Re: [dev] Interesting post about X11

[Gregor Best]

On Mon, Jun 14, 2010 at 11:50:40PM -0700, Robert Ransom wrote:
> [...]
> That > *is* somewhat unusual
> [...]

Where exactly is the difference between running

DISPLAY=foo:0.0 bar

on a remote machine via ssh as opposed to running the very same command
from an xterm on the remote machine?

-- 
GCS/IT/M d- s+:- a-- C++ UL+++ US UB++ P+++ L+++ E--- W+ N+ o--
K- w--- ?O M-- ?V PS++ PE- Y++ PGP+++ t+ 5 X+ R tv b+++ DI+++
D+++ G+ e h! r y+

Gregor Best


pgpfImdj7L4gy.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: [dev] Interesting post about X11

[Anselm R Garbe]

On 15 June 2010 08:18, Gregor Best  wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 14, 2010 at 11:50:40PM -0700, Robert Ransom wrote:
>> [...]
>> That > *is* somewhat unusual
>> [...]
>
> Where exactly is the difference between running
>
>    DISPLAY=foo:0.0 bar
>
> on a remote machine via ssh as opposed to running the very same command
> from an xterm on the remote machine?

There won't be a difference. The client will attempt to connect to the
X server on port 6000 on host foo in both cases.
A difference would be if you would omit the DISPLAY setting, then it
would connect to the X forwarded port presumably.

Kind regards,
Anselm

Re: [dev] Interesting post about X11

[Robert Ransom]

On Tue, 15 Jun 2010 09:18:04 +0200
Gregor Best  wrote:

> On Mon, Jun 14, 2010 at 11:50:40PM -0700, Robert Ransom wrote:
> > [...]
> > That > *is* somewhat unusual
> > [...]
> 
> Where exactly is the difference between running
> 
> DISPLAY=foo:0.0 bar
> 
> on a remote machine via ssh as opposed to running the very same command
> from an xterm on the remote machine?

(I assume you are talking about an xterm whose DISPLAY is 'foo:0'.)  The
difference is that if you run bar on foo:0 from an xterm on foo:0, bar
will probably have D-Bus environment variables for foo:0 in its
environment, whereas if you run bar on foo:0 from an xterm on baz:0,
bar may have D-Bus environment variables for baz:0 in its environment.
(At the moment, I think ssh does not forward D-Bus environment junk,
but that 'feature' could be added fairly easily.)

The protocol they were discussing would have had bar display its own UI
using $DISPLAY and send a startup notification using the D-Bus
connection specified in its environment.

Robert Ransom


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: [dev] Interesting post about X11

[Gregor Best]

On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 12:46:43AM -0700, Robert Ransom wrote:
> [...]
> (At the moment, I think ssh does not forward D-Bus environment junk,
> but that 'feature' could be added fairly easily.)
> [...]

Hope dies last :)

> [...]
> The protocol they were discussing would have had bar display its own UI
> using $DISPLAY and send a startup notification using the D-Bus
> connection specified in its environment.
> [...]

I see, that would really be odd... Every day there's something about
D-Bus that confuses me more and more... (And is there even one system
where D-Bus works absolutely flawless? I have never seen one, not even
in my universities network).

-- 
GCS/IT/M d- s+:- a-- C++ UL+++ US UB++ P+++ L+++ E--- W+ N+ o--
K- w--- ?O M-- ?V PS++ PE- Y++ PGP+++ t+ 5 X+ R tv b+++ DI+++
D+++ G+ e h! r y+

Gregor Best


pgp7F7o24R0Yx.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: [dev] Suckless operating system

[Kurt Van Dijck]

On Mon, Jun 14, 2010 at 05:26:59PM +0200, Moritz Wilhelmy wrote:
> 
> > On Mon, Jun 14, 2010 at 02:22:33PM +0200, Moritz Wilhelmy wrote:
> > > > * udev (+/- 5sec) was replaced by our (small) fdev (now takes some 0.1
> > > > sec).
> > > 
> > > there is also mdev in busybox, in case you are interested. I like busybox
> > > very much, but I think it lacks documentation.
> > Indeed, it's similar.  I forgot why (must look back), but mdev is even more
> > basic, and wasn't sufficient for me.
> 
> would you mind sharing the sourcecode? we are working on another "suckless"
> distro, and we don't want dbus, hal, gconf, fdi, xml, policykit and ponys in
> there, so we're always looking for unixy software to extend it.

