offs but fully support it. This can of course be made in an other branch. The current state is, in my view a really bad compromise (Nichts Halbes und nichts Ganzes). > You don't do polls in fashion - normally it's unconsciously communicated > dictatorship. Fashion is better described with democracy than dictatorship. > Well and in politics (at leat in Germany) you don't do polls very often > (usually every four years). > [Just by the way.] The results of the polls are still bad, that's also no real point. > It works usually that way on the mailing list, doesn't it? -9e99 I don't think so. It's still a discussion you want. -- hiro
Re: [dwm] snapping bugs with multiple screens
> There is this stupid idea called democracy (just in case you heard of > it) and I tried to establish just a tiny fraction of it here in the dwm > development process. Shame on me! At the beginning dwm was Anselm's baby, and he said it shall only fit his needs. He made this very clear and I fully respected this. Dwm never really fit my own needs, but it was still an interesting approach. And, like you said, Matthias, there is always the possibility of an own branch. > For me it the dwm development process seems to be kind of fair, Anselm > mainly tries improve dwm based on the needs (and patches) of the people > here on the mailing list unless they don't interfere with the > development philosophy. > But due to the development philosophy of dwm you can't make everyone > happy and integrate every feature. Yes, what is the development philosophy? If i remember correctly it was all about being small, simple and elitist. But there are always compromises. So, there has to be a decision about what features to support. Recently there were all these changes with monocle and xinerama; And of course things get more difficult this way, so i would have respected i.e. not including such features at all. But at some point the decision was made about Xinerama support, and since then development seemed going forwards and backwards, aimlessly and probably startled from all these bad X dependencies. Dwm shouldn't focus so much on *how much* X features suck, but rather on doing one thing (whatever this is), and then of course, doing it good.
Re: [dwm] snapping bugs with multiple screens
Polls are stupid. All these recently added features seemed to me as if they are rather a matter of popularity, not sanity. Dwm got off course and needs some clear objectives again!
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] [OT] minimalistic bbs/forum
you don't like mailing lists? I can't see the use of a forum... -- hiro
Re: [dwm] A rather radical thought
I am still eager to sea a really acme-like *interface* additionally to only it's layout. But i assume this is not your ambition.
Re: [dwm] A rather radical thought
it would be hilariously great. i've tried it, but never saw the point of this not-so-revolutionary concept.
Re: [dwm] DWM Tricot
You wouldn't need all these different ones if you had my "I suck" shirt. -- hiro
Re: [dwm] recent changes
Two 1600x1200 monitors will give you 3200x1200 for less than 400 euros. It's not only cheap, but I haven't seen any monitor with that much pixels at all. Of course Laptops are becoming more and more common these days, and a lot of people add bigger monitors to it. I think It's ok if you say dwm is not made for xinerama. But it used to be on the todo list... -- hiro
Re: [dwm] Some things about dmenu...
Well, thanks for pointing that out, then. I'm happy you don't want it. On 3/8/08, Antoni Grzymala <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > hiro dixit (2008-03-08, 09:30): > > > > this is not this unix convention's purpose. > > I don't see any use of that feature in dmenu. You could always write a > > wrapper around it, if you so want have case insensitivity so badly. > > > If you had read our mails carefully you'd find out we *don't* want this > feature. It was just a suggestion for those who "need it so badly" as > you put it. > > -- > > [a] > > -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- > Version: GnuPG v2.0.7 (GNU/Linux) > > iD8DBQFH0q2QL69KEesxVYMRApIAAJ94bljix0AqVWK/cbDFq0pz8pwtbgCffsrc > hykxHn9ZPltoNk87OQEgg2E= > =BKjG > -END PGP SIGNATURE- > > -- hiro
Re: [dwm] Some things about dmenu...
this is not this unix convention's purpose. I don't see any use of that feature in dmenu. You could always write a wrapper around it, if you so want have case insensitivity so badly. -- hiro
Re: [dwm] [OT] vimperator
The web is full of visual bloat. That's why your web browser must be compatible, thus be bloat, too. Vimperator is no big win. If you want a better web, provide mountable interfaces to the important services... And regarding firefox: I tried to print ten pages from firefox yesterday. It slowly grew to 200mb in ram, and used all the cpu power, before i killed it and instantly installed opera. Congratulations to firefox and all those oss fine arts suckers.
