Re: [dev] dwm development continues NOW

[Anselm R Garbe]

2009/6/20 Michael :
> Anselm R Garbe wrote:
>> Afterwards the next item will be the interface integration to enable
>> different drawing backends, which will ease porting to cairo/pango or
>> xft as well. The advantage is, that the same interface will be used in
>> st and dmenu as well. This is basically the remainder of my
>> unpublished libtg efforts.
>
> Please, clarify about porting to cairo/pango - I remember discussion
> about this not long ago, and there were a lot of "don't do it", mainly
> because of the size of those libraries.

The conclusion was to define a common interface that abstracts the
drawing routines out, in a way that there is no platform-specific
(Xlib, Xft, pango or whatever) drawing code in dwm.c (eg DC currently
uses Xlib data types and might become an opaque type in the future
instead). This step is definitive and will be achieved rather soon,
perhaps after a 5.6 release.

A bigger goal is to emerge these efforts into something I call libtg
(lib text GUI), which is the common code for the drawing stuff --
years ago I did a similiar thing for wmii called liblitz, but it has
been abandoned. The plan is to use this not only in dwm, but also in
dmenu and st. This step is senseful, because it'll reduce dmenu and st
considerably and form a common base, this will happen potentially
after the 5.7 release.

Another big goal is to do the same for the X11/Xlib specific portions
and to emerge that into a libwm, in order to provide a way that the
core of dwm can be written on top of libwm and libtg. libwm would need
to encapsulate all the Xlib stuff, thus the event handling etc. and
could form a nice base library to write your own window manager
easily, though it will be kept minimalist as dwm. This step is
uncertain yet.

The overall code complexity should not increase considerably due to
these ideas, more the opposite. The separation of concerns should be
very welcome and having a dwm core that can be adopted onto other
underlying systems like XCB, Cocoa or Windows 7 doesn't sound too bad
to me ;) As said, don't miss that all these efforts will be kept at
its most minimalist solution.

Speaking for dwm, the official version of dwm will be as is from a
user perspective, code wise it might look a little bit different. I
can't forsee it if and when there will appear a pango/cairo libtg
version, but that might be something interesting, if you consider that
dwm itself won't change for that to happen.

Kind regards,
Anselm

Re: [dev] Suckless (*NIX|*BSD) Distribution?

[Leandro Chescotta]

Why freebsd is not suckless? not arguing, but i don't know a lot about
BSD's, so, i wanna know


On Sun, Jun 21, 2009 at 3:11 AM, Fernan Bolando wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 21, 2009 at 4:25 AM, Uriel wrote:
>> Agreed, OpenBSD is far from perfect, but it sucks much less than any
>> other *nix system out there this days.
>>
>> Peace
>>
>> uriel
>>
>> On Sat, Jun 20, 2009 at 5:53 PM, Jack Woehr wrote:
>>> There's already a BSD distrib that sucks less. It's called OpenBSD!
>>>
>>> --
>>> Jack J. Woehr            # I run for public office from time to time. It's
>>> like
>>> http://www.well.com/~jax # working out at the gym, you sweat a lot, don't
>>> get
>>> http://www.softwoehr.com # anywhere, and you fall asleep easily afterwards.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
> crux distro for linux
> openbsd or netbsd for bsd
>
>
> --
> http://www.fernski.com
>
>



-- 

-
http://aleyscha.spaces.live.com/

""El lugar mas peligroso de todos es el cielo... En el, cada
pensamiento se hace realidad... sea bueno o malo... creas tu paraiso o
tu infierno""

Re: [dev] Suckless (*NIX|*BSD) Distribution?

