Re: [dwm] dwm's future

2009-05-01 Thread Matthias Kirschner
hi Szabolcs,

* Szabolcs Nagy nszabo...@gmail.com [2009-04-29 13:37:17 +0200]:

 On 4/28/09, Matthias Kirschner m...@fsfe.org wrote:
  I am very interested in that list. Can you please sent it to me?
 
 
 cad softwares (and many related formats are closed as well)

Was already on my list.

 fpga tool chain

Thanks, added to my list.

Best wishes,
Matthias

-- 
Deputy  German Coordinator, Fellowship Coordinator
Free Software Foundation Europe (FSFE) [] (http://fsfeurope.org)
Join the Fellowship of FSFE! [][][]   (http://fsfe.org/join)
Your donation powers our work! ||  (http://fsfeurope.org/donate)



Re: [dwm] dwm's future

2009-05-01 Thread Matthias-Christian Ott
On Thu, Apr 30, 2009 at 03:44:46PM +0200, Matthias Kirschner wrote:
 hi Szabolcs,
 
 * Szabolcs Nagy nszabo...@gmail.com [2009-04-29 13:37:17 +0200]:
 
  On 4/28/09, Matthias Kirschner m...@fsfe.org wrote:
   I am very interested in that list. Can you please sent it to me?
  
  
  cad softwares (and many related formats are closed as well)
 
 Was already on my list.
 
  fpga tool chain
 
 Thanks, added to my list.

Well, for certain ATMEL fpga exists Free Software tools [1], because someone
published the bytestream.
 
 Best wishes,
 Matthias

Regards,
Matthias-Christian

[1] http://research.cs.berkeley.edu/project/slipway/



Re: [dwm] dwm's future

2009-04-29 Thread Preben Randhol
On Tue, 28 Apr 2009 23:41:48 +0200
Martin Oppegaard mar...@deathaven.com wrote:

 Are there any BSD-style licensed equivalents?

Why do you need that?

You could also have a look at: http://www.sagemath.org/index.html

-- 
Preben



Re: [dwm] dwm's future

2009-04-29 Thread Martin Oppegaard
On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 06:52:46AM +0100, Szabolcs Nagy wrote:
 On 4/28/09, Martin Oppegaard mar...@deathaven.com wrote:
  Are there any BSD-style licensed equivalents?
 
 
 scipy.org
 

And use Ipython!



Re: [dwm] dwm's future

2009-04-29 Thread Preben Randhol
On Wed, 29 Apr 2009 10:25:55 +0200
Martin Oppegaard mar...@deathaven.com wrote:

 I like free software.

But not GPL?




Re: [dwm] dwm's future

2009-04-29 Thread Martin Oppegaard
On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 10:35:12AM +0200, Preben Randhol wrote:
 On Wed, 29 Apr 2009 10:25:55 +0200
 Martin Oppegaard mar...@deathaven.com wrote:
 
  I like free software.
 
 But not GPL?
 
It's just another lock in which is getting too big. 



Re: [dwm] dwm's future

2009-04-29 Thread Matthias Kirschner
Hi yiyus,

* yy yiyu@gmail.com [2009-04-28 00:03:27 +0200]:

 But it is not always possible. I can give you a (quite long) list of
 software that doesn't have a free equivalent. 

I am very interested in that list. Can you please sent it to me?

Thanks,
Matthias



Re: [dwm] dwm's future

2009-04-29 Thread Preben Randhol
On Wed, 29 Apr 2009 10:45:35 +0200
Martin Oppegaard mar...@deathaven.com wrote:

 On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 10:35:12AM +0200, Preben Randhol wrote:
  On Wed, 29 Apr 2009 10:25:55 +0200
  Martin Oppegaard mar...@deathaven.com wrote:
  
   I like free software.
  
  But not GPL?
  
 It's just another lock in which is getting too big. 
 

Sure, if you want to make proprietary software...

-- 
Preben Randhol



Re: [dwm] dwm's future

2009-04-29 Thread Martin Oppegaard
On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 12:58:23PM +0200, Preben Randhol wrote:
 On Wed, 29 Apr 2009 10:45:35 +0200
 Martin Oppegaard mar...@deathaven.com wrote:
 
  On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 10:35:12AM +0200, Preben Randhol wrote:
   On Wed, 29 Apr 2009 10:25:55 +0200
   Martin Oppegaard mar...@deathaven.com wrote:
   
I like free software.
   
   But not GPL?
   
  It's just another lock in which is getting too big. 
  
 
 Sure, if you want to make proprietary software...
 
If you want to be free from wacko organisations.

 -- 
 Preben Randhol
 



Re: [dwm] dwm's future

2009-04-29 Thread Szabolcs Nagy
 I like free software.
 But not GPL?
 It's just another lock in which is getting too big.
 Sure, if you want to make proprietary software...
 If you want to be free from wacko organisations.

this fruitful discussion shall end here



Re: [dwm] dwm's future

2009-04-29 Thread Matthias-Christian Ott
On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 01:05:40PM +0200, Martin Oppegaard wrote:
 On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 12:58:23PM +0200, Preben Randhol wrote:
  On Wed, 29 Apr 2009 10:45:35 +0200
  Martin Oppegaard mar...@deathaven.com wrote:
  
   On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 10:35:12AM +0200, Preben Randhol wrote:
On Wed, 29 Apr 2009 10:25:55 +0200
Martin Oppegaard mar...@deathaven.com wrote:

 I like free software.

But not GPL?

   It's just another lock in which is getting too big. 
   
  
  Sure, if you want to make proprietary software...
  
 If you want to be free from wacko organisations.

Are you sure, you know what you are talking about? At least all people I
know from Free Software Foundation Europe are quite friendly and really care
about Free Software and fight actively against proprietary software. They
are by no means wackos.

But as mentioned this discussion could go on and on without a result.
 
  -- 
  Preben Randhol

Regards,
Matthias-Christian



Re: [dwm] dwm's future

2009-04-29 Thread Matthias-Christian Ott
On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 01:37:17PM +0200, Szabolcs Nagy wrote:
 On 4/28/09, Matthias Kirschner m...@fsfe.org wrote:
  I am very interested in that list. Can you please sent it to me?
 
 
 cad softwares (and many related formats are closed as well)
 
 fpga tool chain
 
Well, they are not superior or unique. Their formats are just proprietary
and there's no Free Software for that, because the vendors try by all means
to prevent this.

Regards,
Matthias-Christian



Re: [dwm] dwm's future

2009-04-29 Thread Martin Oppegaard
On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 02:08:20PM +0200, Matthias-Christian Ott wrote:
 On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 01:05:40PM +0200, Martin Oppegaard wrote:
  On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 12:58:23PM +0200, Preben Randhol wrote:
   On Wed, 29 Apr 2009 10:45:35 +0200
   Martin Oppegaard mar...@deathaven.com wrote:
   
On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 10:35:12AM +0200, Preben Randhol wrote:
 On Wed, 29 Apr 2009 10:25:55 +0200
 Martin Oppegaard mar...@deathaven.com wrote:
 
  I like free software.
 
 But not GPL?
 
It's just another lock in which is getting too big. 

   
   Sure, if you want to make proprietary software...
   
  If you want to be free from wacko organisations.
 
 Are you sure, you know what you are talking about? At least all people I
 know from Free Software Foundation Europe are quite friendly and really care
 about Free Software and fight actively against proprietary software. They
 are by no means wackos.

Of course they are!  I'm just being sceptical.

 
 But as mentioned this discussion could go on and on without a result.
  
   -- 
   Preben Randhol
 
 Regards,
 Matthias-Christian
 



Re: [dwm] dwm's future

2009-04-29 Thread Enno Boland (Gottox)
2009/4/29 Martin Oppegaard mar...@deathaven.com:
 On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 02:08:20PM +0200, Matthias-Christian Ott wrote:
 On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 01:05:40PM +0200, Martin Oppegaard wrote:
  On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 12:58:23PM +0200, Preben Randhol wrote:
   On Wed, 29 Apr 2009 10:45:35 +0200
   Martin Oppegaard mar...@deathaven.com wrote:
  
On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 10:35:12AM +0200, Preben Randhol wrote:
 On Wed, 29 Apr 2009 10:25:55 +0200
 Martin Oppegaard mar...@deathaven.com wrote:

  I like free software.

 But not GPL?

It's just another lock in which is getting too big.
   
  
   Sure, if you want to make proprietary software...
  
  If you want to be free from wacko organisations.

 Are you sure, you know what you are talking about? At least all people I
 know from Free Software Foundation Europe are quite friendly and really care
 about Free Software and fight actively against proprietary software. They
 are by no means wackos.

 Of course they are!  I'm just being sceptical.


 But as mentioned this discussion could go on and on without a result.

   --
   Preben Randhol

 Regards,
 Matthias-Christian




All opensource license are crap, don't use any of them, keep you're
source secure by not publishing it. I mean, these guys who use open
source have apparently a very small penis.

my 2 cents.
-- 
http://gnuffy.chaotika.org - Real Community Distro



Re: [dwm] dwm's future

2009-04-29 Thread Kurt H Maier
On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 7:11 AM, Matthias-Christian Ott o...@mirix.org wrote:
 On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 01:37:17PM +0200, Szabolcs Nagy wrote:
 cad softwares (and many related formats are closed as well)
 Well, they are not superior or unique. Their formats are just proprietary
 and there's no Free Software for that, because the vendors try by all means
 to prevent this.

This is flat-out wrong.  There's nothing in the FOSS world that
remoteley competes with something like AutoDesk NavisWorks.  Like most
of us here, I use mostly free software, but I have to maintain a
Windows installation for my wife, who is and engineer.  She's really
excited about NavisWorks (I could provide a list of other engineering
software that has no FOSS competition, too).

I've experimented with showing her FOSS alternatives to CAD packages,
but she quickly explains (convincingly) why they are basically toys.
Take SewerCad.  The package name sounds like a joke, but drainage and
sewage design is obviously very important, and there's basically
nothing out there in the FOSS world.

Reverse-engineering the document format is the smallest fraction of
the tiniest problem. NavisWorks specifically really is superior and
unique.  If you're familiar at all with CAD or engineering software
watch the screencast[1] (requires flash) and it will blow your mind.

[1]-http://www.adskmedia.com/navisworks-engineering/

# Kurt H Maier



Re: [dwm] dwm's future

2009-04-29 Thread Marc Andre Tanner
On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 04:07:55PM +0200, pancake wrote:
 If we just implement this stuff into separated .c or .h files, so everybody
 can still use the basic x11 stuff, or just use cairo/pango or..maybe someone
 would like to use it on w32 or osx, so, these guys will just have to  
 implement
 this little backend, and keep all the dwm internals clean and portable for
 all the systems and backends (also for ncurses?). 

From my experience of porting dwm to win32[1] I can only say that in theory
this sounds like a perfect solution but in practice it won't work because
you will have to work around some random misfeatures of the target platform.

 The problem here is
 that actually all the keybinding stuff depends on X, and there are other
 stuff that is pretty linked to X11, and if we want to drop this hard X11
 binding we should try to split it up into a set of callbacks.

Depending on how much callbacks you would need, this will just clutter the
dwm source for now obvious benefit.