The thing is that this is part of a product for the company I work for.
I don't think my boss wants _all_ code opensourced. I hate to say, but the
answer is no for the moment.

I just talked about the init as it showed a point that it is not necessarily
the complexity that slows down booting. It's the parallelism.

But I seriously evaluated minit & ninit (somewhere on internet). For a regular
desktop system, they would work as well, & are better documented.

our 'fdev' just dropped 5 seconds, but mdev is capable too.

Kurt
> 

Re: [dev] Interesting post about X11

[Alexander Teinum]

An OS built on a web browser doesn’t have to mean that the
applications are closed source. If you host the applications locally,
and use something like web sockets and Node.js to communicate with the
lower level stuff, you may end up with something that 1. uses web
technologies, 2. performs good, 3. is open.

I’m not sure if this is a good idea. I do think it’s the most
streamlined way to do it, since you’re most likely using the web
browser anyway. There was some talk about the idea of implementing a
suckless web browser engine in the other thread that’s 100 % standards
compliant. That could make a web-based terminal application almost as
snappy as xterm if done right.

On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 7:59 AM, Anselm R Garbe  wrote:
> On 14 June 2010 12:13, pancake  wrote:
>> http://julien.danjou.info/blog/2010.html#Thoughts%20and%20rambling%20on%20the%20X%20protocol
>
> This post proves once again that a new window system is what everyone
> is waiting for and that it's our opportunity to do that.
>

I’d love to see, or to be a part of that.


-- 
Best regards,

Alexander Teinum

Re: [dev] Interesting post about X11

[Robert Ransom]

On Tue, 15 Jun 2010 10:38:43 +0200
Alexander Teinum  wrote:

>That could make a web-based terminal application almost as
> snappy as xterm if done right.

So, you think that

- a terminal emulator written in JavaScript
- which produces its output by manipulating XML DOM objects
- which in turn cause a browser to rerun its page *layout* algorithm
- and then redraw the terminal screen

will be as snappy as xterm?  Or by ‘done right’, do you mean that you
want a terminal written in Java or Google Native Client?

Where's Uriel?

Robert Ransom


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: Re: [dev] Suckless operating system

[ilf]

On 06-14 20:18, Stanley Lieber wrote:
I've had to stop using surf to monitor a page at my job because they 
now insist upon a Netscape or IE user agent string.


config.h:   static char *useragent
or http://surf.suckless.org/patches/useragent

'Monitoring' a page sounds like I'd script it though.

--
ilf@jabber.berlin.ccc.de

Über 80 Millionen Deutsche benutzen keine Konsole. Klick dich nicht weg!
-- Eine Initiative des Bundesamtes für Tastaturbenutzung


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: [dev] Interesting post about X11

[pancake]

check eyeOS (again)

On 06/15/10 10:38, Alexander Teinum wrote:

An OS built on a web browser doesn’t have to mean that the
applications are closed source. If you host the applications locally,
and use something like web sockets and Node.js to communicate with the
lower level stuff, you may end up with something that 1. uses web
technologies, 2. performs good, 3. is open.

I’m not sure if this is a good idea. I do think it’s the most
streamlined way to do it, since you’re most likely using the web
browser anyway. There was some talk about the idea of implementing a
suckless web browser engine in the other thread that’s 100 % standards
compliant. That could make a web-based terminal application almost as
snappy as xterm if done right.

On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 7:59 AM, Anselm R Garbe  wrote:
   

On 14 June 2010 12:13, pancake  wrote:
 

http://julien.danjou.info/blog/2010.html#Thoughts%20and%20rambling%20on%20the%20X%20protocol
   

This post proves once again that a new window system is what everyone
is waiting for and that it's our opportunity to do that.

 

I’d love to see, or to be a part of that.


   

Re: [dev] Suckless operating system

[Nick]

Quoth Ethan Grammatikidis:
> I think it's pointless because most file types can be identified 
> from  their first few bytes. This loops back around to my 
> content-type  argument, why should the server go looking for file 
> type when the  client gets it handed to it anyway?