[Julien Laffaye]

Because it is not bloated with httpd and perl in the _basesystem_ ? :-)

On Sun, Jun 21, 2009 at 2:06 PM, Leandro Chescotta <
leandro.chesco...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Why freebsd is not suckless? not arguing, but i don't know a lot about
> BSD's, so, i wanna know
>
>
> On Sun, Jun 21, 2009 at 3:11 AM, Fernan Bolando
> wrote:
> > On Sun, Jun 21, 2009 at 4:25 AM, Uriel wrote:
> >> Agreed, OpenBSD is far from perfect, but it sucks much less than any
> >> other *nix system out there this days.
> >>
> >> Peace
> >>
> >> uriel
> >>
> >> On Sat, Jun 20, 2009 at 5:53 PM, Jack Woehr wrote:
> >>> There's already a BSD distrib that sucks less. It's called OpenBSD!
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> Jack J. Woehr# I run for public office from time to time.
> It's
> >>> like
> >>> http://www.well.com/~jax  # working out at
> the gym, you sweat a lot, don't
> >>> get
> >>> http://www.softwoehr.com # anywhere, and you fall asleep easily
> afterwards.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> > crux distro for linux
> > openbsd or netbsd for bsd
> >
> >
> > --
> > http://www.fernski.com
> >
> >
>
>
>
> --
>
> -
> http://aleyscha.spaces.live.com/
>
> ""El lugar mas peligroso de todos es el cielo... En el, cada
> pensamiento se hace realidad... sea bueno o malo... creas tu paraiso o
> tu infierno""
>
>

Re: [dev] dwm development continues NOW

[Preben Randhol]

On Sun, 21 Jun 2009 02:56:46 +0200
Uriel  wrote:

> I thought we had agreed against having multiple drawing backends...
> this will add considerable complexity for no gain at all.

you misunderstand. Read Anselms mail. It is the Sensible Solution[tm] to
do it the way he suggests. Separating interface and implementation...

Re: [dev] unsubscribe

[Randy Morris]

On Sun, Jun 21, 2009 at 03:22:56PM +1100, Roman Belikin wrote:
> I would be happy to unsubscribe myself, BUT it's don't work. I sent
> million letters to
> dev+unsubscr...@suckless.org etc.
> Please, talk me, what i have to do for unsubcribe
> 
> Thanks a lot
> 
I've also been unable to unsubscribe with an old email that's receiving
digests.  Both dev+unsubscribe and dwm+unsubscribe say I'm not
subscribed.

Re: [dev] unsubscribe

[Premysl Hruby]

On (21/06/09 08:39), Randy Morris wrote:
> To: dev mail list 
> From: Randy Morris 
> Subject: Re: [dev] unsubscribe
> Reply-To: dev mail list 
> List-Id: dev mail list 
> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17)
> 
> On Sun, Jun 21, 2009 at 03:22:56PM +1100, Roman Belikin wrote:
> > I would be happy to unsubscribe myself, BUT it's don't work. I sent
> > million letters to
> > dev+unsubscr...@suckless.org etc.
> > Please, talk me, what i have to do for unsubcribe
> > 
> > Thanks a lot
> > 
> I've also been unable to unsubscribe with an old email that's receiving
> digests.  Both dev+unsubscribe and dwm+unsubscribe say I'm not
> subscribed.
> 

There are no request for unsubscription of your email. Can you retry
unsubcription (post email to dev+unsubscr...@suckless.org) and mail me
privately after you did so?

-Ph

-- 
Premysl "Anydot" Hruby, http://www.redrum.cz/
-
I'm a signature virus. Please add me to your signature and help me spread!

Re: [dev] Suckless (*NIX|*BSD) Distribution?

[James PIC]

Man bash
man portage

On Jun 20, 2009 2:50 PM, "Kurt H Maier"  wrote:

On Sat, Jun 20, 2009 at 4:22 AM, Anselm R Garbe wrote: >
That way I can set up a ...
Ubuntu is an utter nightmare to use on anything but a "workstation"
system.  They ship broken packages, break currently-working packages,
fail to document important things (such as "we broke fai and have no
intention of fixing it"), etc.  As a desktop/laptop OS, it's decent,
but in my experience less reliable than (for instance) fedora, which
these days is equal to Ubuntu in configuration ease.  If I sat down an
enumerated the things Ubuntu has broken and required me to work around
and/or patch, this e-mail would blow someone's disk quota.