Regards,
Marc

[1] http://lists.suckless.org/dwm/0904/7891.html

-- 
 Marc Andre Tanner  http://www.brain-dump.org/  GPG key: CF7D56C0



Re: [dwm] dwm's future

2009-04-29 Thread Marc Andre Tanner
On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 10:54:35PM +0200, markus schnalke wrote:
 Further more, I want to say, that there are more important things to
 focus on, instead of trying to improve (or dis-improve) dwm. `st' is
 the best example, of course.

Amen to that! It would be nice to see some progress on the st front.

Marc

-- 
 Marc Andre Tanner  http://www.brain-dump.org/  GPG key: CF7D56C0



Re: [dwm] dwm's future

2009-04-28 Thread Anselm R Garbe
Ok, thanks again for continuing the discussion.

My conclusion is as follows:

1) dwm will be slightly redesigned, code-wise. I consider having a
less suckish font and drawing abstraction in order to be implemented
in different ways (which will also be used by st and dmenu).
Officially there will only be X font support as is. But due to this
abstraction it'll be possible to implement cairo/pango backends if
that seems more suitable for non western glyphs without the need to
change any vanilla dwm code.

2) Similiarly I will separate the bar bits into a separate file to
make it easy to get rid of the bar if someone prefers going with
dzen+xdotool.

3) Regarding the broken apps I need to investigate further. If it's
really related to reparenting, it's definately a bug in these apps or
in the toolkit (JDK?) they rely on. If that's the case I WON'T
introduce kludges to handle them, instead we should file bug reports
that these apps get fixed.

Particularly if these apps are of commercial nature, it should be the
vendor's interest to fix their apps that you as a customer can use
them in your preferred environment. You or your organization pays
someone license fees I guess so that's just a totally valid request
that the vendor fixes these apps.

4) Regarding multihead I will start a separate thread soon what a
viable solution might be.

Kind regards,
Anselm



Re: [dwm] dwm's future

2009-04-28 Thread Anselm R Garbe
2009/4/28 pmarin pacog...@gmail.com:
 Try to make the new dependencies optionals.

 About the broken non-free apps, is not dwm's problem and one solution
 can be to use a qemu instance with another WM and connect to the host
 Xwindows server.

That won't be a really good solution, the better solution is Xnest.

And don't worry about the dependencies, there won't be any more than
what we currently got.

Kind regards,
Anselm



Re: [dwm] dwm's future

2009-04-28 Thread pmarin
Try to make the new dependencies optionals.

About the broken non-free apps, is not dwm's problem and one solution
can be to use a qemu instance with another WM and connect to the host
Xwindows server.

On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 10:01 AM, Anselm R Garbe garb...@gmail.com wrote:
 Ok, thanks again for continuing the discussion.

 My conclusion is as follows:

 1) dwm will be slightly redesigned, code-wise. I consider having a
 less suckish font and drawing abstraction in order to be implemented
 in different ways (which will also be used by st and dmenu).
 Officially there will only be X font support as is. But due to this
 abstraction it'll be possible to implement cairo/pango backends if
 that seems more suitable for non western glyphs without the need to
 change any vanilla dwm code.

 2) Similiarly I will separate the bar bits into a separate file to
 make it easy to get rid of the bar if someone prefers going with
 dzen+xdotool.

 3) Regarding the broken apps I need to investigate further. If it's
 really related to reparenting, it's definately a bug in these apps or
 in the toolkit (JDK?) they rely on. If that's the case I WON'T
 introduce kludges to handle them, instead we should file bug reports
 that these apps get fixed.

 Particularly if these apps are of commercial nature, it should be the
 vendor's interest to fix their apps that you as a customer can use
 them in your preferred environment. You or your organization pays
 someone license fees I guess so that's just a totally valid request
 that the vendor fixes these apps.

 4) Regarding multihead I will start a separate thread soon what a
 viable solution might be.

 Kind regards,
 Anselm





Re: [dwm] dwm's future

2009-04-28 Thread Christian Garbs
On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 12:19:05AM +0200, Preben Randhol wrote:

 One improvement I just remembered (unless I really have missed an
 option) would be to add invisible typing to dmenu. Useful if you want
 to type a password.

Set -nb to -nf :-)

Regards
Christian
-- 
Christian.Garbs.http://www.cgarbs.de

Tue nie etwas, bei dem Du nicht tot erwischt werden möchtest.




Re: [dwm] dwm's future

2009-04-28 Thread Ross Mohn

Jeremy Jay wrote:

Don't be a bigot, it just makes you look like a moron too. Free Software
is about choice, forcing people to use an app just because you use it is
pretty stupid and annoying and just gives people a negative association
with it. Let people make their own choices. Last I checked it was very
easy to save as .xls or .doc, and its much less hassle for those less
tech literate.

Professors choose to use the software they want because they're
comfortable with it, not to spite you.


Or maybe they're getting a kick back? -RPM



Re: [dwm] dwm's future

2009-04-28 Thread Preben Randhol
On Tue, 28 Apr 2009 09:01:20 -0400
Ross Mohn rpm...@waxandwane.org wrote:


 Or maybe they're getting a kick back? -RPM

Bullshit! Such slander doe not serve Open Source! The reason for
choosing commercial packages is because they have done the job. It is
fine to choose an open source alternative, but it has to be able to
preform the task, which has not always been true for Octave f.ex.

That said, in most cases there is now no reason no to choose Matlab
over Octave.



Re: [dwm] dwm's future

2009-04-28 Thread Preben Randhol
On Tue, 28 Apr 2009 22:00:07 +0200
Preben Randhol rand...@pvv.org wrote:

 That said, in most cases there is now no reason no to choose Matlab
 over Octave.
 
EDIT
 That said, in most cases there is now no reason to choose Matlab
 over Octave.
/EDIT



Re: [dwm] dwm's future

2009-04-28 Thread Martin Oppegaard
On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 10:03:47PM +0200, Preben Randhol wrote:
 On Tue, 28 Apr 2009 22:00:07 +0200
 Preben Randhol rand...@pvv.org wrote:
 
  That said, in most cases there is now no reason no to choose Matlab
  over Octave.
  
 EDIT
  That said, in most cases there is now no reason to choose Matlab
  over Octave.
 /EDIT
 
Are there any BSD-style licensed equivalents?



Re: [dwm] dwm's future

2009-04-28 Thread Szabolcs Nagy
On 4/28/09, Martin Oppegaard mar...@deathaven.com wrote:
 Are there any BSD-style licensed equivalents?


scipy.org



Re: [dwm] dwm's future

2009-04-27 Thread Anselm R Garbe
Thanks for all the valueable input so far in this thread.

I think here are the action points:

1) I plan to separate the bar stuff code-wise into two portions -- the
tag bar with tags and layout info, and the title/status bar, but
things will stay as they are from a user perspective, it's just some
code cleanup which allows replacing the tagbar and/or title/status bar
with something else (or avoiding to compile it in)

There might be possible pango/cairo implementations of this stuff, I
plan to have a font API interface, something like libsfont which is
used by dwm and dmenu to start with, and which depends on either Xlib
or some more fancy sucking stuff optionally.

2) I need to investigate into the reparent stuff first, I really
dislike going the reparent route, because each parent window consumes
much more X resource memory (basically twice the buffer sizes as we
have already if you use a reparenting WM -- this makes everything
slower). I really think bug the authors of the broken apps to fix
their apps that they do not assume a reparenting WM.

So the action here is: let's make a list of all apps which are known
to be broken and behaving strange with dwm first, that I can
investigate.

- Mathematica (Version?)
- ... please provide input

3) I agree multihead has got some preference, I like the approach to
assign certain tags to specific screens.

Kind regards,
Anselm



Re: [dwm] dwm's future

2009-04-27 Thread Preben Randhol
On Sat, 25 Apr 2009 19:23:50 +0100
Anselm R Garbe garb...@gmail.com wrote:

 Hi there,
 
 I discussed several stuff on IRC recently but wanted to share my
 thoughts here.
 
 1. One idea is getting rid of the dwm bar altogether and to print the
 dwm state to stdout when it changes, however after thinking carefully
 about it I conclude that having the bar build-in is definately a
 stayer. It's so much simpler than the hassle with an external bar, not
 worth it. So very unlikely.

Yes, please please keep the bar. I really like it and that it works out
of the box.

 2. Another idea is to switch to another dependency for the rendering
 bit which could possibly be cairo. After all I'm nearly giving up the
 hope that X font handling will ever be fixed and work properly, so
 that relying on a pile of other crap seems to become a solution. cairo
 is a dependency for firefox and I guess that every dwm user uses
 firefox occasionally. And we might benefit from a little bit smoother
 looking dwm (same for dmenu of course and my ongoing st efforts). I
 think this idea is quite likely.

I have no problem with how dwm looks now (except for unicode
problems, but that is a font issue). I like the simpler more retro
look. Do you mean to use cairo for rendering fonts or also the dmenu
itself?

Personally I would like to have one dwm as is, and one gdwm (or some
better name) with more bells and whistles and dependencies. Or that
one can patch cairo support if one want it. For older computers/netbooks
(power saving) it is nice to still have a simple wm that is not
dependent on MSLOC of libraries. For modern computers it could be nice
with some better font handling I guess. I mean I have cairo installed
on all my computers, but I don't have the development packages, so if I
need that as well to compile dwm, then there will be a lot of extra
Mbs. For my worksstation that is fine, but for a netbook with limited
SSD...

For me the great selling point of dwm is that it makes me more
productive as I don't need to do any window moving/resizing etc...

 3. A third idea for legacy support is, that I tend to add a
 compile-time option or a specific Rule extension that let's you set to
 reparent all clients or certain clients which are broken such as
 Mathematica or various Swing apps, though I'm not absolutely sure how
 likely that is. Somehow my inner feelings are against it, because it's
 not a dwm problem and those broken apps should be fixed.

Not a problem for me now, so I don't know if this is needed. For me it
is more important to have working patches to add pertag, bstack and
perhaps fibonaccio (will test this when I change to dwm on my
workstation).



Re: [dwm] dwm's future

2009-04-27 Thread Enno Boland (Gottox)
Hi there !

2009/4/27, Anselm R Garbe garb...@gmail.com:
 Thanks for all the valueable input so far in this thread.

  I think here are the action points:

  1) I plan to separate the bar stuff code-wise into two portions -- the
  tag bar with tags and layout info, and the title/status bar, but
  things will stay as they are from a user perspective, it's just some
  code cleanup which allows replacing the tagbar and/or title/status bar
  with something else (or avoiding to compile it in)
Nice idea. I ever thought dwm's status bar is to deep in the code.

  There might be possible pango/cairo implementations of this stuff, I
  plan to have a font API interface, something like libsfont which is
  used by dwm and dmenu to start with, and which depends on either Xlib
  or some more fancy sucking stuff optionally.
I would prefer plain xlib, but otherwise, as you said, it really sucks
for fonthandling. So, yea, it's ok for me :)

  2) I need to investigate into the reparent stuff first, I really
  dislike going the reparent route, because each parent window consumes
  much more X resource memory (basically twice the buffer sizes as we
  have already if you use a reparenting WM -- this makes everything
  slower). I really think bug the authors of the broken apps to fix
  their apps that they do not assume a reparenting WM.

  So the action here is: let's make a list of all apps which are known
  to be broken and behaving strange with dwm first, that I can
  investigate.

  - Mathematica (Version?)
  - ... please provide input
What about an compile time switch which turns reparenting on and off
globally? I don't see any sense to differ between broken and not
broken apps clientwise. This would add to much complexity. And I
believe someone who uses Mathematica should not care about some KB of
stuctures. Otherwise on an embedded device where one need every free
kb, nobody would use these kinds of apps.

