On Sat 28 Jan 2012 01:03:11 AM PST, s.s.albiz wrote:
> Sent from my BlackBerry device on the Rogers Wireless Network
Sent by mistake? A silent protest against WMII or Ruby? Spam?
--
We are governed not by armies and police but by ideas.
-- Mona Caird, 1892
Sent from my BlackBerry device on the Rogers Wireless Network
-Original Message-
From: "Suraj N. Kurapati"
Date: Sun, 1 Jan 2012 21:13:53
To: dev mail list
Reply-To: dev mail list
Cc:
Subject: Re: [dev] wmii falling out of favor
On Sat 24 Dec 2011 12:13:04 PM PST, dtk wrot
Hi,
It was a long time ago. I just loooked at the code.
I think it should work with a few changes. I do not
use these layouts anymore. I first began with wmii,
then dwm. I, of course, missed the wmii ``capabilities"
so I wrote dwmii.c. But, with time, I realized that
moving the windows from column
On 01/08/2012 10:30 AM, John Matthewman wrote:
> I would like a window manager that has wmii's acme-like window
> management, but without the 9P filesystem, wmiir, support for
> configuration via python, ruby, etc.
> use dwm as a base to build upon
+1
I imagine having a stacked layout + manual
On 1/9/12, Thomas Dahms wrote:
> 2012/1/8 John Matthewman :
>> I would like a window manager that has wmii's acme-like window
>> management, but without the 9P filesystem, wmiir, support for
>> configuration via python, ruby, etc. Trim the fat off of it (or
>> perhaps it would be better to use dwm
2012/1/8 John Matthewman :
> I would like a window manager that has wmii's acme-like window
> management, but without the 9P filesystem, wmiir, support for
> configuration via python, ruby, etc. Trim the fat off of it (or
> perhaps it would be better to use dwm as a base to build upon, rather
> tha
On Sun 08 Jan 2012 04:30:47 PM PST, John Matthewman wrote:
> I would like a window manager that has wmii's acme-like window
> management, but without the 9P filesystem, wmiir, support for
> configuration via python, ruby, etc.
Try i3, which was inspired by wmii: http://i3wm.org/
--
If something h
On 8 January 2012 10:30, John Matthewman wrote:
> On 1/8/12, Anselm R Garbe wrote:
>> Someone could implement a stacked mode patch for dwm based on two
>> extra windows (similar to the dwm bar) per column -- wouldn't be too
>> hard.
>
> I would like a window manager that has wmii's acme-like wind
On 1/8/12, Anselm R Garbe wrote:
> Someone could implement a stacked mode patch for dwm based on two
> extra windows (similar to the dwm bar) per column -- wouldn't be too
> hard.
I would like a window manager that has wmii's acme-like window
management, but without the 9P filesystem, wmiir, supp
On 7 January 2012 20:21, wrote:
> But for me, wmii's window managing is far better than dwm's one. I tried
> dwm for eight weeks. Now back to wmii. I like the stagged mode at most.
> I like window titles. I like columns.
Someone could implement a stacked mode patch for dwm based on two
extra win
Am 22.12.2011 schrieb "Suraj N. Kurapati" :
> On Thu 22 Dec 2011 04:36:55 PM PST, dtk wrote:
> > I just cannot see how to do the stuff I feel I need with static
> > layouts. And since I don't believe that manual layouts are what
> > bloat wmii, I fail to understand why I cannot haz them :/ Worse,
On Sat, Jan 07, 2012 at 05:50:06PM +, Connor Lane Smith wrote:
> So long as you have the input state for those commands -- the files
> themselves -- why must we log the output for each and every command?
Error correction.
> If we know the state of the directory, why log invocations of `ls`?
