On Fri, May 23, 2008 at 9:54 AM, John Li <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, May 23, 2008 at 02:47:28PM +0200, Jan Christoph Ebersbach wrote:
> > On Sun 18-05-2008 12:42 +0200, Anselm R. Garbe wrote:
> > > On Sun, May 18, 2008 at 12:07:37PM +0200, Jan Christoph Ebersbach
> > > wrote:
> > > > The
On Fri, May 23, 2008 at 02:47:28PM +0200, Jan Christoph Ebersbach wrote:
> On Sun 18-05-2008 12:42 +0200, Anselm R. Garbe wrote:
> > On Sun, May 18, 2008 at 12:07:37PM +0200, Jan Christoph Ebersbach
> > wrote:
> > > The floating layout is totally useless when it comes to mouseless
> > > usage and e
On Sun 18-05-2008 12:42 +0200, Anselm R. Garbe wrote:
> On Sun, May 18, 2008 at 12:07:37PM +0200, Jan Christoph Ebersbach
> wrote:
>
> > I'm really wondering about the roadmap of dwm. - Since version 2.8
> > the development is officially finished, isn't it? From my point of
> > view most of the ch
* [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Wrote on Thu, 22 May 2008 20:17:47 +0200:
|> - removed reapply()
| I'm not sure removing reapply() and forcing people to restart dwm is a
| neat idea for those using logon managers. Quitting dwm ends my Xsession,
| kills the X clients and takes me back to xdm.
|
| Perhaps I'm m
On 5/22/08, Szabolcs Nagy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> this way the information in the statusbar is outdated (by 1 second)
ah sorry
this is bullshit
never mind
On 5/22/08, Johannes Hofmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> while true
> do
> echo "temp $((`sysctl -n hw.acpi.thermal.tz0.temperature`/10-273))°C
> batt `sysctl -n hw.acpi.battery.life`%"
> sleep 1
> done | while true; do
> dwm
> done
this way the information in the statusbar
On Thu, May 22, 2008 at 08:17:47PM +0200, Antoni Grzymala wrote:
> Anselm R. Garbe dixit (2008-05-17, 16:05):
>
> > - removed reapply()
>
> [...]
>
> > Let me know how welcome do you feel about those changes. Bug
> > reports are also welcome.
>
> I'm not sure removing reapply() and forcing peop
I understand what you mean. And I didn't know you could tile by default
with that rule. But that's pretty radical ^^
On Thu, 22 May 2008, Jan Christoph Ebersbach wrote:
> No doubt about the usefulness of the floating layout. I was just
> criticising the few functionality for floating windows (m
Anselm R. Garbe dixit (2008-05-17, 16:05):
> - removed reapply()
[...]
> Let me know how welcome do you feel about those changes. Bug
> reports are also welcome.
I'm not sure removing reapply() and forcing people to restart dwm is a
neat idea for those using logon managers. Quitting dwm ends my
On Mon 19-05-2008 18:30 +0200, Rockwolf wrote:
> I too think the floating layout is necessary. But if you don't like
> it, you can always turn it of in the config. I really like this
> config.h stuff, you can throw out anything you don't like ^^ and only
> if no-one likes it, it might be worth co
On Mon 19-05-2008 20:34 +0200, Anselm R. Garbe wrote:
> Maybe I will include something like this in the future. Out of
> curiosity, which keybindings are you using to achieve keyboard-driven
> movements and resizals, since Mod1-{h,j,k,l} are taken already.
Good question. For a long time I remapp
On Mon, May 19, 2008 at 1:34 PM, Anselm R. Garbe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Maybe I will include something like this in the future.
> Out of curiosity, which keybindings are you using to achieve
> keyboard-driven movements and resizals, since Mod1-{h,j,k,l} are
> taken already.