  3) I agree multihead has got some preference, I like the approach to
  assign certain tags to specific screens.
You already tried this between 4.7 and 4.8. That was the time I
detached my branch, because there was just no sane way to implement
it. I prefere the approach of dwm-gtx, because it's very simple and
does not fuck up the tagging concept.

  Kind regards,

 Anselm




-- 
http://gnuffy.chaotika.org - Real Community Distro



Re: [dwm] dwm's future

2009-04-27 Thread Anselm R Garbe
2009/4/27 Preben Randhol rand...@pvv.org:
 On Sun, 26 Apr 2009 11:11:03 +0100
 Anselm R Garbe garb...@gmail.com wrote:

 So there are only three ways:

 - stick with what we got (don't care if some langs look ugly)
 - use pango and/or cairo or something like that
 - invest some effort into a new font rendering lib (seems to be a hard
 job, esp. if one asks for proper font support which can't be done by
 us)

 What about xft? Wasn't there a patch for 4.7 (can't find it anymore).
 I don't know much about the font systems.

One option, though quite half hearted in my opinion.

Kind regards,
--Anselm



Re: [dwm] dwm's future

2009-04-27 Thread Preben Randhol
On Mon, 27 Apr 2009 11:10:47 +0100
Anselm R Garbe garb...@gmail.com wrote:

 2009/4/27 Preben Randhol rand...@pvv.org:

  What about xft? Wasn't there a patch for 4.7 (can't find it
  anymore). I don't know much about the font systems.
 
 One option, though quite half hearted in my opinion.

I found on the net that there is an pango patch also. Couldn't one just
have pango support as an official supported patch? Then it would be easy
to patch the dwm if one wants pango support in dwm and dmenu. I mean
pertag, bstack etc... are patches I rather would see incorporated into
dwm than pango, but I don't mind that they are not.

Keep up the excellent work!



Re: [dwm] dwm's future

2009-04-27 Thread Preben Randhol
On Sun, 26 Apr 2009 11:11:03 +0100
Anselm R Garbe garb...@gmail.com wrote:

 So there are only three ways:
 
 - stick with what we got (don't care if some langs look ugly)
 - use pango and/or cairo or something like that
 - invest some effort into a new font rendering lib (seems to be a hard
 job, esp. if one asks for proper font support which can't be done by
 us)

What about xft? Wasn't there a patch for 4.7 (can't find it anymore).
I don't know much about the font systems.

Preben



Re: [dwm] dwm's future

2009-04-27 Thread Preben Randhol
On Sun, 26 Apr 2009 10:49:55 -0500
Kurt H Maier karmaf...@gmail.com wrote:

 I keep hoping to
 see dwm go into a 'steady state' where the only patches are to
 maintain compatibility with latest x.org, etc., but instead every time
 it seems 'done' we shoot forward into crazy-ass ideas like requiring
 an extra 0.5 MB of libraries for a 2k SLOC program, just so people's
 firefox titles look better.

well, what is the purpose of a stausbar? It is a minority of the
worlds population that adheres to 7-bit ASCII. 

 Instead of porting everything to pango, I suggest leaving it alone,
 and the affected users can turn the built-in bar off and use another
 status bar program.

or that one just patch dwm for pango like one need to do for all other
useful patches. As I can see from a patch I got the code won't change
more than a few lines... 



Re: [dwm] dwm's future

2009-04-27 Thread Martin Oppegaard
On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 11:47:19AM +0200, Preben Randhol wrote:
 Personally I would like to have one dwm as is, and one gdwm (or some
 better name) with more bells and whistles and dependencies.

http://wmii.suckless.org/

Or is Wmii dead in the water?



Re: [dwm] dwm's future

2009-04-27 Thread Randy Morris
On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 12:05:11PM +0200, Preben Randhol wrote:
 What about xft? Wasn't there a patch for 4.7 (can't find it anymore).
 I don't know much about the font systems.
I've been using this patch for quite some time with no issues. If anyone
wants to see the implementation for reference, it lives here:
http://rootshell.be/~polachok/code/dwm-4.7-xft.diff



Re: [dwm] dwm's future

2009-04-27 Thread Matthias Kirschner
* David E. Thiel l...@redundancy.redundancy.org [2009-04-25 13:27:51 -0701]:

 On Sat, Apr 25, 2009 at 08:29:12PM +0200, Dusan wrote:
  Please keep bar, that's why dwm is great out of the box.
 
 Agreed. A window manager should be usable on its own, and have sensible
 defaults. Ability to customize is great, but it shouldn't be depended
 upon to make for a decent user experience.

+ 1 to keep the bar.

Best wishes,
Matthias



Re: [dwm] dwm's future

2009-04-27 Thread Valentin
On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 10:35:20AM +0100, Anselm R Garbe wrote:
 - Mathematica (Version?)

7 breaks on the help window - it doesn't get keyboard focus, mouse focus
still works. First the layout gets applied to it, then the other windows
move back below it.
I'm pretty sure that 6 did not have this behaviour, but I can't check
because I don't have the install CD anymore.
The only other app I can remember at the moment would be netbeans, but
that worked with the environment variable trick that I can't remember
anymore ;)



Re: [dwm] dwm's future

2009-04-27 Thread pancake

I want to feed the mailing with some more words about this topic...

I don't really care about the font rendering, because I just use title bar
to see what's going on the window (like for large builds or browser's
page titles,  ..) And I dont really read contents in chineese or russian,
so i'm happy with ascii. But I understant that there's people wanting
to use truetype fonts for fixing those issues.

If we just implement this stuff into separated .c or .h files, so everybody
can still use the basic x11 stuff, or just use cairo/pango or..maybe someone
would like to use it on w32 or osx, so, these guys will just have to 
implement

this little backend, and keep all the dwm internals clean and portable for
all the systems and backends (also for ncurses?). The problem here is
that actually all the keybinding stuff depends on X, and there are other
stuff that is pretty linked to X11, and if we want to drop this hard X11
binding we should try to split it up into a set of callbacks.

I really like to click on the statusbar, so the code that it is 
currently there

is more thatn enought to me.

As somebody told in another other mail maybe we should focus on the
Xinerama problem, which is probably an endless issue, or maybe we
should rewrite X into a new protocol and set of libs in a more minimalistic
way and if someone wants to run an Xbased app just use Xnest/Xephyr or
just provide a way to run Xbased windows inside the new 'graphical server'.

THis last point is probably the way to go, but obviously is a long time 
project

but i just wanted to throw few ideas more.

About the buggy apps, well.. i really dont have any problem with any 
application,
and maybe this is because i mostly use few graphical applications, and 
all the
ones I use are free software which gives me the possibility to fix any 
issue or

report it. (blame on privative solutions) (mathematica, ...)

For me the solution for using those broken apps is just to run a fullscreen
nested X server in a tag and run the application inside with no window 
manager

or with another one.

I want to keep dwm simple, i think that all the dependencies should be 
optional

and minimal, so we should probably think on the basic primitives to work on
X and wrap them as function pointers in a single structure, and allowing 
compile-

time-plugins to overwrite those pointers with cairo, w32 api or so.

And please, keep the statusbar and the clickable stuff functional or at 
least

optional for those who dont want to use it, but maybe we can think in a more
extensible design for it, but exporting/importing window manager stuff 
between

processes is something stupid if you just need few things and they can be
managed from inside the window manager, for me having this feature inside
keeps the things easier.

--pancake

Anselm R Garbe wrote:

Thanks for all the valueable input so far in this thread.

I think here are the action points:

1) I plan to separate the bar stuff code-wise into two portions -- the
tag bar with tags and layout info, and the title/status bar, but
things will stay as they are from a user perspective, it's just some
code cleanup which allows replacing the tagbar and/or title/status bar
with something else (or avoiding to compile it in)

There might be possible pango/cairo implementations of this stuff, I
plan to have a font API interface, something like libsfont which is
used by dwm and dmenu to start with, and which depends on either Xlib
or some more fancy sucking stuff optionally.

2) I need to investigate into the reparent stuff first, I really
dislike going the reparent route, because each parent window consumes
much more X resource memory (basically twice the buffer sizes as we
have already if you use a reparenting WM -- this makes everything
slower). I really think bug the authors of the broken apps to fix
their apps that they do not assume a reparenting WM.

So the action here is: let's make a list of all apps which are known
to be broken and behaving strange with dwm first, that I can
investigate.

- Mathematica (Version?)
- ... please provide input

3) I agree multihead has got some preference, I like the approach to
assign certain tags to specific screens.

Kind regards,
Anselm

  




Re: [dwm] dwm's future

2009-04-27 Thread Kurt H Maier
On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 5:45 AM, Preben Ran
 well, what is the purpose of a stausbar? It is a minority of the
 worlds population that adheres to 7-bit ASCII.

Which just makes it more mysterious that nobody has fixed xlib font rendering.

 or that one just patch dwm for pango like one need to do for all other
 useful patches. As I can see from a patch I got the code won't change
 more than a few lines...

I hadn't thought of this, but I strongly support a patch like bstack
or pertag.  That way we can leave the core of dwm alone and people who
require hacks and workarounds to display their language can apply them
at compile-time.

# Kurt H Maier



Re: [dwm] dwm's future

2009-04-27 Thread Preben Randhol
On Mon, 27 Apr 2009 13:51:24 +0200
Martin Oppegaard mar...@deathaven.com wrote:

 On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 11:47:19AM +0200, Preben Randhol wrote:
  Personally I would like to have one dwm as is, and one gdwm (or some
  better name) with more bells and whistles and dependencies.
 
 http://wmii.suckless.org/
 
 Or is Wmii dead in the water?
 

Well actually I wan't thinking of wmii as it behaves differently from
dwm. 



Re: [dwm] dwm's future

2009-04-27 Thread Matthias-Christian Ott
On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 10:35:20AM +0100, Anselm R Garbe wrote:
 Thanks for all the valueable input so far in this thread.
 
 I think here are the action points:
 
 1) I plan to separate the bar stuff code-wise into two portions -- the
 tag bar with tags and layout info, and the title/status bar, but
 things will stay as they are from a user perspective, it's just some
 code cleanup which allows replacing the tagbar and/or title/status bar
 with something else (or avoiding to compile it in)
 
 There might be possible pango/cairo implementations of this stuff, I
 plan to have a font API interface, something like libsfont which is
 used by dwm and dmenu to start with, and which depends on either Xlib
 or some more fancy sucking stuff optionally.
 
 2) I need to investigate into the reparent stuff first, I really
 dislike going the reparent route, because each parent window consumes
 much more X resource memory (basically twice the buffer sizes as we
 have already if you use a reparenting WM -- this makes everything
 slower). I really think bug the authors of the broken apps to fix
 their apps that they do not assume a reparenting WM.
 
 So the action here is: let's make a list of all apps which are known
 to be broken and behaving strange with dwm first, that I can
 investigate.
 
 - Mathematica (Version?)
 - ... please provide input

That's mainly proprietary software. dwm shouldn't support that kind of
software, but instead expose their bare brokenness to the user. Maybe users
will realise then that proprietary software is not worth using, because you
can't even fix trivial bugs like this.
 
 3) I agree multihead has got some preference, I like the approach to
 assign certain tags to specific screens.

