[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
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. ;)
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
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
--
James Turner
BSD Group Consulting
http://www.bsdgroup.org
--- config.def.hSat Dec 13 12:39:14 2008
+++ config.def.hSat Dec 13 12:36:21 2008
@@ -62,6 +62,8 @@ static Key keys[] = {
{ MODKEY, XK_l, setmfact, {.f = +0.05}
},
{ MODKEY, XK_Return, zoom, {0} },
{ MODKEY, XK_Tab,view, {0} },
+ { MODKEY, XK_Right, viewnext, {0} },
+ { MODKEY, XK_Left, viewprevious, {0} },
{ MODKEY|ShiftMask, XK_c, killclient, {0} },
{ MODKEY, XK_t, setlayout, {.v =
&layouts[0]} },
{ MODKEY, XK_f, setlayout, {.v =
&layouts[1]} },
--- dwm.c Sat Dec 13 12:39:15 2008
+++ dwm.c Sat Dec 13 12:38:48 2008
@@ -198,6 +198,8 @@ static void updatestatus(void);
static void updatetitle(Client *c);
static void updatewmhints(Client *c);
static void view(const Arg *arg);
+static void viewnext(const Arg *arg);
+static void viewprevious(const Arg *arg);
static int xerror(Display *dpy, XErrorEvent *ee);
static int xerrordummy(Display *dpy, XErrorEvent *ee);
static int xerrorstart(Display *dpy, XErrorEvent *ee);
@@ -1631,6 +1633,40 @@ view(const Arg *arg) {
seltags ^= 1; /* toggle sel tagset */
if(arg->ui & TAGMASK)
tagset[seltags] = arg->ui & TAGMASK;
+ arrange();
+}
+
+void
+viewnext(const Arg *arg) {
+ unsigned int i;
+
+ for(i = 0; i < LENGTH(tags); i++) {
+ if((1 << i & TAGMASK) == tagset[seltags]) {
+ seltags ^= 1;
+ if(i == LENGTH(tags) - 1)
+ tagset[seltags] = 1 << 0 & TAGMASK;
+ else
+ tagset[seltags] = 1 << (i + 1) & TAGMASK;
+ break;
+ }
+ }
+ arrange();
+}
+
+void
+viewprevious(const Arg *arg) {
+ unsigned int i;
+
+ for(i = 0; i < LENGTH(tags); i++) {
+ if((1 << i & TAGMASK) == tagset[seltags]) {
+ seltags ^= 1;
+ if(i == 0)
+ tagset[seltags] = 1 << (LENGTH(tags) - 1) &
TAGMASK;
+ else
+ tagset[seltags] = 1 << (i - 1) & TAGMASK;
+ break;
+ }
+ }
arrange();
}
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
Re: [dwm] Re: dwm-5.4 stdin; cycle tags
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
[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