At first I used M
On (19/05/08 20:34), Anselm R. Garbe wrote:
> To: dynamic window manager
> From: "Anselm R. Garbe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> Well, for mainstream dwm my opinion has always been to stick to
> mouse only. But I had occasional cases when I'd like to have
> keyboard driven resizals as well, esp. when h
On Mon, May 19, 2008 at 11:54:40AM -0500, Kurt H Maier wrote:
> On Sun, May 18, 2008 at 5:42 AM, Anselm R. Garbe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Sun, May 18, 2008 at 12:07:37PM +0200, Jan Christoph Ebersbach wrote:
> >> The floating layout is totally useless when it comes to mouseless usage
> >>
On Sun, May 18, 2008 at 5:42 AM, Anselm R. Garbe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sun, May 18, 2008 at 12:07:37PM +0200, Jan Christoph Ebersbach wrote:
>> The floating layout is totally useless when it comes to mouseless usage
>> and even with the mouse there is no window manager that provides such
On Sun, 18 May 2008, Anselm R. Garbe wrote:
> On Sun, May 18, 2008 at 12:07:37PM +0200, Jan Christoph Ebersbach wrote:
> > The floating layout is totally useless when it comes to mouseless usage
> > and even with the mouse there is no window manager that provides such
> > weak functionality to man
On Mon, May 19, 2008 at 03:59:58PM +0200, Sander van Dijk wrote:
> On Sat, May 17, 2008 at 4:05 PM, Anselm R. Garbe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Do people prefer having a fine-grain bar positioning setup or is
> > it more preferred to have a bar setup in the sense "top or
> > bottom"? I still bel
On Sat, May 17, 2008 at 4:05 PM, Anselm R. Garbe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Do people prefer having a fine-grain bar positioning setup or is
> it more preferred to have a bar setup in the sense "top or
> bottom"? I still believe the latter idea is nicer, if someone
> wants to use dzen, patch upda
On Sat, May 17, 2008 at 04:05:16PM +0200, Anselm R. Garbe wrote:
> Here are the most recent changes I did to the codebase today
> (most stuff towards 5.0 is done now).
>
> - DEFGEOM is replaced by a function updategeom(), and a function
> pointer updategeom in each layout definition
>
> - removed
> > The floating layout is totally useless when it comes to mouseless usage
> > and even with the mouse there is no window manager that provides such
> > weak functionality to manage floating windows.
>
> I disagree. I think the floating mode is as usable as in
> traditional WMs -- which function
On Sun, May 18, 2008 at 11:13 AM, Anselm R. Garbe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sun, May 18, 2008 at 09:33:15AM +0200, Tuncer Ayaz wrote:
>> and please don't forget to include:
>> 1) BarOff
>> and possibly an optimization in the case of BarOff which
>> prevents any busy loop trying to read from s
On Sun, May 18, 2008 at 12:07:37PM +0200, Jan Christoph Ebersbach wrote:
> On Sat 17-05-2008 16:05 +0200, Anselm R. Garbe wrote:
>
> > Let me know how welcome do you feel about those changes. Bug reports
> > are also welcome.
>
> I'm really wondering about the roadmap of dwm. - Since version 2.8
On Sat 17-05-2008 16:05 +0200, Anselm R. Garbe wrote:
> Let me know how welcome do you feel about those changes. Bug reports
> are also welcome.
I'm really wondering about the roadmap of dwm. - Since version 2.8 the
development is officially finished, isn't it? From my point of view most
of the c
On Sun, May 18, 2008 at 09:33:15AM +0200, Tuncer Ayaz wrote:
> and please don't forget to include:
> 1) BarOff
> and possibly an optimization in the case of BarOff which
> prevents any busy loop trying to read from stdin.
Not sure who came up with claiming the stdin reader being a busy
loop. But t
On Sat, May 17, 2008 at 7:46 PM, Steffen Liebergeld <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Anselm R. Garbe wrote:
>> Do people prefer having a fine-grain bar positioning setup or is
>> it more preferred to have a bar setup in the sense "top or
>> bottom"? I still believe the latter idea is nicer, if someone
Anselm R. Garbe wrote:
> Do people prefer having a fine-grain bar positioning setup or is
> it more preferred to have a bar setup in the sense "top or
> bottom"? I still believe the latter idea is nicer, if someone
> wants to use dzen, patch updategeom on you own.
My vote for the top or bottom app
* Anselm R. Garbe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008-05-17 16:05:16 +0200]:
> Do people prefer having a fine-grain bar positioning setup or is
> it more preferred to have a bar setup in the sense "top or
> bottom"? I still believe the latter idea is nicer, if someone
> wants to use dzen, patch updategeom o
Here are the most recent changes I did to the codebase today
(most stuff towards 5.0 is done now).
- DEFGEOM is replaced by a function updategeom(), and a function
pointer updategeom in each layout definition
- removed Client->{fx,fy,fw,fh}
- removed reapply()
- removed tileh*, counttiled(), et
28 matches
Mail list logo