Because that way you can do content negotiation. Granted, that isn't 
much used today, and it would make sense to make content-type 
optional, but I like the idea of content negotiation. Being able to 
e.g. get the original markdown for the content of a page, without 
the HTML crap, navigation etc, would be really nice in a lot of 
cases. I get the impression the W3C expected content negotiation to 
be used a lot more when they wrote the HTTP 1.1 spec.


pgpmecCeukcM5.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: [dev] Interesting post about X11

[Nick]

Quoth Robert Ransom:
> So, you think that
> 
> - a terminal emulator written in JavaScript
> - which produces its output by manipulating XML DOM objects
> - which in turn cause a browser to rerun its page *layout* algorithm
> - and then redraw the terminal screen
> 
> will be as snappy as xterm?  Or by ‘done right’, do you mean that you
> want a terminal written in Java or Google Native Client?
> 
> Where's Uriel?

Indeed. Hell, give me a bloated GNU system anyday over a 
browser-as-OS system. Apart from the enormous drop in possible 
software efficiency and cleanness, browser-based programs default to 
loss of privacy and software freedom.


pgpFiauWtFCk6.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: [dev] Interesting post about X11

[Kurt H Maier]

On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 4:38 AM, Alexander Teinum  wrote:
> If you host the applications locally,
> and use something like web sockets and Node.js to communicate with the
> lower level stuff,

This is some of the most horrifying shit ever spewed into this mailing list.

> 1. uses web technologies,

How the hell is this an advantage?

> 2. performs good,

Maybe on your 4-core processor.  There's no way this will ever be
competitive with a real program.

> 3. is open.

Great.  Open-source dogshit.  Observe as I scramble toward
sourceforge, blinded by my desire for this download.

> I’m not sure if this is a good idea.

I'm absolutely positive it isn't.

> I do think it’s the most
> streamlined way to do it, since you’re most likely using the web
> browser anyway.

I use a car a lot, too, can we just require me to start that engine to
do an 'ls'?  Maybe have the speedometer point to different numbers --
then I can point my webcam at it and run a program to convert them
into ascii and transmit them via RDS to my car stereo so I can read
them.  I mean, it's the most streamlined way to do it, even if it's
circuitous, wasteful, and idiotic.  I'm most likely using my car
anyway.

> There was some talk about the idea of implementing a
> suckless web browser engine in the other thread that’s 100 % standards
> compliant.

Web standards aren't "100% standards-compliant."  Every last one of
them is self-contradictory.

> That could make a web-based terminal application almost as
> snappy as xterm if done right.

You have no grounds for this conclusion *whatsoever*.

> I’d love to see, or to be a part of that.

Feel free to watch, but if someone starts to produce code, do the
world a favor and keep your opinions from contaminating it

-- 
# Kurt H Maier

Re: [dev] Suckless operating system

[Ethan Grammatikidis]

On 15 Jun 2010, at 11:24, Nick wrote:


Quoth Ethan Grammatikidis:

I think it's pointless because most file types can be identified
from  their first few bytes. This loops back around to my
content-type  argument, why should the server go looking for file
type when the  client gets it handed to it anyway?


Because that way you can do content negotiation. Granted, that isn't
much used today,


Why not? With more international businesses than ever on the web and  
the internet spread further over the globe than ever before, and with  
content negotiation having been around for such a long time, why is it  
hardly used? Perhaps because it sucks?



and it would make sense to make content-type
optional, but I like the idea of content negotiation. Being able to
e.g. get the original markdown for the content of a page, without
the HTML crap, navigation etc, would be really nice in a lot of
cases.


Maybe, but I doubt the majority of web designers would like you  
looking at their source, as simple as it might be, and the likelihood  
of big businesses letting you get at their web page sources seems very  
low. Maybe I'm just terminally cynical.



I get the impression the W3C expected content negotiation to
be used a lot more when they wrote the HTTP 1.1 spec.


Erm, yeah. The W3C seems to have expected a lot of things would be  
practical and useful.


--
Complexity is not a function of the number of features. Some features  
exist only because complexity was _removed_ from the underlying system.

Re: [dev] Suckless operating system

[Nick]

Quoth Ethan Grammatikidis:
> On 15 Jun 2010, at 11:24, Nick wrote:
> > Because that way you can do content negotiation. Granted, that isn't
> > much used today,
> 
> Why not? With more international businesses than ever on the web and  
> the internet spread further over the globe than ever before, and with  
> content negotiation having been around for such a long time, why is it  
> hardly used? Perhaps because it sucks?

