[dev] [wmii] Anyone use regex tags for clients?
I just started reading the wmii pdf (http://wmii.googlecode.com/hg/doc/wmii.pdf), and found the feature where you can tag a client with /foo/, and the client will then show up on any tag with "foo" in it. Sounds interesting -- I'd like to hear from anyone who uses this feature. Thanks, --Nate
Re: [dev] [wmii] Anyone use regex tags for clients?
On Fri, 21 May 2010 09:11:01 -0500 Nathan Neff wrote: > I just started reading the wmii pdf > (http://wmii.googlecode.com/hg/doc/wmii.pdf), > and found the feature where you can tag a client with /foo/, and the > client will then show up on any tag with "foo" in it. > > Sounds interesting -- I'd like to hear from anyone who uses this > feature. I rarely use it myself. I mainly added it as a more flexible form of “sticky” clients. There are a few uses I can think of for them, but I think they're mainly useful for people who use category tags. For instance, if you used gimp a lot you might have tags like gimp:project-1, gimp:project-1, and tag the gimp toolbox windows with /gimp/ so it's available on all those tags. The same would apply for, say, an IDE. The other example I've come across fairly often involves things like panels and status bars. Generally they appear on all tags. There are probably certain times you'd prefer not to see them, though, such as when you're reading, writing, or working on something that needs a lot of screen real estate, so you might give it a tag like +/./-/books|mail|tex/. -- Kris Maglione It is a farce to call any being virtuous whose virtues do not result from the exercise of its own reason. --Mary Wollstonecraft
Re: [dev] Re: wmii; make with /bin/bash not with /bin/sh
On Thu, 20 May 2010 22:19:20 +0200
David Schmid wrote:
> On Thu, 20 May 2010 21:46:01 +0200
> David Engster wrote:
> > > Now it says:
> > >
> > > MAKE all libbio/
> > > ../util/compile: syntax error at line 13: `(' unexpected
> > > make[1]: *** [bbuffered.o] Error 2
> > > make: *** [dall] Error 2
> >
> > Sorry, forgot to mention that you still have to set /bin/bash in
> > those scripts in util.
>
> Now that looks awesome. The only thing that does not work is
> cmd/wihack.sh, even when set to /bin/bash.
>
> FILTER cmd/wihack.sh
> wihack.sh: bad substitution
> make[1]: *** [wihack.out] Error 1
> make: *** [dall] Error 2
>
> But I think I will figure out the rest.
That's just because the make script runs a syntax check on sh scripts
before it installs them. I'm afraid the only option is to edit
mk/hdr.mk. It should probably use $(BINSH) there instead.
Is there some reason you can't just replace /bin/sh with some
reasonable shell? dash, ash, or ksh (which would run POSIX emulation in
that case) should all do fine. I can't imagine that there are any
scripts which would run under Bourne and not POSIX sh, and it'd
probably save you some headaches elsewhere, too.
Oh, and ash and ksh actually support proper commandline editing and
histoy, unlike Solaris's shell, as I recall.
--
Kris Maglione
I have always found that plans are useless, but planning is
indispensable.
--Dwight Eisenhower
Re: [dev] Re: wmii; make with /bin/bash not with /bin/sh
Kris Maglione wrote:
On Thu, 20 May 2010 22:19:20 +0200
David Schmid wrote:
On Thu, 20 May 2010 21:46:01 +0200
David Engster wrote:
Now it says:
MAKE all libbio/
../util/compile: syntax error at line 13: `(' unexpected
make[1]: *** [bbuffered.o] Error 2
make: *** [dall] Error 2
Sorry, forgot to mention that you still have to set /bin/bash in
those scripts in util.
Now that looks awesome. The only thing that does not work is
cmd/wihack.sh, even when set to /bin/bash.
FILTER cmd/wihack.sh
wihack.sh: bad substitution
make[1]: *** [wihack.out] Error 1
make: *** [dall] Error 2
But I think I will figure out the rest.
That's just because the make script runs a syntax check on sh scripts
before it installs them. I'm afraid the only option is to edit
mk/hdr.mk. It should probably use $(BINSH) there instead.
Is there some reason you can't just replace /bin/sh with some
reasonable shell? dash, ash, or ksh (which would run POSIX emulation in
that case) should all do fine. I can't imagine that there are any
scripts which would run under Bourne and not POSIX sh, and it'd
probably save you some headaches elsewhere, too.
Oh, and ash and ksh actually support proper commandline editing and
histoy, unlike Solaris's shell, as I recall.
Seems like the sysadmin isn't quite fond of the idea of replacing the sh
command (which is actually something called jsh). Since it is quite
uncomfortable to discuss this with him over instant messaging I will
acquire the reason in person. But that isn't feasible until next weeks'
workdays.
--
regards and a nice weekend,
David
[dev] surf cookie handler
Hi, I was interested in rewriting the cookie handler as per the description in the project ideas page, but it seems like that problem is mostly fixed now, at least, I don't notice anything unusual in multiple surf instances during normal browsing. I would be interested in helping out in that aspect of the project, could someone give me an idea of what the current state of surf's cookie handler is? Thanks -Syed