On 7 January 2012 17:26, Bjartur Thorlacius wrote:
> That's not enough. I want the output of all commands (messages, documents,
> calculations, notes and error reports) to be stored on increasingly
> mainstream terabyte disks along with enough metadata to uniquely identify
> it. "Modification" is
Þann fim 5.jan 2012 23:12, skrifaði Connor Lane Smith:
That's not inherent to GUIs, it just so happens that existing GUIs are
extremely poorly made. It's not interaction which needs to be logged
so much as the modification of persistent data -- files and such --
which could easily be logged by
On Thu, Jan 05, 2012 at 11:12:44PM +, Connor Lane Smith wrote:
> That's not inherent to GUIs, it just so happens that existing GUIs are
> extremely poorly made. It's not interaction which needs to be logged
> so much as the modification of persistent data -- files and such --
> which could easi
Hey,
On 5 January 2012 14:19, David Tweed wrote:
> I'm not aware of any way of either storing or, more importantly,
> searching a user's interaction with the GUI apps on a computer system.
That's not inherent to GUIs, it just so happens that existing GUIs are
extremely poorly made. It's not inte
On Mon, Jan 2, 2012 at 7:02 AM, Patrick Haller
<201009-suckl...@haller.ws> wrote:
> On 2012-01-01 21:13, Suraj N. Kurapati wrote:
>> So I considered the trade-offs between SLOC minimalism, project and
>> community activity, and my productivity in DWM vs. WMII and finally
>> decided to switch back t
You can also use du instead of cd;ls
Overloading simple, old, standard commands is bad for my inflexible brain.
The X11 stuff is way too difficult for me to care.
On 2012-01-02 12:26, hiro wrote:
> I don't understand how this is related to your quote?
Suraj re-evaluated his toolset. I think the re-evaluation part is a good
idea, however it seems you could spend too much time doing it.
> You always execute ls when you cd to a different folder?
in interacti
I don't understand how this is related to your quote?
You always execute ls when you cd to a different folder?
On 02.01.2012, Patrick Haller <201009-suckl...@haller.ws> wrote:
> On 2012-01-01 21:13, Suraj N. Kurapati wrote:
>> So I considered the trade-offs between SLOC minimalism, project and
>>
On 2012-01-01 21:13, Suraj N. Kurapati wrote:
> So I considered the trade-offs between SLOC minimalism, project and
> community activity, and my productivity in DWM vs. WMII and finally
> decided to switch back to WMII (which I used since six years prior).
How often do people re-evaluate their too
On 01/01/2012 11:13 PM, Suraj N. Kurapati wrote:
> Good point. After seeing people take SLOC minimalism further than
> the suckless community's beloved DWM (c.f. MonsterWM), I realized
> that it all came down to *choice* and that I actually had a choice.
>
> So I considered the trade-offs between
On Sat 24 Dec 2011 12:13:04 PM PST, dtk wrote:
> On 12/22/2011 05:54 PM, Suraj N. Kurapati wrote:
> > I'm another WMII expatriate and I'm still not completely used to
> > DWM's lack of on-the-fly tag creation: especially when some new
> > random task comes up and all of my tags are currently occupi
On 12/24/11, Connor Lane Smith wrote:
> I'm not sure a screenshot is necessary. It would just be a fullscreen
> window. :p If you hide the status bar it's honestly *just* the window.
And a border, telling you whether it is focused or not (assuming a
non-zero borderpx).
On 24 December 2011 12:08, dtk wrote:
> So, what's the policy here? All future development in patches, so we
> don't spoil that fancy 2K SLOC statistic everybody is so fond of? :/
> *sceptic*
Hah. :) We fold in popular patches, slowly, so dwm doesn't become all
bloated and unstable. My personal v
On 12/22/2011 05:32 PM, Suraj N. Kurapati wrote:
> On Thu 22 Dec 2011 02:44:54 PM PST, dtk wrote:
>> is there a way to have widgets in the status bar display images
>> instead of utf8 symbols?
>
> I gave up on this approach for DWM and used dzen2 as my status bar
> instead: https://github.com/sun
On 12/22/2011 05:54 PM, Suraj N. Kurapati wrote:
> On Thu 22 Dec 2011 04:36:55 PM PST, dtk wrote:
>> I just cannot see how to do the stuff I feel I need with static
>> layouts. And since I don't believe that manual layouts are what
>> bloat wmii, I fail to understand why I cannot haz them :/ Worse,
Hey cls,
On 12/22/2011 04:57 PM, Connor Lane Smith wrote:
> On 22 December 2011 16:36, dtk wrote:
>> nope, 32 is aplenty. Thing is, in wmii I create them on demand and name
>> them dynamically (to reflect their purpose), which conveniently groups
>> them as well. I just don't want the tag I do de
On Fri 23 Dec 2011 10:24:54 AM PST, Jakub Lach wrote:
> They work day to day in Gnome, then try to emulate it's insanity
> in currently acceptable flavour of the month wm, then brag
> on their home forum with screenshots (arch forum anyone?),
> seeking peer approval.