You guys running Gentoo in production environments either have an
infinite amount of time or else tiny little production environments.
AFAIK there's no Gentoo equivalent of FAI [1] or kickstart [2], and
without tools like that a distribution is worthless to me as a
"production" OS.  Hell, even Slackware has facilities that make it
trivial to perform an automated, noninteractive rollout.  Past the
installation, distributing source to machines and having them all
compile their own is a breathtaking waste of time and resources, and
I'd justly be fired if ever I tried something like that.  I'd hope
Gentoo has a way by now to distribute binary updates, but then what's
the point of Gentoo?

Obviously if a distro does what you want and you're satisfied with it,
it's the "right" one.

--
# Kurt H Maier


[1] - http://www.informatik.uni-koeln.de/fai/
[2] -
http://www.redhat.com/docs/manuals/linux/RHL-7.3-Manual/custom-guide/ch-kickstart2.html

Re: [dev] Suckless (*NIX|*BSD) Distribution?

[Kurt H Maier]

On Sun, Jun 21, 2009 at 9:01 AM, James PIC wrote:
> Man bash
> man portage

I'm pretty happy that both of those commands fail on all my systems

Re: [dev] dwm development continues NOW

[hiro]

> As said, don't miss that all these efforts will be kept at
its most minimalist solution.

Easily said...

> It is the Sensible Solution[tm] to
> do it the way he suggests.

...

> Separating interface and implementation...

Not always sane.

In this case I agree that it's rather not worth it.
If Arg eagerly wants to try it nobody will prevent him in doing so.
But if he really managed to bring us out of X doom, I'd be greatly surprised :)

Re: [dev] Suckless (*NIX|*BSD) Distribution?

[hiro]

On Sun, Jun 21, 2009 at 4:01 PM, James PIC  wrote:
>
> Man bash
> man portage

I'm pretty happy that both of those commands fail on all my hand calculators.

They are great Systems. I never had to reboot or upgrade anything,
cause it's so fucking less sucking. And it works with solar power!

You guys bore me today :P
And I feel a bit like Eris Discordia. What a pain.

Re: [dev] dwm development continues NOW

[Preben Randhol]

On Sun, 21 Jun 2009 17:43:40 +0200
hiro <23h...@googlemail.com> wrote:

> > As said, don't miss that all these efforts will be kept at
> its most minimalist solution.
> 
> Easily said...

Easily done...

> > Separating interface and implementation...
> 
> Not always sane.

In most cases it is. Figure if your computer would only run if a
certain type of power plant was delivering the electricity...

> In this case I agree that it's rather not worth it.
> If Arg eagerly wants to try it nobody will prevent him in doing so.
> But if he really managed to bring us out of X doom, I'd be greatly
> surprised :)

I really don't see that suckless == as few LOCs as possible. For me
that is seldom the case. Suckless == most user friendly and minimize
unnecessary repetitive work.  In case of dwm it is the window layout.
Almost no more window moving/resizing in the floating sense. That is
suckless for me. Not the size of dwm. 

So if dwm will make it possible for different implementations depending
on needs it would be very nice. I don't want pango as default, but I
have at least one computer I would need it on or I will have to choose
another wm.

Best wishes

Preben Randhol

Re: [dev] Suckless (*NIX|*BSD) Distribution?

[Thomas Gallen]

It really has degenerated into an a pissing contest so I gave up.

Thomas

On Jun 21, 2009, at 11:55 AM, hiro <23h...@googlemail.com> wrote:


On Sun, Jun 21, 2009 at 4:01 PM, James PIC  wrote:


Man bash
man portage


I'm pretty happy that both of those commands fail on all my hand  
calculators.


They are great Systems. I never had to reboot or upgrade anything,
cause it's so fucking less sucking. And it works with solar power!

You guys bore me today :P
And I feel a bit like Eris Discordia. What a pain.