Could you please briefly explain why you are opposed to XRandR. It seems
pretty common and usable.
 
 Kind regards,
 Anselm

Regards,
Matthias-Christian



Re: [dwm] dwm's future

2009-04-27 Thread Valentin
On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 08:47:33PM +0200, Matthias-Christian Ott wrote:
 On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 10:35:20AM +0100, Anselm R Garbe wrote:
 
 That's mainly proprietary software. dwm shouldn't support that kind of
 software, but instead expose their bare brokenness to the user. Maybe users
 will realise then that proprietary software is not worth using, because you
 can't even fix trivial bugs like this.

Except some of us don't have a choice and have to use this for their
work or at uni...
 
 Regards,
 Matthias-Christian

Regards,
Valentin



Re: [dwm] dwm's future

2009-04-27 Thread Kurt H Maier
On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 1:47 PM, Matthias-Christian Ott o...@mirix.org wrote:
 Could you please briefly explain why you are opposed to XRandR. It seems
 pretty common and usable.


Not only that, xinerama is going to be entirely supplanted by xrandr.
Developing for xinerama is a dead end.

On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 1:50 PM, Valentin a...@0au.de wrote:
 Except some of us don't have a choice and have to use this for their
 work or at uni...

Perfect candidate for a different window manager, or at least a
different window manager in a nested X display.

$subject is broken, therefore we must bloat up dwm to work around it
is bad reasoning, even if $subject is x11 font rendering or some
expensive app my school is forcing on me

# Kurt H Maier



Re: [dwm] dwm's future

2009-04-27 Thread Matthias-Christian Ott
On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 08:50:49PM +0200, Valentin wrote:
 On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 08:47:33PM +0200, Matthias-Christian Ott wrote:
  On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 10:35:20AM +0100, Anselm R Garbe wrote:
  
  That's mainly proprietary software. dwm shouldn't support that kind of
  software, but instead expose their bare brokenness to the user. Maybe users
  will realise then that proprietary software is not worth using, because you
  can't even fix trivial bugs like this.
 
 Except some of us don't have a choice and have to use this for their
 work or at uni...

Well, what about GNU Octave? Mathematica seems to have become as much a
disease as Fortran was in last decades.
  
  Regards,
  Matthias-Christian
 
 Regards,
 Valentin

Regards,
Matthias-Christian



Re: [dwm] dwm's future

2009-04-27 Thread Amit Uttamchandani
  Except some of us don't have a choice and have to use this for their
  work or at uni...
 
 Well, what about GNU Octave? Mathematica seems to have become as much a
 disease as Fortran was in last decades.


I once tried to explain to my professor if I could use Octave instead
of Matlab but he wouldn't even hear of it...I even tried explaining
that is compatible, etc., etc. but no luck...



Re: [dwm] dwm's future

2009-04-27 Thread Antoni Grzymala
Kurt H Maier dixit (2009-04-27, 13:54):

 $subject is broken, therefore we must bloat up dwm to work around it
 is bad reasoning, even if $subject is x11 font rendering or some
 expensive app my school is forcing on me

The only difference is that you *have* to use X11 font rendering while
you do not necessarily have to run above mentioned apps directly in dwm
(yes, nested X server with or without a wm seems like a cool solution).

So the above is a fallacy. And no, it's not only about displaying weird
firefox window titles. There's also the status bar, tag names and such.
Displaying unicode (which solution to settle on is another discussion)
is not bloating but is realizing the basic fact that 7bit ASCII is too
limited for a worldwide dwm audience.

Best,

-- 
[a]


pgp0x1RweiKfd.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Re: [dwm] dwm's future

2009-04-27 Thread Matthias-Christian Ott
On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 12:05:57PM -0700, Amit Uttamchandani wrote:
   Except some of us don't have a choice and have to use this for their
   work or at uni...
  
  Well, what about GNU Octave? Mathematica seems to have become as much a
  disease as Fortran was in last decades.
 
 
 I once tried to explain to my professor if I could use Octave instead
 of Matlab but he wouldn't even hear of it...I even tried explaining
 that is compatible, etc., etc. but no luck...
 
Most teachers are morons. I tried to convince some of mine to switch to Free
Software or accept non-Microsoft formats, such as PDF or PostScript, but
they either refused to listen or thought Free Software is evil and accused
me of using pirated software, etc. (of course I listed all four freedoms
they have with Free Software and tried explain to them what Free Software
licenses are about).

The problem with them seems to be that they have been an educational authority
for so long that they think they know everything better and don't have to
listen. When I was supposed to hand in yet another Microsoft Word or Excel file
(that's quite common), I tried to explain that to one of them, but She said:
That's bad luck, search for someone who let's you use his computer! and
walked away.

Well, I could go on. However, morons don't justify the use or the introduction
of fixes for this software.

Regards,
Matthias-Christian



Re: [dwm] dwm's future

2009-04-27 Thread Jeremy Jay

Don't be a bigot, it just makes you look like a moron too. Free Software
is about choice, forcing people to use an app just because you use it is
pretty stupid and annoying and just gives people a negative association
with it. Let people make their own choices. Last I checked it was very
easy to save as .xls or .doc, and its much less hassle for those less
tech literate.

Professors choose to use the software they want because they're
comfortable with it, not to spite you.

Jeremy




On Mon 27 Apr 2009 - 09:38PM, Matthias-Christian Ott wrote:
 On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 12:05:57PM -0700, Amit Uttamchandani wrote:
Except some of us don't have a choice and have to use this for their
work or at uni...
   
   Well, what about GNU Octave? Mathematica seems to have become as much a
   disease as Fortran was in last decades.
  
  
  I once tried to explain to my professor if I could use Octave instead
  of Matlab but he wouldn't even hear of it...I even tried explaining
  that is compatible, etc., etc. but no luck...
  
 Most teachers are morons. I tried to convince some of mine to switch to Free
 Software or accept non-Microsoft formats, such as PDF or PostScript, but
 they either refused to listen or thought Free Software is evil and accused
 me of using pirated software, etc. (of course I listed all four freedoms
 they have with Free Software and tried explain to them what Free Software
 licenses are about).
 
 The problem with them seems to be that they have been an educational authority
 for so long that they think they know everything better and don't have to
 listen. When I was supposed to hand in yet another Microsoft Word or Excel 
 file
 (that's quite common), I tried to explain that to one of them, but She said:
 That's bad luck, search for someone who let's you use his computer! and
 walked away.
 
 Well, I could go on. However, morons don't justify the use or the introduction
 of fixes for this software.
 
 Regards,
 Matthias-Christian
 



Re: [dwm] dwm's future

2009-04-27 Thread markus schnalke
[ pretty off topic ]


Three days off-line and now ... *eek* ... 75 new messages.

It was interesting to read all those opinions and comments. I think it
was even fun, because I'm not directly affected ... not anymore. I
already found what I was looking for, more than a year ago. dwm then
was already good enough (with some personal modifications).

Nonetheless, reading this list is great inspiration and motivation for
staying on the suckless track.



Now to say some words about the actual topic:

Important is IMO to define a clear goal and to follow a straight path
to this goal. This is not only for the competition with other WMs but
also for keeping the software clear.

My personal opinion is that dwm should try to stay small and accept to
lose users to the ``fancy'' tiling WMs if this increases the internal
clarity and integrity of dwm and the path of its development.

But anyway, I don't care much anymore as I stopped with dwm 3.4. So,
you may not care about my opinion -- I don't mind.


Further more, I want to say, that there are more important things to
focus on, instead of trying to improve (or dis-improve) dwm. `st' is
the best example, of course.



Wish you all a good sleep (if you're from Europe) or a good morning
or a nice evening (if you're from somewhere else).


meillo


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


Re: [dwm] dwm's future

2009-04-27 Thread pancake
When I was in the university I had to use matlab. Proffessors told me  
that I can use the windows boxes in place, but for personal reasons  
(time and so) I proposed them to use the telnet interface and use it  
remotely.


It happened that their license didn't allowed them to export the  
application via network. Which is IMHO a very stupid and privative  
limitation.


At this point I decided to install octave on a remote netbsd box, add  
some fixes to the package and I develop all the tasks finding  
equivalences between the sintaxes.


The last page of my work was an explanation of the reasons for using  
it. I just explain that I don't support software that limits my  
freedom and possibilities, and I also explain how incorrect is to  
teech people with privative tools.


They accept my project but things didn't changed.

On Apr 27, 2009, at 9:05 PM, Amit Uttamchandani atu13...@csun.edu  
wrote:



Except some of us don't have a choice and have to use this for their
work or at uni...


Well, what about GNU Octave? Mathematica seems to have become as  
much a

disease as Fortran was in last decades.



I once tried to explain to my professor if I could use Octave instead
of Matlab but he wouldn't even hear of it...I even tried explaining
that is compatible, etc., etc. but no luck...





Re: [dwm] dwm's future

2009-04-27 Thread Martin Oppegaard
On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 06:57:13PM +0200, Preben Randhol wrote:
 On Mon, 27 Apr 2009 13:51:24 +0200
 Martin Oppegaard mar...@deathaven.com wrote:
 
  On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 11:47:19AM +0200, Preben Randhol wrote:
   Personally I would like to have one dwm as is, and one gdwm (or some
   better name) with more bells and whistles and dependencies.
  
  http://wmii.suckless.org/
  
  Or is Wmii dead in the water?
  
 
 Well actually I wan't thinking of wmii as it behaves differently from
 dwm. 
 
I can't even remember how Wmii feels like anymore, after changing to Dwm
less than a year ago.



Re: [dwm] dwm's future

2009-04-27 Thread Matthias-Christian Ott
On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 04:05:36PM -0400, Jeremy Jay wrote:
 
 Don't be a bigot, it just makes you look like a moron too. Free Software

Well, you are a moron if you get bad marks, because you didn't hand in your
papers, because you refuse to use proprietary software: You don't change
anything and just hurt yourself.

I always found someone to typeset my texts or just printed them out. It
worked in the majority of cases.

 is about choice, forcing people to use an app just because you use it is

No, not because I use it, just because it's Free Software. That's the fact
that matters.

 pretty stupid and annoying and just gives people a negative association
 with it. Let people make their own choices. Last I checked it was very

They don't let their students choose either.

 easy to save as .xls or .doc, and its much less hassle for those less
 tech literate.

Still you are using pragmatic arguments to invalidate my fundamental
arguments. We'll never come to an agreement then.

It's not about the ease of use, it's about the nature of the software
itself. I would even use Free Software if it's harder to use and less
powerful. In fact I do this on daily basis.

I partially agree that this is hard to explain these kind of persons (not
because they are to stupid or not skilled enough to understand this, but
because they don't want to listen or understand it).
 
 Professors choose to use the software they want because they're
 comfortable with it, not to spite you.

But its their duty to provide equal access and opportunity to their
students. If they require their students to use proprietary software,
don't fullfil that duty, despite the fact that proprietary software is a
contradiction to education.

Well, this discussion will lead is just more E-Mail traffic and wasted time,
so I suggest to do everyone a favour and stop here. All relevant arguments
have been mentioned and further discussion won't yield a result.
 
 Jeremy

Regards,
Matthias-Christian

 On Mon 27 Apr 2009 - 09:38PM, Matthias-Christian Ott wrote:
  On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 12:05:57PM -0700, Amit Uttamchandani wrote:
 Except some of us don't have a choice and have to use this for their
 work or at uni...