Touché! s/Gnome/wmii/ and yo
On Fri, 23 Dec 2011 10:34:35 -, hiro <23h...@googlemail.com> wrote:
I kill dwm when I've placed all my windows correctly so I can save more
RAM.
I actually did that the other day, so I could GIMP my Christmas cards.
Dnia 23 grudnia 2011 11:34 hiro <23h...@googlemail.com> napisał(a):
> I kill dwm when I've placed all my windows correctly so I can save more RAM.
> Everyone who wants more functionality than just placing his windows in
> a perfect way once and for all is stupid.
Words of wisdom!
For ultimate RA
I kill dwm when I've placed all my windows correctly so I can save more RAM.
Everyone who wants more functionality than just placing his windows in
a perfect way once and for all is stupid.
On 23.12.2011, Jakub Lach wrote:
> Dnia 22 grudnia 2011 16:53 Manolo Martínez
> napisał(a):
>
>> The claim
Dnia 22 grudnia 2011 16:53 Manolo Martínez
napisał(a):
> The claim is that when this people finish rewriting dwm then go write their
> e-mails in
> Gnome 3?
> --
That's certainly possible, given compulsive behaviour of tweaking
tweaks.
They work day to day in Gnome, then try to emulate it's
On Fri, Dec 23, 2011 at 02:52:28AM +0100, Florian Limberger wrote:
> I know what you are displaying, I use a slightly modified version of
> the status.sh script you posted once. Thanks though.
That script in its current incarnation is about 1/10th the size it was
when I posted it.
> I know yo
On Thu, 22 Dec 2011 20:34:12 -0500, Kurt H Maier wrote:
A one-letter prefix doesn't help you? b50% s70%? I don't even do
that
much. I used to just have it read, e.g., 50% 70% and I used my
amazing
pattern-recognition skills to discern that the battery life was
mysteriously always first in tha
On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 04:27:35PM +0100, Florian Limberger wrote:
> then how do you distinguish the percentage of battery load and the
> percentage of wifi signal strength? Sometimes, I don't care if wifi
> signal quality is exactly 87% or 78%, It would suffice if I knew if it
> is over 25%, 5
On Thu 22 Dec 2011 11:54:21 AM PST, Seth Hover wrote:
> Is there a reason you're not just using awesome?
Subjectively, I like C and Ruby better than Lua. Architecturally, I
like that DWM is minimal, having a very limited statusbar, because
I can use a better tool for the job (dzen2) or even go ov
whoops, I missed the [wmii] tag. Please ignore my last post.
--sth
On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 11:54 AM, Seth Hover wrote:
> Is there a reason you're not just using awesome?
>
> -sth
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 8:32 AM, Suraj N. Kurapati wrote:
>
>> On Thu 22 Dec 2011 02:44:54 PM PST, dtk wrote:
>
Is there a reason you're not just using awesome?
-sth
On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 8:32 AM, Suraj N. Kurapati wrote:
> On Thu 22 Dec 2011 02:44:54 PM PST, dtk wrote:
> > is there a way to have widgets in the status bar display images
> > instead of utf8 symbols?
>
> I gave up on this approach for DW
On Thu 22 Dec 2011 02:05:36 PM PST, Jacob Todd wrote:
> On Dec 22, 2011 12:03 PM, "Suraj N. Kurapati"
> wrote:
> > Now that you mention it, I rarely use this feature because it's too
> > coarse grained. For instance, I have tags pre-allocated for
> > particular tasks so viewing more than one of t
On Dec 22, 2011 12:03 PM, "Suraj N. Kurapati" wrote:
> Now that you mention it, I rarely use this feature because it's too
> coarse grained. For instance, I have tags pre-allocated for particular
> tasks so viewing more than one of them simultaneously pulls in too many
> unrelated clients into my
On Thu 22 Dec 2011 06:07:05 PM PST, Connor Lane Smith wrote:
> On 22 December 2011 18:02, Suraj N. Kurapati wrote:
> > Multi-tagging is cool and useful, but too coarse grained in DWM.