Re: [dev] Suckless (*NIX|*BSD) Distribution?

[Uriel]

Bash scripts are one of the worst venereal diseases to even infest *nix systems.

Learn to use good ol' sh, or switch to rc, but stop spreading the bash
braindamage.

uriel

On Sun, Jun 21, 2009 at 5:55 PM, hiro<23h...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 21, 2009 at 4:01 PM, James PIC  wrote:
>>
>> Man bash
>> man portage
>
> I'm pretty happy that both of those commands fail on all my hand calculators.
>
> They are great Systems. I never had to reboot or upgrade anything,
> cause it's so fucking less sucking. And it works with solar power!
>
> You guys bore me today :P
> And I feel a bit like Eris Discordia. What a pain.
>
>

Re: [dev] unsubscribe

[Uriel]

This list has become like the internet's kindergarten...

And Erik Naggum is dead, just when the world needs him most, what a sad day :(

uriel

On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 6:26 AM, Kris Maglione wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 12:18:15PM +0800, Ludovic Guégan wrote:
>>
>> Same to me!
>
> Unsubscribe yourselves, and please don't post again.
>
> --
> Kris Maglione
>
> I'm confident that tomorrow's Unix will look like today's Unix, only
> cruftier.
>        --Russ Cox
>
>
>

Re: [dev] dwm development continues NOW

[Uriel]

Well, it might work, but lets say that I'm skeptical.

Also I wonder if the gain of moving the handful of lines of code
involved in drawing dwm's GUI into a library would really be worth it.

Excessive and naive obsession with code reuse is one of the major
sources of gratuitous complexity in the software industry.

uriel

On Sun, Jun 21, 2009 at 5:43 PM, hiro<23h...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>> As said, don't miss that all these efforts will be kept at
> its most minimalist solution.
>
> Easily said...
>
>> It is the Sensible Solution[tm] to
>> do it the way he suggests.
>
> ...
>
>> Separating interface and implementation...
>
> Not always sane.
>
> In this case I agree that it's rather not worth it.
> If Arg eagerly wants to try it nobody will prevent him in doing so.
> But if he really managed to bring us out of X doom, I'd be greatly surprised 
> :)
>
>

Re: [dev] Suckless (*NIX|*BSD) Distribution?

[Antoni Grzymala]

Uriel dixit (2009-06-21, 20:39):

> Bash scripts are one of the worst venereal diseases to even infest
> *nix systems.

I wouldn't exaggerate. Most bash scripts don't use bashisms and could
just as well be “good ol' sh” scripts as you like to call them, though I
don't personallly see what so “good” in them, mostly just the “ol'” bit.
Bash programming is a bit smelly anyhow, though useful.

As to whether bashisms cause (are result of?) particular braindamage is
a matter of debate, that this list isn't probably suitable for.

Best,

-- 
[a]

Re: [dev] Suckless (*NIX|*BSD) Distribution?

[hiro]

> smelly anyhow, though useful.

Useful in creating jobs, right.
I will try to keep this in mind, thank you very much.

Scat, though smelly, is also very useful as a fertilizer.

Re: [dev] Suckless (*NIX|*BSD) Distribution?

[Antoni Grzymala]

hiro dixit (2009-06-21, 22:13):

> > smelly anyhow, though useful.
> 
> Useful in creating jobs, right.
> I will try to keep this in mind, thank you very much.
> 
> Scat, though smelly, is also very useful as a fertilizer.

Definitely. There's a hint (or more) of scat that I enjoy in some of the
finest cheeses.

-- 
[a]

[dev] dwm / add tabs / attach/detach functionality

[Kevin Nagel]

Hello,

I am a wmii-2.5 user and like the tabbing concept much more than the
stacking concept in wmii-3. However, I've considered using dwm, but
would like to have these features there as well. Also the dynamic
control of creating/deleting workspaces and not using tagging. Is
this possible and how difficult is it to change/implement it? I know
a little bit C, but do I also need to dig in Xlib?