I always presumed it was because web browsers never really gave it a 
meaningful interface. Same, for that matter, with HTTP basic 
authentication.
 
> > and it would make sense to make content-type
> > optional, but I like the idea of content negotiation. Being able to
> > e.g. get the original markdown for the content of a page, without
> > the HTML crap, navigation etc, would be really nice in a lot of
> > cases.
> 
> Maybe, but I doubt the majority of web designers would like you  
> looking at their source, as simple as it might be, and the likelihood  
> of big businesses letting you get at their web page sources seems very  
> low. Maybe I'm just terminally cynical.

Sigh, no, you're largely right. Though wikipedia or some of the more 
open blog engines are examples where this is less likely to be true.

> > I get the impression the W3C expected content negotiation to
> > be used a lot more when they wrote the HTTP 1.1 spec.
> 
> Erm, yeah. The W3C seems to have expected a lot of things would be  
> practical and useful.

Well, I prefer the W3C's vision of the web to the one designers and 
marketers have created.

Incidentally, can anyone recommend a good gopher client? I missed it 
the first time 'round, and I'd be curious to see a different 
paradigm of web type thing.


pgp7z85zmd6O6.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: [dev] Suckless operating system

[Kris Maglione]

Does anyone ever notice that every time we have this thread, it 
grows without bound, and yet never manages to get anywhere?


--
Kris Maglione

You're bound to be unhappy if you optimize everything.
--Donald Knuth

Re: [dev] Interesting post about X11

[Connor Lane Smith]

On 15 June 2010 09:58, Robert Ransom  wrote:
> - a terminal emulator written in JavaScript
> - which produces its output by manipulating XML DOM objects
> - which in turn cause a browser to rerun its page *layout* algorithm
> - and then redraw the terminal screen

You have heard of HTML5's , right?

It's the JavaScript which makes me balk. I think the web will be a lot
nicer to develop for once browsers begin to understand that 

Re: [dev] Interesting post about X11

[Anselm R Garbe]

On 15 June 2010 12:51, Connor Lane Smith  wrote:
> On 15 June 2010 09:58, Robert Ransom  wrote:
>> - a terminal emulator written in JavaScript
>> - which produces its output by manipulating XML DOM objects
>> - which in turn cause a browser to rerun its page *layout* algorithm
>> - and then redraw the terminal screen
>
> You have heard of HTML5's , right?
>
> It's the JavaScript which makes me balk. I think the web will be a lot
> nicer to develop for once browsers begin to understand that 

Re: [dev] Suckless operating system

[Kurt H Maier]

On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 7:45 AM, Kris Maglione  wrote:
> Does anyone ever notice that every time we have this thread, it grows
> without bound,

This happens with this topic on all general-dev mailing lists.

>and yet never manages to get anywhere?

This is what makes the suckless list better.  Otherwise you wind up
with shit like http://www.archhurd.org/

-- 
# Kurt H Maier

Re: [dev] Interesting post about X11

[Ethan Grammatikidis]

On 15 Jun 2010, at 09:58, Robert Ransom wrote:


On Tue, 15 Jun 2010 10:38:43 +0200
Alexander Teinum  wrote:


  That could make a web-based terminal application almost as
snappy as xterm if done right.


So, you think that

- a terminal emulator written in JavaScript
- which produces its output by manipulating XML DOM objects
- which in turn cause a browser to rerun its page *layout* algorithm
- and then redraw the terminal screen

will be as snappy as xterm?  Or by ‘done right’, do you mean that you
want a terminal written in Java or Google Native Client?

Where's Uriel?



Indeed! Off in some less deeply disturbing thread, perhaps? >:-) Kurt  
H Maier made some solid points, but these points written here so  
exactly parallel the JavaStation tale I had to reply here.


HISTORY
HISTORY
HISTORY

If you're a little ambitious and, say, want to come up with THE next  
big thing in the computing world, don't try to come up with something  
yourself. Look a little way into the past, around 10 years is always a  
good bet. Take an idea from that time, rephrase about half of the  
terminology to sound good in present-day, and add a liberal sprinkling  
of suck to make the new terms look like they fit. YOUR SUCKY  
UNIMAGINATIVE SHIT _WILL_ SELL.