>
> I don't understand what you mean. In dwm a single client can have
> multiple tags, and one can also view multip
On 22 December 2011 18:02, Suraj N. Kurapati wrote:
> In contrast, WMII has fine-grained multi-tagging (a client can appear
> on multiple views) so I would either (1) choose a client from dmenu to
> pull into my current view or (2) go to the tag I want and multi-tag the
> clients that I'm interest
On Thu 22 Dec 2011 04:57:24 PM PST, Connor Lane Smith wrote:
> In dwm you can view multiple tags at the same time, which pulls all
> clients with that tag into view. (Which is really amazing once you get
> used to it. Other window managers just make me feel really
> constrained.)
Now that you ment
On Thu 22 Dec 2011 04:36:55 PM PST, dtk wrote:
> I just cannot see how to do the stuff I feel I need with static
> layouts. And since I don't believe that manual layouts are what
> bloat wmii, I fail to understand why I cannot haz them :/ Worse, I
> fail to see why I'm the only one who wants them *
On Thu 22 Dec 2011 02:44:54 PM PST, dtk wrote:
> is there a way to have widgets in the status bar display images
> instead of utf8 symbols?
I gave up on this approach for DWM and used dzen2 as my status bar
instead: https://github.com/sunaku/.dwm/blob/master/dwm-statusbar
(Pictured at bottom of
On 22 December 2011 16:36, dtk wrote:
> nope, 32 is aplenty. Thing is, in wmii I create them on demand and name
> them dynamically (to reflect their purpose), which conveniently groups
> them as well. I just don't want the tag I do development of project A on
> to be on tag 5. Today. And on tag 6
Somebody claiming to be dtk wrote:
This is why dwm has tags: just don't view the tags you aren't using.
Like you say, tag clients according to their role, and then by
definition those which are not being used needn't be seen. However,
you may be interested in flextile [1].
wouldn't be used to l
On 12/22/2011 04:38 PM, Justin Pogue wrote:
> Sidestepping the holy-war topic here, I'd like to point out that there
> are plenty of status bars out there like tint2 and dzen2 that you
> could use.
k. Was just reluctant to integrate it. Redirecting all the information
there. wmii's status bar basi
On 12/22/11 at 04:47pm, hiro wrote:
> lol, people on suckless don't actually use their window managers, they
> brag about it and rewrite it and rewrite it and rewrite it. It's more
> of a hobby than a necessity for them.
>
The claim is that when this people finish rewriting dwm then go write their
On 12/22/2011 04:27 PM, Florian Limberger wrote:
>> The general consensus is that sprinkling icons everywhere actually
>> makes the interface far more complicated and distracting, and
>> generally quite *bad*. While there *are* some exceptions where icons
>> are more compact, they are rare.
Yupp.
lol, people on suckless don't actually use their window managers, they
brag about it and rewrite it and rewrite it and rewrite it. It's more
of a hobby than a necessity for them.
I just looked at the screenshot linked by the OP, and thats indeed
wrong
usage of icons, IMHO. I argued againts the wifi signal example, not for
replacing descriptive names of applications with crappy logos without
any
expressivenes. How the fuck can a wolf represent an audio application?
At le
Sidestepping the holy-war topic here, I'd like to point out that there
are plenty of status bars out there like tint2 and dzen2 that you
could use. I've even heard of people using DWM in conjunction with
xfce-panel. A patch to add the same functionality that one of these
examples already does ver
Hey,
thx for your quick response!
On 12/22/2011 03:49 PM, Connor Lane Smith wrote:
> On 22 December 2011 15:35, dtk wrote:
>> I tag clients according to the topic they deal with (yess, I have
>> *several* Firefox windows open on different tags at any given point in
>> time -.-), which is why sta
Hello,
The general consensus is that sprinkling icons everywhere actually
makes the interface far more complicated and distracting, and
generally quite *bad*. While there *are* some exceptions where icons
are more compact, they are rare.