Well, what about GNU Octave? Mathematica seems to have become as much a
disease as Fortran was in last decades.
   
   
   I once tried to explain to my professor if I could use Octave instead
   of Matlab but he wouldn't even hear of it...I even tried explaining
   that is compatible, etc., etc. but no luck...
   
  Most teachers are morons. I tried to convince some of mine to switch to Free
  Software or accept non-Microsoft formats, such as PDF or PostScript, but
  they either refused to listen or thought Free Software is evil and accused
  me of using pirated software, etc. (of course I listed all four freedoms
  they have with Free Software and tried explain to them what Free Software
  licenses are about).
  
  The problem with them seems to be that they have been an educational 
  authority
  for so long that they think they know everything better and don't have to
  listen. When I was supposed to hand in yet another Microsoft Word or Excel 
  file
  (that's quite common), I tried to explain that to one of them, but She said:
  That's bad luck, search for someone who let's you use his computer! and
  walked away.
  
  Well, I could go on. However, morons don't justify the use or the 
  introduction
  of fixes for this software.
  
  Regards,
  Matthias-Christian
  
 



Re: [dwm] dwm's future

2009-04-27 Thread Matthias-Christian Ott
On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 10:58:31PM +0200, pancake wrote:
 When I was in the university I had to use matlab. Proffessors told me  
 that I can use the windows boxes in place, but for personal reasons  
 (time and so) I proposed them to use the telnet interface and use it  
 remotely.

 It happened that their license didn't allowed them to export the  
 application via network. Which is IMHO a very stupid and privative  
 limitation.

 At this point I decided to install octave on a remote netbsd box, add  
 some fixes to the package and I develop all the tasks finding  
 equivalences between the sintaxes.

 The last page of my work was an explanation of the reasons for using it. 
 I just explain that I don't support software that limits my freedom and 
 possibilities, and I also explain how incorrect is to teech people with 
 privative tools.

 They accept my project but things didn't changed.

At least you didn't loose your dignity, carried out your principles and
proofed that Free Software is as powerful as an expensive proprietary software.

Regards,
Matthias-Christian

 On Apr 27, 2009, at 9:05 PM, Amit Uttamchandani atu13...@csun.edu  
 wrote:

 Except some of us don't have a choice and have to use this for their
 work or at uni...

 Well, what about GNU Octave? Mathematica seems to have become as  
 much a
 disease as Fortran was in last decades.


 I once tried to explain to my professor if I could use Octave instead
 of Matlab but he wouldn't even hear of it...I even tried explaining
 that is compatible, etc., etc. but no luck...





Re: [dwm] dwm's future

2009-04-27 Thread David Tweed
I thought you mentioned stopping in the email you sent before this
one? (Or was that only applicble to other people?)

On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 10:30 PM, Matthias-Christian Ott o...@mirix.org wrote:
 On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 10:58:31PM +0200, pancake wrote:
 When I was in the university I had to use matlab. Proffessors told me
 that I can use the windows boxes in place, but for personal reasons
 (time and so) I proposed them to use the telnet interface and use it
 remotely.

 It happened that their license didn't allowed them to export the
 application via network. Which is IMHO a very stupid and privative
 limitation.

 At this point I decided to install octave on a remote netbsd box, add
 some fixes to the package and I develop all the tasks finding
 equivalences between the sintaxes.

 The last page of my work was an explanation of the reasons for using it.
 I just explain that I don't support software that limits my freedom and
 possibilities, and I also explain how incorrect is to teech people with
 privative tools.

 They accept my project but things didn't changed.

 At least you didn't loose your dignity, carried out your principles and
 proofed that Free Software is as powerful as an expensive proprietary 
 software.

 Regards,
 Matthias-Christian

 On Apr 27, 2009, at 9:05 PM, Amit Uttamchandani atu13...@csun.edu
 wrote:

 Except some of us don't have a choice and have to use this for their
 work or at uni...

 Well, what about GNU Octave? Mathematica seems to have become as
 much a
 disease as Fortran was in last decades.


 I once tried to explain to my professor if I could use Octave instead
 of Matlab but he wouldn't even hear of it...I even tried explaining
 that is compatible, etc., etc. but no luck...







-- 
cheers, dave tweed__
computer vision reasearcher: david.tw...@gmail.com
while having code so boring anyone can maintain it, use Python. --
attempted insult seen on slashdot



Re: [dwm] dwm's future

2009-04-27 Thread yy
2009/4/27 Matthias-Christian Ott o...@mirix.org:
 At least you didn't loose your dignity, carried out your principles and
 proofed that Free Software is as powerful as an expensive proprietary 
 software.


But it is not always possible. I can give you a (quite long) list of
software that doesn't have a free equivalent. Between other things, my
work involves a lot of mechanical testing, and even if developing your
own easy solution would be straightforward you have to use the
nonsense 1gb of ram proprietary (and usually windows) application
because it is the industry standard.
The argument about free software is a non-end disucssion. The matter
is: there are broken applications, do we want to use dwm to manage
their windows? I would prefer keeping it as suckless as possible, as
somebody else suggested. dwm makes a great job managing windows, it is
not its job to fix font handling or work around broken applications.
However, I liked the idea of a suckless font library, but it will
have to suck a lot (i.e. include pango) to work perfectly with every
language on earth.


-- 
- yiyus || JGL .



Re: [dwm] dwm's future

2009-04-27 Thread Preben Randhol
On Mon, 27 Apr 2009 22:54:35 +0200
markus schnalke mei...@marmaro.de wrote:

 Important is IMO to define a clear goal and to follow a straight path
 to this goal. This is not only for the competition with other WMs but
 also for keeping the software clear.

Yes, I wanted at one point to try out xmonad, but when that entailed
installing 64Mb worth of packages (ubuntu) I canceled the installed.

One improvement I just remembered (unless I really have missed an
option) would be to add invisible typing to dmenu. Useful if you want
to type a password.



Re: [dwm] dwm's future

2009-04-27 Thread Jimmy Tang
On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 08:47:33PM +0200, Matthias-Christian Ott wrote:
 That's mainly proprietary software. dwm shouldn't support that kind of
 software, but instead expose their bare brokenness to the user. Maybe users
 will realise then that proprietary software is not worth using, because you
 can't even fix trivial bugs like this.
  

i wouldn't say no to supporting such software tbh, there are some
commercial/propietry software where there is just has no opensource
equivalent too that would give the same amount of productivity. it
should be at least considered. some people have no choice but to use
such programs.


jimmy

-- 
Sent from my Nokia mobile phone


pgpCEgsd794Q8.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Re: [dwm] dwm's future

2009-04-27 Thread Thomas Lavergne
On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 04:05:36PM -0400, Jeremy Jay wrote:
 
 Don't be a bigot, it just makes you look like a moron too. Free Software
 is about choice, forcing people to use an app just because you use it is
 pretty stupid and annoying and just gives people a negative association
 with it. Let people make their own choices. Last I checked it was very
 easy to save as .xls or .doc, and its much less hassle for those less
 tech literate.

I agree with you on almost all. You don't have to make choice for
others. But there is also the concept of mid-path, finding the solution
who hasle the less both people.
Most of the time you can easily make of doc or xls even if you have to
export to a txt or csv and do a little formatinf but this is not always
the case.

There is no reason to refuse a pdf and ask for doc, in particular in
academic world if you have mathematical contents in. I've tryed more
than one time to use the Word and OpenOffice equation editor and it take
very long time to write even a small formula, when it's almost to cost
to write it in tex and compile to pdf.
In this case it's almost impossible to convert to doc and pdf is enough
used to be an acceptable format for almost anyone.

But I've seen people refusing it in such case and ask or doc. In this
case I send a screen capture of the formula but I will never take a long
time to make a doc for such 'bigot'.

This is a special case but it's not the only one. I'm not fanboy of free
softwares, I use the best soft for my needs I can find and try to make
all I can to adapt to other people, but I think there is some limits
people have to understand and accept to also make a little effort.


-- 
Thomas LavergneEntia non sunt multiplicanda praeter
 necessitatem. (Guillaume d'Ockham)
thomas.laver...@reveurs.orghttp://oniros.org



Re: [dwm] dwm's future

2009-04-27 Thread Uriel
On Sun, Apr 26, 2009 at 1:57 PM, Haomin Wen wen1...@gmail.com wrote:
 Hello,

 I am sorry but I really hope dwm can switch to using pango.

 X fonts are broken and not well supported, at least in Ubuntu. I have six
 Chinese fonts shown in xlsfonts, but only two of them can be displayed.

Then file a bug with the Ubuntu people, why should dwm be forced to
depend on a huge mountain of crud just because people building
distributions can't even provide working fonts?

Peace

uriel



Re: [dwm] dwm's future

2009-04-27 Thread Uriel
On Sun, Apr 26, 2009 at 5:43 PM, Kurt H Maier karmaf...@gmail.com wrote:
 On Sun, Apr 26, 2009 at 10:01 AM, Mate Nagy mn...@port70.net wrote:
 I strongly believe that the major problem of dwm currently is
 not font handling (8bit ascii bitmap fonts are perfectly fine thank
 you);

 Agree 100%.  Folks, if you want unicode support, develop a sane,
 working implementation.

Exactly.

 I've never seen one that matches both sane and working.

http://doc.cat-v.org/plan_9/4th_edition/papers/utf

There you go ;)

But I agree with your point in the X11 context (although see http://plan9.us)

uriel


 1. Complete lack of proper xrandr and multi monitor support - this is
 solved in multiple tiling wms, there's no reason other than lack of
 interest or obscure ideology not to do this.

 Here's a patch to make DWM work fine on a two-monitor side-by-side setup:

 --- dwm.c~      2009-02-08 06:10:49.0 -0600
 +++ dwm.c       2009-02-25 18:54:17.0 -0600
 @@ -1415,7 +1415,7 @@
        c = nexttiled(clients);
        mw = mfact * ww;
        adjustborder(c, n == 1 ? 0 : borderpx);
 -       resize(c, wx, wy, (n == 1 ? ww : mw) - 2 * c-bw, wh - 2 * c-bw,
 resizehints);
 +       resize(c, wx, wy, mw - 2 * c-bw, wh - 2 * c-bw, resizehints);

        if(--n == 0)
                return;


 ...that's from dwm 5.4.1, using xrandr --output DVI-0 --right-of
 DVI-1.  Problem solved.

 # Kurt H Maier





Re: [dwm] dwm's future

2009-04-26 Thread Anselm R Garbe
Hi,

2009/4/26 Szabolcs Nagy nszabo...@gmail.com:
 On 4/26/09, Christian Garbs mi...@cgarbs.de wrote:
 On Sat, Apr 25, 2009 at 11:06:08PM +0100, Szabolcs Nagy wrote:
 On 4/25/09, Christian Garbs mi...@cgarbs.de wrote:
  work, even without pango or cairo.  I have German umlauts as well as
  Japanese characters (eg. web page titles from Firefox).

 try greek or cyrillic
 i had trouble with those when fonts were loaded with XCreateFontSet

 Looks ok to me:
 https://www.cgarbs.de/tmp/dwm-ru.png

 no, that is ugly bold font, same problem with greek

 Wrong font here?
 https://www.cgarbs.de/tmp/dwm-ar.png

 most likely your font does not cover arabic fonts (iso8859-6) in the given 
 size

 Korean does look broken, though:
 https://www.cgarbs.de/tmp/dwm-ko.png

 yes, i get the same result using fixed-14

With the font spec:

-*-*-medium-*-*-*-14-*-*-*-*-*-*-*

I'm able to get proper results including Japanese, Chinese, Korean,
Greek, Russian, Hebrew, and Thai with that. Though not all of them are
monospaced (Gree and Russian for instance).