Cheers,

Kev

[dev] dmenu / enso

[Kevin Nagel]

Hello,

is it possible to expand dmenu into sth similar like enso
(http://www.humanized.com/enso/)

Regards,

Kev

Re: [dev] dwm / add tabs / attach/detach functionality

[Szabolcs Nagy]

On 6/21/09, Kevin Nagel  wrote:
> I am a wmii-2.5 user and like the tabbing concept much more than the
> stacking concept in wmii-3. However, I've considered using dwm, but
> would like to have these features there as well. Also the dynamic
> control of creating/deleting workspaces and not using tagging. Is
> this possible and how difficult is it to change/implement it? I know
> a little bit C, but do I also need to dig in Xlib?

that would be a major rewrite, primarily data structure changes
(i estimate that about 50% of the code should be modified and the
complexity would double)

alternatively you can use tags for workspaces and monocle layout for tabbing

[dev] dmenu / enso

[Paul McCann]

On Sun, Jun 21, 2009 at 5:31 PM, Kevin Nagel wrote:
> Hello,
>
> is it possible to expand dmenu into sth similar like enso
> (http://www.humanized.com/enso/)
>
> Regards,
>
> Kev

What does enso do that dmenu doesn't?

For things like definitions and math, create some scripts that wrap
shell utilities and pipe the results to dzen or xmessage. -POLM

Re: [dev] dmenu / enso

[Szabolcs Nagy]

On 6/21/09, Kevin Nagel  wrote:
> is it possible to expand dmenu into sth similar like enso
> (http://www.humanized.com/enso/)

"You just hold down the Caps Lock key and type an Enso command, which
is displayed in a translucent overlay. Once the command is typed, you
simply release the Caps Lock key to activate it, and the overlay
disappears."

if you meant the capslock part that should be easy
in dwm bind capslock (XK_Caps_Lock ?) to run dmenu, in dmenu bind
capslock to return.

if you meant the translucent overlay that's imho not trivial

Re: [dev] dmenu / enso

[Kris Maglione]

On Sun, Jun 21, 2009 at 10:31:21PM +0100, Kevin Nagel wrote:

is it possible to expand dmenu into sth similar like enso
(http://www.humanized.com/enso/)


The idea seems absurd. We already have unix commands to perform 
all of the requisite functionality. And, with dmenu, you've no 
need to hold the caps lock key as you type (are these people 
insane?). I just open a terminal for such things:



dict antidisestablishmentarianism


Easily fast enough, and complete with standard tab completion. 
If you want something different, bind a key to open dmenu, 
execute a command, and display the output somewhere, but I don't 
see the point.


--
Kris Maglione

If the designers of X Windows built cars, there would be no fewer than
five steering wheels hidden about the cockpit, none of which followed
the same principles – but you’d be able to shift gears with your car
stereo.  Useful feature that.
--Marcus J. Ranum, DEC

Re: [dev] Suckless (*NIX|*BSD) Distribution?

[Fernan Bolando]

On Sun, Jun 21, 2009 at 8:06 PM, Leandro
Chescotta wrote:
> Why freebsd is not suckless? not arguing, but i don't know a lot about
> BSD's, so, i wanna know
>
>
> On Sun, Jun 21, 2009 at 3:11 AM, Fernan Bolando 
> wrote:
>> On Sun, Jun 21, 2009 at 4:25 AM, Uriel wrote:
>>> Agreed, OpenBSD is far from perfect, but it sucks much less than any
>>> other *nix system out there this days.
>>>
>>> Peace
>>>
>>> uriel
>>>
>>> On Sat, Jun 20, 2009 at 5:53 PM, Jack Woehr wrote:
 There's already a BSD distrib that sucks less. It's called OpenBSD!

 --
 Jack J. Woehr            # I run for public office from time to time. It's
 like
 http://www.well.com/~jax # working out at the gym, you sweat a lot, don't
 get
 http://www.softwoehr.com # anywhere, and you fall asleep easily afterwards.