Consider the meter widgets people are obsessed with putti
Hey,
On 22 December 2011 14:44, dtk wrote:
> I just saw it
> yesterday in awesome[0] and think it was a pretty neat feature to
> display information in a compact yet intuitive way.
The general consensus is that sprinkling icons everywhere actually
makes the interface far more complicated and dis
Hey,
On 22 December 2011 15:35, dtk wrote:
> I tag clients according to the topic they deal with (yess, I have
> *several* Firefox windows open on different tags at any given point in
> time -.-), which is why static tagging with a predefined number of tags
> works really really bad for me :/
Th
On 12/22/2011 02:49 PM, hiro wrote:
> What are widgets?
Encapsulated, reusable functionality that displays information in the
status bar. Whole onmouseover thing and such...
dtk
On 11/15/2011 06:59 AM, Suraj N. Kurapati wrote:
> On Thu 10 Nov 2011 09:29:53 PM PST, Anselm R Garbe wrote:
>> wmii is cursed. Its code base has grown by factor 3 or 4 in terms
>> of SLOC, whereas its functionality has stalled.
>
> Thanks Anselm. I think I've held on to the past for too long, an
On Thu, 22 Dec 2011 13:44:54 -, dtk wrote:
is there a way to have widgets in the status bar display images instead
of utf8 symbols?
s/(image|symbol)/glyph/g
Modify your font. There are patches either on the website or on the
Archlinux Forums that modify dwm to use more powerful font rend
What are widgets?
Hey guys,
is there a way to have widgets in the status bar display images instead
of utf8 symbols?
I know it's a question of philosophy whether you'll want that (and will
therefore inevitably spawn holy flame wars ;)), but I just saw it
yesterday in awesome[0] and think it was a pretty neat featu
On 11/14/2011 11:34 PM, Justin Pogue wrote:
On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 4:26 PM, Jonas H. wrote:
Hi folks!
Is it possible to use tiling w/ dualhead? i.e. have a separate tiling area
on each monitor - so that if you move a window from monitor 0 to monitor 1
in floating mode and then move it to the
2011/11/15 Jonas H. :
>
> What's that "Xinerama support" that came with 3.9 then?
It is Xinerama. One view just includes both monitors. That is
different from dwm and other window managers, but not necessarily
worse.
--
Thomas Dahms
On 11/15/2011 09:32 AM, Thomas Dahms wrote:
wmii spans the tiling area over all monitors, but managed columns end
at screen boundaries.
What's that "Xinerama support" that came with 3.9 then?
2011/11/14 Jonas H. :
> Is it possible to use tiling w/ dualhead? i.e. have a separate tiling area
> on each monitor - so that if you move a window from monitor 0 to monitor 1
> in floating mode and then move it to the tiling layer, it stays on monitor
> 1. (The way it works for my setup right now
On Thu 10 Nov 2011 09:29:53 PM PST, Anselm R Garbe wrote:
> wmii is cursed. Its code base has grown by factor 3 or 4 in terms
> of SLOC, whereas its functionality has stalled.
Thanks Anselm. I think I've held on to the past for too long, and
avoided DWM mainly out of disinterest in C. However, a
On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 4:26 PM, Jonas H. wrote:
> Hi folks!
>
> Is it possible to use tiling w/ dualhead? i.e. have a separate tiling area
> on each monitor - so that if you move a window from monitor 0 to monitor 1
> in floating mode and then move it to the tiling layer, it stays on monitor
> 1.
Hi folks!
Is it possible to use tiling w/ dualhead? i.e. have a separate tiling
area on each monitor - so that if you move a window from monitor 0 to
monitor 1 in floating mode and then move it to the tiling layer, it
stays on monitor 1. (The way it works for my setup right now is that
it's
On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 4:36 AM, David Tweed wrote:
> My view is that the plan 9 technologies are attractive if and only if
> they're used everywhere: if a pseudo-filesystem interface was
> pervasive it would avoid the "learn another new language/technology
> tricks/etc for this task" and the prob
On 11 Nov 2011 04:30, "Anselm R Garbe" wrote:
>
> On 8 November 2011 07:28, Suraj N. Kurapati wrote:
>
> > And how is "modern" wmii different from its, let's say, "pre-modern"
> > phase? From my view, it still uses the Plan9 protocol and the Plan9
> > approach of exposing a virtual filesystem fo
On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 1:46 PM, Connor Lane Smith wrote:
> On 08/11/2011, Suraj N. Kurapati wrote:
>> I thought Suckless folks were enthusiastic about Plan9 technologies;
>> has this changed? If so, why?
