On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 10:31:41PM -0500, Bryan Bennett wrote:
> "Bending over backward":
> cd ~/.bin/builds/dwm && make && cp dwm ~/.bin; echo "export
> PATH=$PATH:~/.bin/" >> ~/.bashrc
excuse me, I think you missed some steps. I can't find the 'cd' or
'make' or 'echo' buttons in unity.
"Bending over backward":
cd ~/.bin/builds/dwm && make && cp dwm ~/.bin; echo "export
PATH=$PATH:~/.bin/" >> ~/.bashrc
On 26 January 2012 04:28, Winston Weinert wrote:
> This may seem blatantly obvious and unspoken -- however: it is OK to install
> dwm to /usr/local or $HOME on the mentioned distros. It is a lot of work to
> roll packages per-setup and per-user. It also seems logical to put personal
> binaries in
On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 03:27:26PM +0100, Paul Onyschuk wrote:
> On Thu, 12 Jan 2012 19:34:09 +0200
> aecepoglu@ wrote:
>
> >
> > I might be interested in trying to help write one such suckless issue
> > tracker as requested on the webpage.
> >
> > I just want to ask;
> > What set of features ar
Troels Henriksen wrote:
> ii performs some strange processing around JOIN messages, which means
> that they are not handled correctly (they are put in the server buffer
> with 'null' channel name). The following patch fixes that, but I can't
> believe the code was in there for no reason, as it s
On Tue, 24 Jan 2012, Michael Stummvoll wrote:
On 24.01.2012 10:08, Anthony Campbell wrote:
I use Debian Sid, which is similar though not identical to Ubuntu. I haven't
tried to make a .deb file, which seems like an unnecessary complication.
- apt-get build-dep dwm
- apt-get source dwm
and the
On Mon 23 Jan 2012 07:10:57 PM PST, Bjartur Thorlacius wrote:
> On Mon, 23 Jan 2012 11:04:55 -, Nick wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 11:57:42AM +0100, hiro wrote:
> >> Security is not a feature.
> > I thought you were restricting yourself to Sundays.
> Yes, on Sundays ;)
Ah, such comedians!
ii performs some strange processing around JOIN messages, which means
that they are not handled correctly (they are put in the server buffer
with 'null' channel name). The following patch fixes that, but I can't
believe the code was in there for no reason, as it seems rather
deliberate. Could som
On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 11:52 AM, Aragon Gouveia wrote:
> On 01/25/12 12:26, Connor Lane Smith wrote:
>>
>> I think that patch is GNU-specific. The problem is that using
>> -D_POSIX_C_SOURCE=2 was breaking builds on FreeBSD
>
>
> FWIW, my update to FreeBSD's dmenu port patches those bits, so it's
On 01/25/12 12:26, Connor Lane Smith wrote:
I think that patch is GNU-specific. The problem is that using
-D_POSIX_C_SOURCE=2 was breaking builds on FreeBSD
FWIW, my update to FreeBSD's dmenu port patches those bits, so it's
probably OK if you don't worry too much about it for FreeBSD. :)
Hey,
On 25 January 2012 09:40, Carsten Mattner wrote:
> it seems that the commit 484:0b6490d9a62b "remove _POSIX_C_SOURCE cflag"
> broke the build on at least Fedora 16.
>
> The following patch fixes it on Fedora 16. I haven't tested it on anything
> else.
I think that patch is GNU-specific. Th
Hi,
it seems that the commit 484:0b6490d9a62b "remove _POSIX_C_SOURCE cflag"
broke the build on at least Fedora 16.
The following patch fixes it on Fedora 16. I haven't tested it on anything else.
diff -r 1659395e4de0 stest.c
--- a/stest.c Thu Jan 19 22:52:17 2012 +
+++ b/stest.c Wed Jan
12 matches
Mail list logo