Re: xv alternatives

#include Henry House wrote on Tue Aug 14, 2001 um 02:54:56PM: > I've tried xloadimage and its derivative xli. I've had problems with both, > e.g., some options do not work right and many images cause the program to Esetroot is working fine for me. From my ~/.xsession: Esetroot -s `perl -e 'prin

Re: xv alternatives

On 15 Aug 2001, Henry House wrote: > On Wed, Aug 15, 2001 at 09:10:46AM +0100, Anthony Campbell wrote: > > feh doesn't work here. It produces the thumbprints of the images but > > there is no way of enlarging them, either with the keys or the mouse. > > Strange...have you tried fiddling with the o

Re: xv alternatives

On Wed, Aug 15, 2001 at 09:10:46AM +0100, Anthony Campbell wrote: > feh doesn't work here. It produces the thumbprints of the images but > there is no way of enlarging them, either with the keys or the mouse. Strange...have you tried fiddling with the options? There is a thubnail mode which is spe

Re: xv alternatives

On 14 Aug 2001, Henry House wrote: > On Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 09:25:29PM -0400, Michael P. Soulier wrote: > > On Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 10:41:51AM +0100, Phillip Deackes wrote: > > > > > > I second that. I love the way xloadimage turns the cursor into a double > > > arrow where the image is larger th

Re: xv alternatives

On Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 09:25:29PM -0400, Michael P. Soulier wrote: > On Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 10:41:51AM +0100, Phillip Deackes wrote: > > > > I second that. I love the way xloadimage turns the cursor into a double > > arrow where the image is larger than the screen and lets you move the > > image

Re: xv alternatives

Michael P. Soulier wrote: > Hmm. > > I'd argue that this is what good coding is for. Even good coders make mistakes. My resource limits have saved my system from OOM due to badly behaved code I was writing or debugging, accidental fork bombs (yes, it can be done!), etc, more times than

Re: xv alternatives

on Sun, Jul 08, 2001 at 10:29:33AM -0400, Michael P. Soulier ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > On Sun, Jul 08, 2001 at 02:53:22AM -0400, Joey Hess wrote: > > Carl Johnson wrote: > > > I haven't tried imagemagick recently, but it's crashed my system > > > enough times over the years that I avoid it when

Re: xv alternatives

on Fri, Jul 06, 2001 at 06:26:37PM -0400, Rick Pasotto ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > On Fri, Jul 06, 2001 at 05:16:17PM -0500, Michael A. Miller wrote: > > > "Noah" == Noah L Meyerhans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > > Since xv is being removed from the distribution, I would > > >

Re: xv alternatives

On Sun, Jul 08, 2001 at 02:53:22AM -0400, Joey Hess wrote: > Carl Johnson wrote: > > I haven't tried imagemagick recently, but it's crashed my system > > enough times over the years that I avoid it whenever possible. Unless > > it has changed recently, it doesn't check memory. If it runs out of >

Re: xv alternatives

Carl Johnson wrote: > I haven't tried imagemagick recently, but it's crashed my system > enough times over the years that I avoid it whenever possible. Unless > it has changed recently, it doesn't check memory. If it runs out of > memory it will keep trying until the system daemons run out of mem

Re: xv alternatives

Joe Bouchard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I don't know if it is quite the same, but I use "display" and "convert" > that comes in the "imagemagick" package. imagemagick is free as long as > you use the libmagick4g library instead of the libmagick4g-lzw (which > comes from non-free). I didn't ma

Re: xv alternatives

On Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 10:41:51AM +0100, Phillip Deackes wrote: > > I second that. I love the way xloadimage turns the cursor into a double > arrow where the image is larger than the screen and lets you move the > image around so you can see all parts of it more easily. Much nicer than > the way

Re: xv alternatives

On Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 09:44:24AM -0400, Rick Pasotto wrote: > Plus the fact that you have to give an option to tell it to shutup about > what it's doing. That doesn't bother me, but "alias" is your friend. -- Carl Fink [EMAIL PROTECTED] I-Con's Science and Technology Programming

Re: xv alternatives

On Fri, Jul 06, 2001 at 08:09:52PM -0400, Carl Fink wrote: > I like xloadimage (xview), although xv is certainly nice. I tried that and didn't like it. For a series of pictures it destroys and creates the window for each one instead of just resizing the window. All that flashing is very annoying.

Re: xv alternatives

Hi, I don't know if it is quite the same, but I use "display" and "convert" that comes in the "imagemagick" package. imagemagick is free as long as you use the libmagick4g library instead of the libmagick4g-lzw (which comes from non-free). I didn't make a concious effort to choose the free versi

Re: xv alternatives

On Fri, 6 Jul 2001 20:09:52 -0400 Carl Fink <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I like xloadimage (xview), although xv is certainly nice. I second that. I love the way xloadimage turns the cursor into a double arrow where the image is larger than the screen and lets you move the image around so you can

Re: xv alternatives

I like xloadimage (xview), although xv is certainly nice. -- Carl Fink [EMAIL PROTECTED] I-Con's Science and Technology Programming

Re: xv alternatives

On Fri, Jul 06, 2001 at 06:26:37PM -0400, Rick Pasotto wrote: > If you do 'display *.jpg' for a large number of files total memory > used keeps increasing until all memory (including swap) is used up. > > This does not happen with xv. It's things like this that will make me miss xv so much. It's

Re: xv alternatives

On Fri, Jul 06, 2001 at 05:16:17PM -0500, Michael A. Miller wrote: > > "Noah" == Noah L Meyerhans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > Since xv is being removed from the distribution, I would > > like to find a new image viewer to use. > > I use "display", which is part of the imagemag

Re: xv alternatives

On Fri, Jul 06, 2001 at 05:37:56PM -0400, Rick Pasotto wrote: > On Fri, Jul 06, 2001 at 05:25:29PM -0400, Noah L. Meyerhans wrote: > > Since xv is being removed from the distribution, I would like to > > find a > > new image viewer to use. > > Why is this happening? Can't we continue to use the cu

Re: xv alternatives

On Fri, Jul 06, 2001 at 05:25:29PM -0400, Noah L. Meyerhans wrote: > The features I really want are: > 1. Lots of easy keyboard commands (Tab & Backspace were great in XV) > 2. Intelligent scaling (I liked the zoom maxspect feature of XV, where >it would zoom as close as possible to the screens

Re: xv alternatives

On Fri, Jul 06, 2001 at 05:37:56PM -0400, Rick Pasotto wrote: > On Fri, Jul 06, 2001 at 05:25:29PM -0400, Noah L. Meyerhans wrote: > > Since xv is being removed from the distribution, I would like to find a > > new image viewer to use. > > Why is this happening? Can't we continue to use the curren

Re: xv alternatives

> "Noah" == Noah L Meyerhans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Since xv is being removed from the distribution, I would > like to find a new image viewer to use. I use "display", which is part of the imagemagick package. > 1. Lots of easy keyboard commands (Tab & Backspace were

Re: xv alternatives

On Fri, Jul 06, 2001 at 05:25:29PM -0400, Noah L. Meyerhans wrote: > Since xv is being removed from the distribution, I would like to find a > new image viewer to use. Why is this happening? Can't we continue to use the current version? -- People are beginning to realize that the apparatus of go

xv alternatives

Since xv is being removed from the distribution, I would like to find a new image viewer to use. Unfortunately, I haven't been able to find one that's as good as Xv. eeyes seems pretty nice, but I refuse to install the necessary GNOME libraries to make it work. I grabbed the source to see if it