Arabic doesn't work for me if I'm not increasing the size to 17 or
above which is huge... and that's hard to be monospaced anyways.

I had a look into pango, well and I agree having such a dependency is
not very nice, pango is quite complex for what we need, cairo is bad
either for what we require. These achieve pseudo-monospace'ing through
scaling, which ends up in more or less equally bad results as using
plain X fonts, though perhaps looking a little bit smoother because
one doesn't need to declare large fonts.

So there are only three ways:

- stick with what we got (don't care if some langs look ugly)
- use pango and/or cairo or something like that
- invest some effort into a new font rendering lib (seems to be a hard
job, esp. if one asks for proper font support which can't be done by
us)

So I think, we stick to what we got after all. The bar stays at it is.

I agree there are more interesting problems.

Kind regards,
--Anselm



Re: [dwm] dwm's future

2009-04-26 Thread Anselm R Garbe
2009/4/26 Szabolcs Nagy nszabo...@gmail.com:
 On 4/25/09, Anselm R Garbe garb...@gmail.com wrote:
 1. One idea is getting rid of the dwm bar altogether and to print the
 dwm state to stdout when it changes, however after thinking carefully
 about it I conclude that having the bar build-in is definately a
 stayer. It's so much simpler than the hassle with an external bar, not
 worth it. So very unlikely.

 if external bar is a hassle then inter-process communication is broken
 in our systems

 if built-in bar is a hassle then x is broken (unable to display text)

Well, an external bar is a hassle because it would increase the
overall complexity if it's assumed to be implemented properly (or in a
fashion like what we got). One has to specify handling where the bar
appears, which size, and all kinds of interface handling between the
bar and dwm.

 2. Another idea is to switch to another dependency for the rendering
 bit which could possibly be cairo. After all I'm nearly giving up the
 hope that X font handling will ever be fixed and work properly,

 $ du -h /usr/lib/libcairo.a
 608K    /usr/lib/libcairo.a

 pango seems to be slightly smaller, but i don't know what these libs
 do exactly..

They do fairly more than what we need for a single bar. So let's stick
to what we got.

 imo it's not suckless, but it can be a temporary solution until x is fixed

Knowing who drives the X development I gave up any hope that X will
ever be fixed, more the contrary.

I think the only solution is dws, which needs more assistance and
which can be based on legacy crap. Important is that dws provides
decent interfaces and possibly a legacy X interface on top of it. I
think that's the long term plan we should achieve. But it'll take a
long time with the resources we got atm (I hoped GSoC would sponsor us
somehow to get started into that direction).

 3. A third idea for legacy support is, that I tend to add a
 compile-time option or a specific Rule extension that let's you set to
 reparent all clients or certain clients which are broken

 rule extension won't work as these applications tend not to set
 class,instance,name properly

Yea that's a pity and that makes the rules more questionable, perhaps
I should make them simpler or changing the mechanism eg having a
catch next map function instead which applies a certain rule to the
next window which is mapped.

Kind regards,
--Anselm



Re: [dwm] dwm's future

2009-04-26 Thread Haomin Wen
Oh, sorry. There is a typo. Three but not two Chinese fonts can be
displayed. Two of them are too large, and the third one is not bitmap font.

On Sun, Apr 26, 2009 at 7:57 PM, Haomin Wen wen1...@gmail.com wrote:

 Hello,

 I am sorry but I really hope dwm can switch to using pango.

 X fonts are broken and not well supported, at least in Ubuntu. I have six
 Chinese fonts shown in xlsfonts, but only two of them can be displayed. Two
 of them only support 16 pixel and 24 pixel size. They are too large, given
 that my dpi is as low as 75. The other font is arphic ukai, but it is not
 bitmap font, and therefore broken. WenQuanYi Bitmap Song is a nice bitmap
 font and covers many encodings, but I can use it for no obvious reason.

 It seems to me that pango's powerfulness comes with almost no cost.

 For programmers, there is little difference, or at least it generally will
 not increase SLOC.

 For users, they just need to set the font to something like Sans-10 or
 Monosapce-10. It is much simpler than setting X fonts. Besides, fontconfig
 is powerful. User can set spacing, priority, antialias, hinting, and a lot
 more properties of fonts, which is necessary for certain fonts.

 Of course pango is not as comman as xlib, and it even depends on Cairo, but
 it works.

 Sincerely,

 Haomin Wen

 On Sun, Apr 26, 2009 at 6:38 PM, Anselm R Garbe garb...@gmail.com wrote:

 2009/4/26 Szabolcs Nagy nszabo...@gmail.com:
  On 4/25/09, Anselm R Garbe garb...@gmail.com wrote:
  1. One idea is getting rid of the dwm bar altogether and to print the
  dwm state to stdout when it changes, however after thinking carefully
  about it I conclude that having the bar build-in is definately a
  stayer. It's so much simpler than the hassle with an external bar, not
  worth it. So very unlikely.
 
  if external bar is a hassle then inter-process communication is broken
  in our systems
 
  if built-in bar is a hassle then x is broken (unable to display text)

 Well, an external bar is a hassle because it would increase the
 overall complexity if it's assumed to be implemented properly (or in a
 fashion like what we got). One has to specify handling where the bar
 appears, which size, and all kinds of interface handling between the
 bar and dwm.

  2. Another idea is to switch to another dependency for the rendering
  bit which could possibly be cairo. After all I'm nearly giving up the
  hope that X font handling will ever be fixed and work properly,
 
  $ du -h /usr/lib/libcairo.a
  608K/usr/lib/libcairo.a
 
  pango seems to be slightly smaller, but i don't know what these libs
  do exactly..

 They do fairly more than what we need for a single bar. So let's stick
 to what we got.

  imo it's not suckless, but it can be a temporary solution until x is
 fixed

 Knowing who drives the X development I gave up any hope that X will
 ever be fixed, more the contrary.

 I think the only solution is dws, which needs more assistance and
 which can be based on legacy crap. Important is that dws provides
 decent interfaces and possibly a legacy X interface on top of it. I
 think that's the long term plan we should achieve. But it'll take a
 long time with the resources we got atm (I hoped GSoC would sponsor us
 somehow to get started into that direction).

  3. A third idea for legacy support is, that I tend to add a
  compile-time option or a specific Rule extension that let's you set to
  reparent all clients or certain clients which are broken
 
  rule extension won't work as these applications tend not to set
  class,instance,name properly

 Yea that's a pity and that makes the rules more questionable, perhaps
 I should make them simpler or changing the mechanism eg having a
 catch next map function instead which applies a certain rule to the
 next window which is mapped.

 Kind regards,
 --Anselm





Re: [dwm] dwm's future

2009-04-26 Thread Haomin Wen
On Sun, Apr 26, 2009 at 9:15 PM, Kurt H Maier karmaf...@gmail.com wrote:

 On Sun, Apr 26, 2009 at 6:57 AM, Haomin Wen wen1...@gmail.com wrote:
  For programmers, there is little difference, or at least it generally will
  not increase SLOC.
 Yes, but at the cost of dragging in a huge chain of libraries, which
 is insanity.  Just because you can't see the complexity doesn't mean
 it's not there.

  For users, they just need to set the font to something like Sans-10 or
  Monosapce-10. It is much simpler than setting X fonts. Besides, fontconfig
  is powerful. User can set spacing, priority, antialias, hinting, and a lot
  more properties of fonts, which is necessary for certain fonts.

 Not only can the user set these things, the user *has to*, because
 otherwise his screen is an unreadable mess.

Most users need not set these things by themselves. Distributions and
font makers can do this work for them. Many students in my school said
that they are well pleased with the default Chinese font looking in
Ubuntu 9.04. Of course distributions and font makers could have
provide better support for X fonts, but it seems that they are losing
interests on X fonts. I prefer X fonts years ago. At that time Debian
support X fonts fairly well, but now some tools, dfontmgr for example,
are no longer supported.

Even if some people have certain special needs, dwm built with pango
will probably not be a problem for them. Anyway most people use
firefox or some other soft which also depend on fontconfig, hence they
need to tune fontconfig soon or later.

 I may be be in the minority here, but ASCII works wonderfully, and I'm
 happy with the state of font rendering in dwm.

 # Kurt H Maier




Re: [dwm] dwm's future

2009-04-26 Thread yy
You could add an option to print the window title to stdout. This way
if somebody wants to pipe it to an external program to show window
titles (like dzen on top of the dwm bar), they can.


-- 
- yiyus || JGL .



Re: [dwm] dwm's future

2009-04-26 Thread bill lam
On Sun, 26 Apr 2009, Haomin Wen wrote:
 Hello,
 
 I am sorry but I really hope dwm can switch to using pango.
 
 X fonts are broken and not well supported, at least in Ubuntu. I have six
 Chinese fonts shown in xlsfonts, but only two of them can be displayed. Two
 of them only support 16 pixel and 24 pixel size. They are too large, given
 that my dpi is as low as 75. The other font is arphic ukai, but it is not
 bitmap font, and therefore broken. WenQuanYi Bitmap Song is a nice bitmap
 font and covers many encodings, but I can use it for no obvious reason.
 
 It seems to me that pango's powerfulness comes with almost no cost.
 
 For programmers, there is little difference, or at least it generally will
 not increase SLOC.
 
 For users, they just need to set the font to something like Sans-10 or
 Monosapce-10. It is much simpler than setting X fonts. Besides, fontconfig
 is powerful. User can set spacing, priority, antialias, hinting, and a lot
 more properties of fonts, which is necessary for certain fonts.

Can you give examples, eg url where its title failed to displayed
properly using firefox?  I use debian and previosly ubuntu and found
no problems.  Not sure why correlate  bitmap font to broken or not?
What do you mean by broken?  Can you give some screen shoot.  Does
that really matter to have antialias or hinting in the single line
bar?

-- 
regards,

GPG key 1024D/4434BAB3 2008-08-24
gpg --keyserver subkeys.pgp.net --recv-keys 4434BAB3
唐詩150 劉禹錫  蜀先主廟
天地英雄氣  千秋尚凜然  勢分三足鼎  業復五銖錢
得相能開國  生兒不象賢  淒涼蜀故妓  來舞魏宮前



Re: [dwm] dwm's future

2009-04-26 Thread Haomin Wen
I do not care antialias or hinting if there are bitmap fonts, but they
are necessary when using some truetype fonts. I use dmenu to show how
fonts are broken.

https://www.getdropbox.com/gallery/957017/1/dwm?h=fb5e6b

On Sun, Apr 26, 2009 at 10:13 PM, bill lam cbill@gmail.com wrote:
 On Sun, 26 Apr 2009, Haomin Wen wrote:
 Hello,

 I am sorry but I really hope dwm can switch to using pango.

 X fonts are broken and not well supported, at least in Ubuntu. I have six
 Chinese fonts shown in xlsfonts, but only two of them can be displayed. Two
 of them only support 16 pixel and 24 pixel size. They are too large, given
 that my dpi is as low as 75. The other font is arphic ukai, but it is not
 bitmap font, and therefore broken. WenQuanYi Bitmap Song is a nice bitmap
 font and covers many encodings, but I can use it for no obvious reason.