It _will_ be praised as the latest and greatest. The very few people  
who notice it was around 10 years ago will be utterly ignored by the  
vast flood of mindless praise you will receive. No, that's not right.  
It's much worse than that. Those who notice will be taken for fools,  
because the vast flock of sheep which constitutes the technology- 
worshipping crowd today really, genuinely believe tiny differences in  
the way something is phrased actually mean a real, deep, and complete  
difference in the technology.


So, JavaStations. Hardware and software purpose-designed for zero  
administration, using Java not JavaScript, a real programming language  
with far fewer layers between it and the hardware than "web  
technology" has. Note JavaStations, when people put Linux on them  
instead of JavaOS, turned out to be quite reasonable machines. The  
hardware was quite adequate for the era. Note too the timescale, it's  
a little over 10 years. Note 3 the subtle change in terminology, Java  
was marketed as (and thus widely believed to be) the _network_  
programming language. Network, web, big difference eh?


Allow me to quote from a professor who was subjected to JavaStations  
in his computing lab. This is quoted in the Linux JavaStation HOWTO. [1]


> Well, of course the old JavaStations were practically unusable.  
It's not a matter of just my opinion; we used to have CU 310 full of  
students using the Xterms all the time. As soon as the JavaStations  
appeared there were NO STUDENTS in there at all. The JavaStations  
killed CU 310. Now that the JavaStations are (thanks to you) back up  
to speed, students are beginning to come back, but they've gotten out  
of the habit of working in our lab, and are used to working on their  
own in the dorms. I think this is a big loss -- they don't learn  
anything from talking to each other in the labs anymore.


> Ghostview was slow, etc, but even vi was too slow. I am used to  
typing quickly, and when the cursor can't keep up with me, I can't  
handle it. I would also have worked at home if I didn't have to be  
here. And there were those annoying red squares left all over the  
Xterm window when you were in vi. I had to type ^L every few lines to  
get rid of them to see what I was typing... The pits. The whole setup  
made me lose a lot of respect for Sun (although I try to separate the  
different product lines as much as possible); I also think Sun will  
not get respect for hyping a product like the JavaStation so strongly,  
and then just dumping it. I would wonder why anyone would not just  
dump Sun...


> BTW, the JavaStations, now that they are fast, are quite fine. I  
really like mine, and don't see why they aren't a viable product.


 -- Dr. Mark Barnard, Professor at Marquette University (Quoted March  
2000) 


[1] 
http://www.tldp.org/HOWTO/JavaStation-HOWTO/whatischapter.html#JavaStationDeathSection

--
Do not specify what the computer should do for you, ask what the  
computer can do for you.

Re: [dev] Interesting post about X11

[Ethan Grammatikidis]

On 15 Jun 2010, at 12:51, Connor Lane Smith wrote:


In my opinion the problem is purely user experience:


Is this your opinion, or lines you've been fed?


(a) installing
software is perceived as difficult, so not having to bother with that
is an instant plus, and (b) your data is available everywhere.


Neither is a reason to use horse-shit like HTTP, HTML, CSS or  
JavaScript.


--
After watching Linux go nowhere for 10 years, actually watching it go  
backwards many times, I woke up.

Re: [dev] Suckless operating system

[Ethan Grammatikidis]

On 15 Jun 2010, at 12:48, Nick wrote:


Quoth Ethan Grammatikidis:

On 15 Jun 2010, at 11:24, Nick wrote:

Because that way you can do content negotiation. Granted, that isn't
much used today,


Why not? With more international businesses than ever on the web and
the internet spread further over the globe than ever before, and with
content negotiation having been around for such a long time, why is  
it

hardly used? Perhaps because it sucks?


I always presumed it was because web browsers never really gave it a
meaningful interface. Same, for that matter, with HTTP basic
authentication.


The interface for language content negotiation is straightforward and  
meaningful, but nobody uses even that.





and it would make sense to make content-type
optional, but I like the idea of content negotiation. Being able to
e.g. get the original markdown for the content of a page, without
the HTML crap, navigation etc, would be really nice in a lot of
cases.