>
> Appreciative, not necessarily enthusiastic. Plan 9 technologies have
> their place, but
On 8 November 2011 07:28, Suraj N. Kurapati wrote:
> On Thu 03 Nov 2011 09:57:19 AM PDT, Kurt H Maier wrote:
>> There is nothing "suckless" about any aspect of modern wmii
>
> I thought Suckless folks were enthusiastic about Plan9 technologies;
> has this changed? If so, why?
The overall concept
Hey,
On 08/11/2011, Suraj N. Kurapati wrote:
> I thought Suckless folks were enthusiastic about Plan9 technologies;
> has this changed? If so, why?
Appreciative, not necessarily enthusiastic. Plan 9 technologies have
their place, but it's very tempting to use them everywhere. I don't
believe 9P
On Mon, 7 Nov 2011 22:28:59 -0800
"Suraj N. Kurapati" wrote:
>On Thu 03 Nov 2011 09:57:19 AM PDT, Kurt H Maier wrote:
>> There is nothing "suckless" about any aspect of modern wmii
>
>I thought Suckless folks were enthusiastic about Plan9 technologies;
>has this changed? If so, why?
>
>And how i
On Thu 03 Nov 2011 09:57:19 AM PDT, Kurt H Maier wrote:
> There is nothing "suckless" about any aspect of modern wmii
I thought Suckless folks were enthusiastic about Plan9 technologies;
has this changed? If so, why?
And how is "modern" wmii different from its, let's say, "pre-modern"
phase? Fr
On Thu, Nov 3, 2011 at 9:57 PM, Kurt H Maier wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 3, 2011 at 9:47 AM, Jeffrey 'jf' Lim
> wrote:
> > hm. I see. So your argument was to disown wmii, because this *specific*
> > configuration - and NOT wmii itself - requires ruby. Alright.
>
> No, I want to disown wmii because it's
On 3 November 2011 02:23, Kurt H Maier wrote:
> Any word on a timetable for disowning wmii? This is a four-hundred
> line configuration that requires a 1600-line library, not to mention
> an entire extra programming language.
>
> To manage x11 windows.
I'm in the process arranging and performing
I think you misunderstand. While he may wish that no user again uses wmii,
that is not what he has stated here. His stated wish is wmii's removal from
suckless.org because it does not meet suckless standards.
--Andrew Hills
Yeah, and C engendered Java.
Just use your own "configuration" if you don't like it. And an older
version of wmii if you don't like change.
On Thu, Nov 3, 2011 at 9:47 AM, Jeffrey 'jf' Lim wrote:
> hm. I see. So your argument was to disown wmii, because this *specific*
> configuration - and NOT wmii itself - requires ruby. Alright.
No, I want to disown wmii because it's a bloated >30ksloc monstrosity
that engenders other lesser monst
On Thu, Nov 3, 2011 at 9:37 PM, Kurt H Maier wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 3, 2011 at 1:36 AM, Jeffrey 'jf' Lim
> wrote:
> > what does that even mean? wmii *requires* ruby? Never heard of that.
>
> This configuration requires ruby. Try to keep up.
>
>
hm. I see. So your argument was to disown wmii, beca
On Thu, Nov 3, 2011 at 1:36 AM, Jeffrey 'jf' Lim wrote:
> what does that even mean? wmii *requires* ruby? Never heard of that.
This configuration requires ruby. Try to keep up.
--
# Kurt H Maier
On Thu, Nov 3, 2011 at 9:23 AM, Kurt H Maier wrote:
> Anselm,
>
> Any word on a timetable for disowning wmii? This is a four-hundred
> line configuration that requires a 1600-line library, not to mention
> an entire extra programming language.