>>>
>>>
>> crux distro for linux
>> openbsd or netbsd for bsd
>>
>>

My comment on using openbsd or netbsd versus freebsd is purely because
I have not used freebsd myself. Crux and Obsd already has almost
everything I need in a  <200MB base system, so I only needed to
download a few package to configure it for specific purpose. I have
always had the impression that freebsd wants me to download >600MB of
data to install. If they created a picobsd distro then I would have
probably prefered using that for some of my stuff.

fernan

-- 
http://www.fernski.com

Re: [dev] dwm development continues NOW

[Enno Boland (Gottox)]

I agree with uriel. In my opinion just seperate the drawing code from
the rest of the code by putting it into its own functions. This should
be sufficient. Please avoid using extra libraries.

2009/6/21 Uriel :
> Well, it might work, but lets say that I'm skeptical.
>
> Also I wonder if the gain of moving the handful of lines of code
> involved in drawing dwm's GUI into a library would really be worth it.
>
> Excessive and naive obsession with code reuse is one of the major
> sources of gratuitous complexity in the software industry.
>
> uriel
>
> On Sun, Jun 21, 2009 at 5:43 PM, hiro<23h...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>> As said, don't miss that all these efforts will be kept at
>> its most minimalist solution.
>>
>> Easily said...
>>
>>> It is the Sensible Solution[tm] to
>>> do it the way he suggests.
>>
>> ...
>>
>>> Separating interface and implementation...
>>
>> Not always sane.
>>
>> In this case I agree that it's rather not worth it.
>> If Arg eagerly wants to try it nobody will prevent him in doing so.
>> But if he really managed to bring us out of X doom, I'd be greatly surprised 
>> :)
>>
>>
>
>



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

Re: [dev] dwm development continues NOW

[Jack Woehr]

Enno Boland (Gottox) wrote:

2009/6/21 Uriel :
  

Excessive and naive obsession with code reuse is one of the major
sources of gratuitous complexity in the software industry.


Ooh! Nice. "Having an idea and being able to execute it in code"
is in 75% of cases much more serendipitous than rote code reuse.

Besides, code reuse means usually "using someone else's code"
and "using someone else's code" is often the cause of "sucks".

--
Jack J. Woehr# I run for public office from time to time. It's like
http://www.well.com/~jax # working out at the gym, you sweat a lot, don't get
http://www.softwoehr.com # anywhere, and you fall asleep easily afterwards.

Re: [dev] Suckless (*NIX|*BSD) Distribution?

[Pinocchio]

It's a metadistribution. The entire point is to use it how you see fit
and it tries to help you do that, but it by no means holds your hand
while doing it.



I don't think "metadistribution" has an actual application here.  I
see things like LFS or JeOS as metadistributions; 'being configurable'
doesn't really cut it.


  
I really think it has... at least from the suckless mind frame. I have 
used Gentoo in the past and one of the main reasons I liked it was that 
you could install only the components you liked. So if you were not 
using Gnome, you could eliminate the gnome support and dependency 
libraries altogether from a lot of common applications. So in a sense, 
it allows you not only to decide which applications you want to install 
but also have control on which subsystems you want to install. Also, 
this is the very reason why it is source based as I don't think its 
technically feasible to do with a binary distribution without some 
standardization and/or hackery. At least, I was ready to put up with the 
compilation to get rid of bloated and buggy subsystems.


I think it will be nice to have a way of directly looking up installed 
components and then disabling / enabling features in binary installs 
depending on their presence and absence. Also, I think having this at 
the granularity of single packages is probably not a good idea and there 
should be a notion of "subsystems" which applications could query. There 
are many collections of packages that could become subsystems 
(ssh-client, ssh-server, X-client, X-server, standard-tray-desktop...) 
and that would be a nice way to give control to applications themselves 
to query, enable and disable support for features in their apps.