Re: [dwm] xinerama, things get more and more useful
On 3/1/08, Nicolas Martyanoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sat, 1 Mar 2008 05:33:03 -0500 > hiro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > I just tried the last hg version, and I am a bit disappointed. > > > The idea to divide up the tags between the screens isn't really > > > ergonomic. > > > > > > A dual (or more) screen, is particulary useful to have two or more > > > applications on a single view, for example a coding window and a > > > pdf research paper. With the new system, navigating between the > > > tags is really tedious; with wmii, I knew that my coding windows > > > (editor, doc...) were on tag '2'. A simple alt-2 and it was > > > restaured. With dwm old xinerama system, I had to press alt-2 > > > foreach screen which was ok though less practical. Now I have to > > > remember two tag, on per screen, for each couple of application. > > > > > > The only advantage of this system is to remove the need to manually > > > toggle between the screens. > > > > > > Furthermore, if it was possible before to use a window covering the > > > whole display (blender for example) by switching to float mode, > > > the by enabling the same tag on each screen (yes it was painful), > > > it's not possible anymore. > > > > > > I really hope this is gonna change :( > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > Try xmonad, it's usable for the things i'm doing > > > I personnally have nothing against xmonad, but I have years of > experience in C programming, none in haskell, and I like to be able to > tweak my wm; I think I'm gonna write my own wm :/ > > > > -- > > Nicolas Martyanoff >http://codemore.org >[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > That's of course an alternative;) I just want a window manager with sane defaults. I'm not planning to hack a lot, or even write an own one. -- hiro
Re: [dwm] xinerama, things get more and more useful
On 3/1/08, Nicolas Martyanoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Thu, 28 Feb 2008 23:01:39 +0100 > > "Anselm R. Garbe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > There are kind a lot of caveats in current hg tip, but I > > encourage early adaptors to give it a try and to update from > > time to time, and to report bugs. > > > > The worst caveat atm is that the focus handling among different > > views (screens) might need mouse assistance in some cases, so > > I'm aware of this already. > > > > http://www.suckless.org/shots/dwm-xinerama-new.png > > > > Kind regards, > > > I just tried the last hg version, and I am a bit disappointed. > The idea to divide up the tags between the screens isn't really > ergonomic. > > A dual (or more) screen, is particulary useful to have two or more > applications on a single view, for example a coding window and a pdf > research paper. With the new system, navigating between the tags is > really tedious; with wmii, I knew that my coding windows (editor, > doc...) were on tag '2'. A simple alt-2 and it was restaured. With dwm > old xinerama system, I had to press alt-2 foreach screen which was ok > though less practical. Now I have to remember two tag, on per screen, > for each couple of application. > > The only advantage of this system is to remove the need to manually > toggle between the screens. > > Furthermore, if it was possible before to use a window covering the > whole display (blender for example) by switching to float mode, the by > enabling the same tag on each screen (yes it was painful), it's not > possible anymore. > > I really hope this is gonna change :( > > Regards, > > > -- > Nicolas Martyanoff >http://codemore.org >[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Try xmonad, it's usable for the things i'm doing -- hiro
Re: [dwm] xinerama, things get more and more useful
doesn't compile, see attachment. On 2/28/08, Anselm R. Garbe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > There are kind a lot of caveats in current hg tip, but I > encourage early adaptors to give it a try and to update from > time to time, and to report bugs. > > The worst caveat atm is that the focus handling among different > views (screens) might need mouse assistance in some cases, so > I'm aware of this already. > > http://www.suckless.org/shots/dwm-xinerama-new.png > > Kind regards, > > -- > Anselm R. Garbe >< http://www.suckless.org/ >< GPG key: 0D73F361 > > -- hiro 2log Description: Binary data
Re: [dwm] Xinerama
>I think the way dwm treats multiple tags being viewed is really a nice feature and makes it unique to all other clones and related projects. I never used dwm this way. Perhaps you are right and my proposals really don't fit dwm's typical style. -- hiro