 It seems to me that pango's powerfulness comes with almost no cost.

 For programmers, there is little difference, or at least it generally will
 not increase SLOC.

 For users, they just need to set the font to something like Sans-10 or
 Monosapce-10. It is much simpler than setting X fonts. Besides, fontconfig
 is powerful. User can set spacing, priority, antialias, hinting, and a lot
 more properties of fonts, which is necessary for certain fonts.

 Can you give examples, eg url where its title failed to displayed
 properly using firefox?  I use debian and previosly ubuntu and found
 no problems.  Not sure why correlate  bitmap font to broken or not?
 What do you mean by broken?  Can you give some screen shoot.  Does
 that really matter to have antialias or hinting in the single line
 bar?

 --
 regards,
 
 GPG key 1024D/4434BAB3 2008-08-24
 gpg --keyserver subkeys.pgp.net --recv-keys 4434BAB3
 唐詩150 劉禹錫  蜀先主廟
天地英雄氣  千秋尚凜然  勢分三足鼎  業復五銖錢
得相能開國  生兒不象賢  淒涼蜀故妓  來舞魏宮前





Re: [dwm] dwm's future

2009-04-26 Thread Mate Nagy
Hi all,
 I'm sure there is a severe risk of this piece being understood as
flamebait (this is not my intention).

 However, I strongly believe that the major problem of dwm currently is
not font handling (8bit ascii bitmap fonts are perfectly fine thank
you); not the status bar (it's great); instead, it's twofold:

1. Complete lack of proper xrandr and multi monitor support - this is
solved in multiple tiling wms, there's no reason other than lack of
interest or obscure ideology not to do this.

2. Handling of broken applications (reparenting). Not many tiling wms
get this right. I believe a good solution is to unconditionally reparent
all windows. This adds some code, but means no difference to the user
(the window frame can still be a single pixel border, if you like),
however it fixes all/most incompatibility problems in a single stroke.

NB. the added complexity of unconditional reparenting is massively
smaller than using pango (especially if you consider the dependencies);
the achieved improvement in perceived user experience is also arguably
much larger.

Regards,
 Mate



Re: [dwm] dwm's future

2009-04-26 Thread Antoni Grzymala
Mate Nagy dixit (2009-04-26, 17:01):

  However, I strongly believe that the major problem of dwm currently is
 not font handling (8bit ascii bitmap fonts are perfectly fine thank
 you);

This is a very selfish view. 8-bit character sets suck big way, even not
considering anything outside accented latin characters (which either
work or not, usually not quite).

Agree with the rest of your points.

-- 
[a]



Re: [dwm] dwm's future

2009-04-26 Thread bill lam
On Sun, 26 Apr 2009, Haomin Wen wrote:
 I do not care antialias or hinting if there are bitmap fonts, but they
 are necessary when using some truetype fonts. I use dmenu to show how
 fonts are broken.
 
 https://www.getdropbox.com/gallery/957017/1/dwm?h=fb5e6b

Thanks, I follow you example by echo nei hou but the nei always
become Dc, not sure if this a problem in dmenu or not.

-- 
regards,

GPG key 1024D/4434BAB3 2008-08-24
gpg --keyserver subkeys.pgp.net --recv-keys 4434BAB3
唐詩013 王維  送別
下馬飲君酒  問君何所之  君言不得意  歸臥南山陲  但去莫復聞  白雲無盡時



Re: [dwm] dwm's future

2009-04-26 Thread Evgeny Grablyk
Hi,

Why not make statusbar a (default) compile-time option, and add
possibility to export all statusbar information? This way user can
choose between builtin statusbar, or make his own. To make things more
simple, mouseclick support for statusbar should be removed.

As about cairo/pango, again, why not make that optional? Or will that
add much code and so increase dwm's own complexity?

--
Evgeny



Re: [dwm] dwm's future

2009-04-26 Thread Kurt H Maier
On Sun, Apr 26, 2009 at 10:01 AM, Mate Nagy mn...@port70.net wrote:
 I strongly believe that the major problem of dwm currently is
 not font handling (8bit ascii bitmap fonts are perfectly fine thank
 you);

Agree 100%.  Folks, if you want unicode support, develop a sane,
working implementation.  I've never seen one that matches both sane
and working.

 1. Complete lack of proper xrandr and multi monitor support - this is
 solved in multiple tiling wms, there's no reason other than lack of
 interest or obscure ideology not to do this.

Here's a patch to make DWM work fine on a two-monitor side-by-side setup:

--- dwm.c~  2009-02-08 06:10:49.0 -0600
+++ dwm.c   2009-02-25 18:54:17.0 -0600
@@ -1415,7 +1415,7 @@
c = nexttiled(clients);
mw = mfact * ww;
adjustborder(c, n == 1 ? 0 : borderpx);
-   resize(c, wx, wy, (n == 1 ? ww : mw) - 2 * c-bw, wh - 2 * c-bw,
resizehints);
+   resize(c, wx, wy, mw - 2 * c-bw, wh - 2 * c-bw, resizehints);

if(--n == 0)
return;


...that's from dwm 5.4.1, using xrandr --output DVI-0 --right-of
DVI-1.  Problem solved.

# Kurt H Maier



Re: [dwm] dwm's future

2009-04-26 Thread Mate Nagy
 ...that's from dwm 5.4.1, using xrandr --output DVI-0 --right-of
 DVI-1.  Problem solved.
 well obviously i had something more sophisticated in mind :)
 like, horribile dictu, displaying different tags or different layouts
on different monitors. or supporting more monitors than 2...

M.



Re: [dwm] dwm's future

2009-04-26 Thread Kurt H Maier
On Sun, Apr 26, 2009 at 10:45 AM, Mate Nagy mn...@port70.net wrote:
 ...that's from dwm 5.4.1, using xrandr --output DVI-0 --right-of
 DVI-1.  Problem solved.
  well obviously i had something more sophisticated in mind :)
  like, horribile dictu, displaying different tags or different layouts
 on different monitors. or supporting more monitors than 2...

Okay, so I was being a bit of a smartass there :)

I really think that such cases are best left to a window manager that
tries to 'do everything' -- dwm is perfect for one (or two, in my
case) large monitor, and it handles it very well.  I keep hoping to
see dwm go into a 'steady state' where the only patches are to
maintain compatibility with latest x.org, etc., but instead every time
it seems 'done' we shoot forward into crazy-ass ideas like requiring
an extra 0.5 MB of libraries for a 2k SLOC program, just so people's
firefox titles look better.

Instead of porting everything to pango, I suggest leaving it alone,
and the affected users can turn the built-in bar off and use another
status bar program.


# Kurt H Maier



Re: [dwm] dwm's future

2009-04-26 Thread Guillaume Quintin

Hi,

I never look at the windows titles. I only look at the tags in the 
status bar. So for me, this font rendering problem is less important 
than this problem : handling several monitors. I agree with Mate Nagy 
about dwm handling correctly several monitors. My point of view is that 
we should have Client *clients[NUMBER_OF_MONITORS] and manage each 
monitor independantly. But we should be able to move a window from a 
monitor to another and alsa an entire tag.


I agree with Jeremy Jay about a system of plugins... So that dwm stay 
very simple and one can build a nice status bar with cairo or pango 
dependencies if he wants. Why not implement this ?


--
Kind regards
Guillaume Quintin



Re: [dwm] dwm's future

2009-04-26 Thread Enno Boland (Gottox)
Hi There!
  3. A third idea for legacy support is, that I tend to add a
  compile-time option or a specific Rule extension that let's you set to
  reparent all clients or certain clients which are broken such as
  Mathematica or various Swing apps, though I'm not absolutely sure how
  likely that is. Somehow my inner feelings are against it, because it's
  not a dwm problem and those broken apps should be fixed.
I believe that a compile time switch in rules is unneccessary. If we
want to support these b0rken apps, why not reparent any client?

regard
Gottox



Re: [dwm] dwm's future

2009-04-26 Thread David E. Thiel
On Sun, Apr 26, 2009 at 05:09:26PM +0200, Antoni Grzymala wrote:
 Mate Nagy dixit (2009-04-26, 17:01):
   However, I strongly believe that the major problem of dwm currently is
  not font handling (8bit ascii bitmap fonts are perfectly fine thank
  you);
 
 This is a very selfish view. 8-bit character sets suck big way, even not
 considering anything outside accented latin characters (which either
 work or not, usually not quite).

Agreed. Proven fact: non-English-speaking people exist. Minimalism and
simplicity shouldn't exclude basic functionality like displaying
characters in the language the user speaks.




Re: [dwm] dwm's future

2009-04-26 Thread Kurt H Maier
On Sun, Apr 26, 2009 at 2:08 PM, David E. Thiel
l...@redundancy.redundancy.org wrote:
 Agreed. Proven fact: non-English-speaking people exist. Minimalism and
 simplicity shouldn't exclude basic functionality like displaying
 characters in the language the user speaks.

Rendering thousands of different codesets is not basic
functionality.  Proven (in this very thread) fact: nobody has yet
come up with a suckless way to display unicode.  If x11's font
rendering is broken, fix it -- don't bloat up client software to work
around it.

# Kurt H Maier



Re: [dwm] dwm's future

2009-04-26 Thread David Tweed
On Sun, Apr 26, 2009 at 4:26 PM, Evgeny Grablyk
evgeny.grab...@gmail.com wrote:
 Why not make statusbar a (default) compile-time option, and add
 possibility to export all statusbar information? This way user can
 choose between builtin statusbar, or make his own. To make things more
 simple, mouseclick support for statusbar should be removed.

One thing that's interesting is that no-one ever quantifies in what
manner things become simpler: for the programmers, for the user or
some other metric? I'll reiterate a point that I've made in the past
that I don't really care about number of lines of code providing that
the application provides the appropriate level of self-consistent
functionality (ie, the amount of functionality that makes sense at
this point in the software stack). Some of my custom tile()
implementations involve many more lines of quite intricate code that
nevertheless gives a sophisticated but predictable behaviour when
I'm a user.

In particular, when I'm on a desktop machine with a mouseI often use
clicks on the tags to manipulate the view. I'd be sad if that simple,
predictable functionality were removed simply because it means a lower
SLOC number can be quoted. (This is probably flamebait, but for some
reason the phrase Cargo Cult comes to mind.)

-- 
cheers, dave tweed__
computer vision reasearcher: david.tw...@gmail.com
while having code so boring anyone can maintain it, use Python. --
attempted insult seen on slashdot



Re: [dwm] dwm's future

2009-04-26 Thread Marc Andre Tanner
On Sun, Apr 26, 2009 at 08:15:40AM -0500, Kurt H Maier wrote:
 I may be be in the minority here, but ASCII works wonderfully, and I'm
 happy with the state of font rendering in dwm.

+1 

-- 
 Marc Andre Tanner  http://www.brain-dump.org/  GPG key: CF7D56C0



Re: [dwm] dwm's future

2009-04-25 Thread Dusan
On Sat, 25 Apr 2009 19:23:50 +0100
Anselm R Garbe garb...@gmail.com wrote:

 Hi there,
 
 I discussed several stuff on IRC recently but wanted to share my
 thoughts here.
 
 1. One idea is getting rid of the dwm bar altogether and to print the
 dwm state to stdout when it changes, however after thinking carefully
 about it I conclude that having the bar build-in is definately a
 stayer. It's so much simpler than the hassle with an external bar, not
 worth it. So very unlikely.