Bottomline, I believe that giving applications more control rather than 
relying on distributions to package things well would be a good first 
step towards a suckless (less bloat, works out of the box) workstation / 
server setup


regards,
pinocchio

Re: [dev] dwm development continues NOW

[Uriel]

On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 3:28 AM, Jack Woehr wrote:
> Enno Boland (Gottox) wrote:
>>
>> 2009/6/21 Uriel :
>>
>>>
>>> Excessive and naive obsession with code reuse is one of the major
>>> sources of gratuitous complexity in the software industry.
>>>
>
> Ooh! Nice. "Having an idea and being able to execute it in code"
> is in 75% of cases much more serendipitous than rote code reuse.
>
> Besides, code reuse means usually "using someone else's code"
> and "using someone else's code" is often the cause of "sucks".


This needs to be qualified: it depends on *who else's* code you use.
Much crap is produced by people that can't recognize their own
limitations and reinvent square wheels when some of the best minds in
the world already have produced perfectly round wheels.

Of course there are fewer round wheels out there than most people
thinks, but to put a very clear example: if you have a choice between
writing your own code or using ken's code, I'm quite certain every
single time you should pick ken's code.

There are perhaps only handful of hackers in the world of ken's
caliber, but everyone that cares about not polluting the world with
more crap should be well aware of their work and take advantage of
reusing it as much as possible.

Peace

uriel

Re: [dev] Suckless (*NIX|*BSD) Distribution?

[Jorge Vargas]

On Sat, Jun 20, 2009 at 12:21 AM, Antony Jepson wrote:
> I'm not sure if this has been asked before (although I did do a quick
> search of ) but what distributions do you guys use on
> a daily basis?  I recently built a new computer and I'm looking for a
> good OS to install on there.
>
> I've been eyeing Crux lately but maybe Gentoo would be a better choice?
> If it makes a difference, I currently use Arch.
>
> Comments or suggestions for a (quality|suckless|KISS) distribution
> (doesn't matter if *BSD or *NIX) would be appreciated.  I read about
> pancake's distribution [1] and it definitely sounds interesting.
>
I totally agree with Anselm I'm using ubuntu for the desktop, because
it *just works* I don't agree with most of it's design decision and I
totally disagree with the "code for the idiots" but oh well. At this
point in time it doesn't gets in my way and I'm happy with that.

I have to totally agree with the Gentoo is not for racers part. In
fact for servers if I ever manage a server again. I'll probably run
gentoo on it. Mainly becuase
1- you install only what you want
2- you build from source (this is good! for security)
3- SELinux is really good in gentoo.
4- Going to dev versions of needed (for patches for example) doesn't
means you need to wait 6 months for it.

> --
> Sincerely,
>
> Antony Jepson /   / GPG Key: 0xFA10ED80
>

Re: [dev] Re: dwm development continues NOW

[Alexander Krylowsky]

On Sat, 2009-06-20 17:27:48 +0100, Anselm R Garbe wrote:
> An initial version of the new xinerama support is committed into hg,
> it's not finished/polished yet, but the basics are usable already.
> During the development I decided to have a bar per monitor, instead of
> just one bar. It's less confusing that way.
> 
> Monitors are currently selected through pressing Mod1-w, Mod1-e (just
> two initial keybindings), and clients are assigned to the selected
> monitor and can be re-assigned using Mod1-Shift-w, Mod1-Shift-e resp.
> 
> There are several bugs still, esp. related to the floating handling
> (it's currently possible to have a floating client assigned to a
> monitor even if it's shown on a totally different monitor).
> 
> The code will have a lot of polishing and some config.h options will
> go away possibly... one candidate is topbar.
> 
> Bug reports welcome.
> 
> Please don't do code reviews yet, I know that it's ugly and needs polishing.
> 
> Kind regards,
> Anselm

 Sounds good. But what about XrandR support in dwm? afaik, Xinerama is
deprecated since 2008 in Xorg..
 There were some pathes on dwm@ list to do this thing, but they're ugly.

-- 
wbr, Alexander Krylowsky
Tver State University IC dep
mailto: w...@tversu.ru