Re: [dwm] We need a different Xinerama implementation
I'm using xmonad now, because hg tip isn't usable with Xinerama yet. And their model is what i wanted, except window swapping
Re: [dwm] We need a different Xinerama implementation
On 2/15/08, Ralph E. Carter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > I'm not sure about this idea. I don't like this idea so much > > because it would increase complexity and decrease > > predictability. > > > > Kind regards, > > -- > > Anselm R. Garbe>< http://www.suckless.org/>< GPG key: 0D73F361 > > > > Yes. > I vote for simplicity and predictability. > Thanks. > _ > Climb to the top of the charts! Play the word scramble challenge with star > power. > http://club.live.com/star_shuffle.aspx?icid=starshuffle_wlmailtextlink_jan > Simplicity has become too much of a religion here. The differences are quite small, and the only really simple solution is not changing everything. You shouldn't just believe! I vote for thoughtfulness. -- hiro
Re: [dwm] We need a different Xinerama implementation
> I consider different tagsets for each screen, which can't be > selected in a join way, to prevent the basic problem of being > unable to display the same window on different screens. It doesn't really fix that problem, but limits the user to make it seem more logically. And specially if one of your monitor is bigger than the other, you sometimes want to move your clients between them. > Maybe somewhat into the direction of having a 2D tagset, with y > addressing different screens (yiyus or pancake came up with this > idea if I remember correctly) for the Xinerama case, and y > addressing different virtual screens for the non Xinerama case. This visualization makes things more complicated than they are. It definitely doesn't fit with numbered tags. > Hence, say tags 1-4 address screen 1, tags 5-9 address screen 2 > or so, but tagging a client 1+5 is not possible. This should > give you a rough idea. This solves problems of the current approach, but i.e. not being able to tag a client 1+5 will bring other confusion instead. Moreover, how will that work with 3 screens? I remembered, that a lot of you use the keyboard only. Your version would make it easier to change focus to an other monitor, whereas with david's patch you would either have to use the mouse, or bind a special key for that.
Re: [dwm] Xinerama and multihead support
Nicolas, i haven't seen this use case yet, but it's a good point. I have hg tip running now and no crashes yet. I'm glad that i can test arg's interpretation of this issue. Well, now i'm sure david's version is beneficial, because it allows you to control a lot only by tagging. It's natural and a lot simpler. You won't need: 1. no new command (to move windows to another monitor). 2. no new memory in your brain (selecting a tag will bring everything you associate with it to your view). Perhaps it's only my limited memory;). I definitely don't easily remember the tag AND monitor of the apps I'm trying to get on view. But now it is like having 9 additional tags, all named in a confusing way. Now finally, my proposal: Normally each monitor should show everything associated with the selected tag. If there are multiple selected tags, dwm should regard these as one monitor, so that we can use the whole capabilities of Xinerama. Here you are, Nicolas. hiro
Re: [dwm] [PATCH] slock with DPMS.
What do you people do so that others won't just ctrl-alt-backspace back to the open console session?
Re: [dwm] rfc: patch: xinerama support
Well, i didn't use to read the mailing list, but after a quick search i couldn't really find out anything about how "classic multihead" support will look like. If i understand that the right way you are planning to divide the monitors from each other so that their tags won't interfere which each other. And you want that for both xinerama and multihead. So the only difference would be some special command for sending clients to an other monitor? hiro
Re: [dwm] rfc: patch: xinerama support
Hi, For a few weeks now i'm using a thinkpad x60s and a 1600x1200 external tft on my desk. My old machine will probably have a lot of fun with glenda in the cellar. I don't know whether Kris started implementing support for xinerama in wmii. It was talked about last year, but now, that i'm setting up my screens, this patch is the first i found to serve a working xinerama environment. And it feels great. Even though i don't like dwm's strict 2-column design, this patch shows a lot of potential, very well done! -- hiro