Please keep bar, that's why dwm is great out of the box.
 
 2. Another idea is to switch to another dependency for the rendering
 bit which could possibly be cairo. After all I'm nearly giving up the
 hope that X font handling will ever be fixed and work properly, so
 that relying on a pile of other crap seems to become a solution. cairo
 is a dependency for firefox and I guess that every dwm user uses
 firefox occasionally. And we might benefit from a little bit smoother
 looking dwm (same for dmenu of course and my ongoing st efforts). I
 think this idea is quite likely.

Great.

 3. A third idea for legacy support is, that I tend to add a
 compile-time option or a specific Rule extension that let's you set to
 reparent all clients or certain clients which are broken such as
 Mathematica or various Swing apps, though I'm not absolutely sure how
 likely that is. Somehow my inner feelings are against it, because it's
 not a dwm problem and those broken apps should be fixed.

No. Adding exceptions will increase code and you can't possibly cover
all broken applications.

 Please feel free to comment or add other ideas to this list.
 
 Kind regards,
 --Anselm
 





Re: [dwm] dwm's future

2009-04-25 Thread Anselm R Garbe
2009/4/25 yy yiyu@gmail.com:
 There is a middle way solution. I just thought about it, and will
 probably have its drawbacks, but here it goes: keep a bar with only
 the tags and tile symbol and print the sel client title to stdout.
 This way you can use an external program (dzen) to render the title
 (and status text, of course). I don't think nobody needs unicode
 glyphs in their tag names or tile symbols, you wouldn't need cairo in
 dwm (but could add it to dzen) and would remove a lot of loc getting
 ride of status text and window title.
 About the reparent call, I don't think is a good idea. There are lots
 of dwm similar wms around, and it is very easy changing between them.
 I would keep dwm as pure as possible and would let the others to
 handle the dirty stuff, but of course I'm not the one who needs to use
 those broken apps...

Well I like and hate that idea. Those who do not like relying on some
other apps won't see the title anymore (just ignoring the status
text). On the other hand, purists might not be interested in the title
and status text anyways.

So definately worth considering!

Kind regards,
--Anselm



Re: [dwm] dwm's future

2009-04-25 Thread Alexander Polakov
2009/4/25, yy yiyu@gmail.com:
 There is a middle way solution. I just thought about it, and will
 probably have its drawbacks, but here it goes: keep a bar with only
 the tags and tile symbol and print the sel client title to stdout.
 This way you can use an external program (dzen) to render the title
 (and status text, of course). I don't think nobody needs unicode
 glyphs in their tag names or tile symbols, you wouldn't need cairo in
 dwm (but could add it to dzen) and would remove a lot of loc getting
 ride of status text and window title.

One can export tag names, active tags, layout and active window via
root window properties, and handle them with a bunch of shell scripts
and dzen2, like it's done in echinus.



Re: [dwm] dwm's future

2009-04-25 Thread David E. Thiel
On Sat, Apr 25, 2009 at 08:29:12PM +0200, Dusan wrote:
 Please keep bar, that's why dwm is great out of the box.

Agreed. A window manager should be usable on its own, and have sensible
defaults. Ability to customize is great, but it shouldn't be depended
upon to make for a decent user experience.

 No. Adding exceptions will increase code and you can't possibly cover
 all broken applications.

Yeah, I wouldn't bend over backwards to support these. With wmname, Java
apps work fine for me.

  Please feel free to comment or add other ideas to this list.

Only things I can think of are better integrated multi-head support
(I have yet to try Guillaume's patch) and XCB. It's basically perfect
otherwise.



Re: [dwm] dwm's future

2009-04-25 Thread Christian Garbs
On Sat, Apr 25, 2009 at 09:37:56PM +0200, yy wrote:

 I don't think nobody needs unicode glyphs in their tag names or tile
 symbols, you wouldn't need cairo in dwm

I'm still using dwm-4.7 (because I did not yet have time to port all
patches to the current version), but Unicode glyphs in status bar
work, even without pango or cairo.  I have German umlauts as well as
Japanese characters (eg. web page titles from Firefox).

http://www.cgarbs.de/cgi-bin/gitweb.cgi/dwm-mitch.git?a=blob;f=05_patch_dwm_mitch_utf8widechars.diff

Regards
Christian
-- 
Christian.Garbs.http://www.cgarbs.de

Der Kopf ist rund, damit das Denken die Richtung ändern kann.
  (Picabia)


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


Re: [dwm] dwm's future

2009-04-25 Thread Wu, Yue
On Sat, Apr 25, 2009 at 07:23:50PM +0100, Anselm R Garbe wrote:
 
 2. Another idea is to switch to another dependency for the rendering
 bit which could possibly be cairo. After all I'm nearly giving up the
 hope that X font handling will ever be fixed and work properly, so
 that relying on a pile of other crap seems to become a solution. cairo
 is a dependency for firefox and I guess that every dwm user uses
 firefox occasionally. And we might benefit from a little bit smoother
 looking dwm (same for dmenu of course and my ongoing st efforts). I
 think this idea is quite likely.
 

Please keep the dependencies the least, I don't think I can stay with dwm if
it needs cairo, I don't have it installed.

-- 
Hi,
Wu, Yue



Re: [dwm] dwm's future

2009-04-25 Thread Michael
Anselm R Garbe wrote:
 2. Another idea is to switch to another dependency for the rendering
 bit which could possibly be cairo. After all I'm nearly giving up the
 hope that X font handling will ever be fixed and work properly, so
 that relying on a pile of other crap seems to become a solution. cairo
 is a dependency for firefox and I guess that every dwm user uses
 firefox occasionally. And we might benefit from a little bit smoother
 looking dwm (same for dmenu of course and my ongoing st efforts). I
 think this idea is quite likely.
Please, don't depend on such huge library just to get nifty fonts and
smooth look, dwm is great because it's very small and depend only on
really small range of things - x11-dev, optional xinerama, libc - those
are things that you can find everywhere, but linking to cairo will
destroy this beauty and simplicity in my opinion. Please, don't do it.

btw, fonts are fixed now for me in Debian/Sid



Re: [dwm] dwm's future

2009-04-25 Thread Szabolcs Nagy
On 4/25/09, Christian Garbs mi...@cgarbs.de wrote:
 work, even without pango or cairo.  I have German umlauts as well as
 Japanese characters (eg. web page titles from Firefox).

try greek or cyrillic
i had trouble with those when fonts were loaded with XCreateFontSet



Re: [dwm] dwm's future

2009-04-25 Thread pmarin
In spanish we have a sentence for this: gunfire to kill flies

On Sun, Apr 26, 2009 at 12:06 AM, Szabolcs Nagy nszabo...@gmail.com wrote:
 On 4/25/09, Christian Garbs mi...@cgarbs.de wrote:
 work, even without pango or cairo.  I have German umlauts as well as
 Japanese characters (eg. web page titles from Firefox).

 try greek or cyrillic
 i had trouble with those when fonts were loaded with XCreateFontSet





Re: [dwm] dwm's future

2009-04-25 Thread Szabolcs Nagy
On 4/25/09, Anselm R Garbe garb...@gmail.com wrote:
 1. One idea is getting rid of the dwm bar altogether and to print the
 dwm state to stdout when it changes, however after thinking carefully
 about it I conclude that having the bar build-in is definately a
 stayer. It's so much simpler than the hassle with an external bar, not
 worth it. So very unlikely.

if external bar is a hassle then inter-process communication is broken
in our systems

if built-in bar is a hassle then x is broken (unable to display text)

 2. Another idea is to switch to another dependency for the rendering
 bit which could possibly be cairo. After all I'm nearly giving up the
 hope that X font handling will ever be fixed and work properly,

$ du -h /usr/lib/libcairo.a
608K/usr/lib/libcairo.a

pango seems to be slightly smaller, but i don't know what these libs
do exactly..

imo it's not suckless, but it can be a temporary solution until x is fixed

 3. A third idea for legacy support is, that I tend to add a
 compile-time option or a specific Rule extension that let's you set to
 reparent all clients or certain clients which are broken

rule extension won't work as these applications tend not to set
class,instance,name properly



Re: [dwm] dwm's future

2009-04-25 Thread Christian Garbs
On Sat, Apr 25, 2009 at 11:06:08PM +0100, Szabolcs Nagy wrote:
 On 4/25/09, Christian Garbs mi...@cgarbs.de wrote:
  work, even without pango or cairo.  I have German umlauts as well as
  Japanese characters (eg. web page titles from Firefox).
 
 try greek or cyrillic
 i had trouble with those when fonts were loaded with XCreateFontSet

Looks ok to me:
https://www.cgarbs.de/tmp/dwm-ru.png

The missing character seems to be a long dash - it's missing in
German, too: 
https://www.cgarbs.de/tmp/dwm-de.png

Japanese is perfect:
https://www.cgarbs.de/tmp/dwm-ja.png

Wrong font here?
https://www.cgarbs.de/tmp/dwm-ar.png

Korean does look broken, though:
https://www.cgarbs.de/tmp/dwm-ko.png

Regards
Christian
-- 
Christian.Garbs.http://www.cgarbs.de

Wenn ein Mann im Wald ruft, und keine Frau hört es,
hat er trotzdem Unrecht?


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


Re: [dwm] dwm's future

2009-04-25 Thread bill lam
On Sat, 25 Apr 2009, Christian Garbs wrote:
 On Sat, Apr 25, 2009 at 09:37:56PM +0200, yy wrote:
 
  I don't think nobody needs unicode glyphs in their tag names or tile
  symbols, you wouldn't need cairo in dwm
 
 I'm still using dwm-4.7 (because I did not yet have time to port all
 patches to the current version), but Unicode glyphs in status bar
 work, even without pango or cairo.  I have German umlauts as well as
 Japanese characters (eg. web page titles from Firefox).

I can display unicode chinese in dwm 5.xx using x11 unicode font (not
xft) without patch.  It doesn't matter if those fonts are a little
ugly compared to xft fonts.  So I don't think cairo is needed.

-- 
regards,

GPG key 1024D/4434BAB3 2008-08-24
gpg --keyserver subkeys.pgp.net --recv-keys 4434BAB3
唐詩146 李益  喜見外弟又言別
十年離亂後  長大一相逢  問姓驚初見  稱名憶舊容
別來滄海事  語罷暮天鐘  明日巴陵道  秋山又幾重



Re: [dwm] dwm's future

2009-04-25 Thread Szabolcs Nagy
On 4/26/09, Christian Garbs mi...@cgarbs.de wrote:
 On Sat, Apr 25, 2009 at 11:06:08PM +0100, Szabolcs Nagy wrote:
 On 4/25/09, Christian Garbs mi...@cgarbs.de wrote:
  work, even without pango or cairo.  I have German umlauts as well as
  Japanese characters (eg. web page titles from Firefox).

 try greek or cyrillic
 i had trouble with those when fonts were loaded with XCreateFontSet

 Looks ok to me:
 https://www.cgarbs.de/tmp/dwm-ru.png

no, that is ugly bold font, same problem with greek

 Wrong font here?
 https://www.cgarbs.de/tmp/dwm-ar.png

most likely your font does not cover arabic fonts (iso8859-6) in the given size

 Korean does look broken, though:
 https://www.cgarbs.de/tmp/dwm-ko.png

yes, i get the same result using fixed-14