Maybe, but I doubt the majority of web designers would like you
looking at their source, as simple as it might be, and the likelihood
of big businesses letting you get at their web page sources seems  
very

low. Maybe I'm just terminally cynical.


Sigh, no, you're largely right. Though wikipedia or some of the more
open blog engines are examples where this is less likely to be true.


I get the impression the W3C expected content negotiation to
be used a lot more when they wrote the HTTP 1.1 spec.


Erm, yeah. The W3C seems to have expected a lot of things would be
practical and useful.


Well, I prefer the W3C's vision of the web to the one designers and
marketers have created.


I don't. :) There are plenty of worthless shinyshit marketing sites,  
of course, but sites which actually sell you a wide range of products  
make sure you can find the products you want AND specifications on them.


On w3.org by contrast the page on the cgi standard has nothing but  
dead links and references to an obsolete web server. I was searching  
for the CGI standard the other day, and couldn't find it _anywhere_.  
I've not generally found navigating w3.org too easy, it's only all  
right when you already know where stuff is.




Incidentally, can anyone recommend a good gopher client? I missed it
the first time 'round, and I'd be curious to see a different
paradigm of web type thing.


I'm curious too. I've only ever used a somewhat sucky web gateway to  
access gopher, and that only once.


--
Complexity is not a function of the number of features. Some features  
exist only because complexity was _removed_ from the underlying system.

Re: [dev] Suckless operating system

[Dmitry Maluka]

On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 02:21:12PM +0100, Ethan Grammatikidis wrote:
> On w3.org by contrast the page on the cgi standard has nothing but
> dead links and references to an obsolete web server. I was searching
> for the CGI standard the other day, and couldn't find it _anywhere_.

It's here, btw: http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3875

Re: [dev] Interesting post about X11

[Alexander Teinum]

That did cause some reactions.

The reason why I brought this up is because I for a year have been
working on a personal project named Brevity, and I have been
experimenting with the idea of basing an OS on a web browser engine on
top of Linux.

But that’s not the goal of the OS – it’s just one possible way to
reach the goal. The technical goal is to have a system with as clean
architecture as possible. For the user, the goal is to have a UI that
doesn’t get in the way. I have been playing around with MVC patterns
in native DOM JavaScript (by that I mean that I don’t use libraries)
for some time, but issues such as JavaScript not having an
import-statement has made me look for workarounds. I’m not sure if
it’s worth it. Judging from the the general opinion of this
discussion, it’s definitely not worth it. :)

So I’m not sure what will happen to my project. I’d really just like
to have my computer as simple as possible. I love dwm because of its
simplicity, and right now I would like to have the same kind of
simplicity in the lower layers.


-- 
Best regards,

Alexander Teinum

Re: [dev] Suckless operating system

[Dieter Plaetinck]

On Tue, 15 Jun 2010 08:43:31 -0400
Kurt H Maier  wrote:


> This is what makes the suckless list better.  Otherwise you wind up
> with shit like http://www.archhurd.org/
> 

What's wrong with arch hurd?

Dieter

Re: [dev] Suckless operating system

[Kris Maglione]

On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 04:05:24PM +0200, Dieter Plaetinck wrote:

On Tue, 15 Jun 2010 08:43:31 -0400
Kurt H Maier  wrote:

This is what makes the suckless list better.  Otherwise you wind up
with shit like http://www.archhurd.org/



What's wrong with arch hurd?


The HURD part, obviously.

--
Kris Maglione

Haskell is faster than C++, more concise than Perl, more regular than
Python, more flexible than Ruby, more typeful than C#, more robust
than Java, and has absolutely nothing in common with PHP.
--Autrijus Tang

Re: [dev] Suckless operating system

[anonymous]

On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 12:48:34PM +0100, Nick wrote:
> Incidentally, can anyone recommend a good gopher client? I missed it 
> the first time 'round, and I'd be curious to see a different 
> paradigm of web type thing.

Lynx and Mozilla Firefox support Gopher.

Re: [dev] Suckless operating system

[Mate Nagy]

On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 07:12:54PM +0400, anonymous wrote:
> Lynx and Mozilla Firefox support Gopher.
firefox's gopher support has some catches (e.g. only port 70 is
supported, given port after : is ignored).