>
> To manage x11 windows.
>
>
what does that even m
On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 7:49 PM, Suraj N. Kurapati wrote:
> Hello,
>
> For those who were weary of my Ruby wmiirc[1]'s power consumption,
> I am happy to announce that the latest Ruby 1.9.3-p0 stable release
> has solved Ruby's problem of causing excessive CPU wakeups-from-idle
Indeed it has. I ha
Anselm,
Any word on a timetable for disowning wmii? This is a four-hundred
line configuration that requires a 1600-line library, not to mention
an entire extra programming language.
To manage x11 windows.
--
# Kurt H Maier
Hello,
For those who were weary of my Ruby wmiirc[1]'s power consumption,
I am happy to announce that the latest Ruby 1.9.3-p0 stable release
has solved Ruby's problem of causing excessive CPU wakeups-from-idle
which would drain your laptop battery much sooner than you'd expect.
On my ASUS UL30A-
Þann fim 1.sep 2011 17:42, skrifaði Benjamin Cathey:
Okay so then they are apparently different, regardless of the keycode
give by `xev`
I ran xev on my system, and it reported different keycodes and keysyms,
but equivalent XLookupString results.
I don't speak wmiirc, but I'm happy if I was a
Okay so then they are apparently different, regardless of the keycode
give by `xev`
That's fine - however what would I use in my wmiirc to define the
difference?
Would it be:
Key $MODKEY-Control-KP0 ?
---
Actually it looks like it would be $MODKEY-Control-KP_0
Thanks for your help!
B
On
Þann mið 31.ágú 2011 23:36, skrifaði Benjamin Cathey:
I recently added a few new key combinations and I am having issues and I
am not quite sure why.
I am attempting to use the number keys in the numeric keypad and it
simply is not working. The combinations work with the regular number
keys howe
Looks like this did send twice. Also I accidentally included
$MODKEY-Control-l which does work. It's the numbers that do not work
(only the numeric pad) as I mentioned
Thanks again
Benjamin
On 08/31/2011 07:36 PM, Benjamin Cathey wrote:
I recently added a few new key combinations and I am
I recently added a few new key combinations and I am having issues and I
am not quite sure why.
I am attempting to use the number keys in the numeric keypad and it
simply is not working. The combinations work with the regular number
keys however not with those on the keypad. Using xev it loo
Sorry if this is a repost - I had mail client fail so I am not sure if
the send completed.
I recently added a few new key combinations and I am having issues and I
am not quite sure why.
I am attempting to use the number keys in the numeric keypad and it
simply is not working. The combinati
"twosuperior" isn't a key on US keyboards, and pressing Alt-2 injects
it in many applications. It is possible that it is confusing Alt-2
with your literal twosuperior. Just a thought--I'm not an expert.
--Andrew Hills
On Fri, Aug 26, 2011 at 1:29 PM, Mr. Bougs wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I'm running w
Hello,
I'm running wmii's hg tip (rev 2788).
I just experienced a strange behaviour with the specific shortcut
$MODKEY-2 after switching from the be (azerty) to the us dvorak-intl xkb
layout. When using that shortcut, the current window seems to lose focus
(the title bar stays highlighted). W
On 08/24/2011 01:20 AM, orlando wrote:
All you have to do is rename "Delete" to "Close" and close should appear
at the top of the menu.
Thank you, that did it.
All you have to do is rename "Delete" to "Close" and close should appear at
the top of the menu.
On Tue, Aug 9, 2011 at 9:15 AM, Gidon Ernst <
er...@informatik.uni-augsburg.de> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> recently the order of items
>[Delete, Kill, Fullscreen]
> in the menu that appears when right-c
[...], so Close could go at (or near) the top of the menu and Kill at the
bottom.
Yeah that's what I want. How can you configure this?
On 05.08.2011 16:24, Ethan Grammatikidis wrote:
> On Fri, 5 Aug 2011 14:39:23 +0200
> Eckehard Berns wrote:
>
>> I also have encountered freezes with fullscreen flash video playback (I
>> haven't tested something other than youtube). I noticed that I didn't
>> encounter those freezes when using c
1 - 100 of 827 matches
Mail list logo