There is an extension for firefox called overbite:
 http://gopher.floodgap.com/overbite/

this adds decent gopher support.

lynx used to be a terribly buggy gopher client, but in recent versions
the major problems seem to be fixed. I remember it had an issue with a
bit overzealous caching, so watch out.

There's also the "gopher" package in Debian, which is supposedly "a
text-based (ncurses) client from the University of Minnesota."
This is an abomination that tries to connect with (the nonstandard)
gopher+ by default and if the gopher server doesn't handle this, fails
utterly. Gopher servers must contain gopher+ trampolines to work
around this problem. It has problems handling menus with more
consecutive info lines than the screen height (this is a bit unusual but
not unknown situation).

My vote: if you're firefox running anyway, use overbite; otherwise try
lynx.

Mate

[dev] dwm 5.8.2 patches

[v4hn]

ev'ning everyone,

I thought about updating my current dwm installation(5.2)
for some time. Well, now I had some spare time left
and updated my old monocle_count-patch to 5.8.2 - 
if anyone is interested: it prints the total number of
clients and the number of the currently activated client
besides the symbol of the monocle layout, while the current release
prints only the number of total clients within the symbol.

Also I tweaked the patches of bstack, fibonacci and gridmode
to apply clean if applied incrementally. So the following does
work without rejections now:

dwm-5.8.2 $ cat ../dwm-5.8.2-bstack.diff \
../dwm-5.8.2-fibonacci.diff \
../dwm-5.8.2-gridmode.diff \
../dwm-5.8.2-monocle_count.diff \
../dwm-5.8.2-pertag_without_bar.diff | patch -p1

Last but not least in my current setup I see no point of
one showbar flag for each tag, while I really like pertag.
So I hacked pertag, to keep one boolean showbar,
while layout and mfact are stored per tag.


All patched are attached, have fun :)


v4hn
diff -NU5 -r dwm-5.8.2/bstack.c dwm-5.8.2-bstack/bstack.c
--- dwm-5.8.2/bstack.c  1970-01-01 01:00:00.0 +0100
+++ dwm-5.8.2-bstack/bstack.c   2010-06-15 17:47:44.0 +0200
@@ -0,0 +1,29 @@
+static void
+bstack(Monitor *m) {
+   int x, y, h, w, mh;
+   unsigned int i, n;
+   Client *c;
+
+   for(n = 0, c = nexttiled(m->clients); c; c = nexttiled(c->next), n++);
+   if(n == 0)
+   return;
+   /* master */
+   c = nexttiled(m->clients);
+   mh = m->mfact * m->wh;
+   resize(c, m->wx, m->wy, m->ww - 2 * c->bw, (n == 1 ? m->wh : mh) - 2 * 
c->bw, False);
+   if(--n == 0)
+   return;
+   /* tile stack */
+   x = m->wx;
+   y = (m->wy + mh > c->y + c->h) ? c->y + c->h + 2 * c->bw : m->wy + mh;
+   w = m->ww / n;
+   h = (m->wy + mh > c->y + c->h) ? m->wy + m->wh - y : m->wh - mh;
+   if(w < bh)
+   w = m->ww;
+   for(i = 0, c = nexttiled(c->next); c; c = nexttiled(c->next), i++) {
+   resize(c, x, y, /* remainder */ ((i + 1 == n)
+  ? m->wx + m->ww - x - 2 * c->bw : w - 2 * c->bw), h - 2 
* c->bw, False);
+   if(w != m->ww)
+   x = c->x + WIDTH(c);
+   }
+}
diff -NU5 -r dwm-5.8.2/bstackhoriz.c dwm-5.8.2-bstack/bstackhoriz.c
--- dwm-5.8.2/bstackhoriz.c 1970-01-01 01:00:00.0 +0100
+++ dwm-5.8.2-bstack/bstackhoriz.c  2010-06-15 17:47:44.0 +0200
@@ -0,0 +1,30 @@
+static void
+bstackhoriz(Monitor *m) {
+   int x, y, h, w, mh;
+   unsigned int i, n;
+   Client *c;
+
+   for(n = 0, c = nexttiled(m->clients); c; c = nexttiled(c->next), n++);
+   if(n == 0)
+   return;
+   /* master */
+   c = nexttiled(m->clients);
+   mh = m->mfact * m->wh;
+   resize(c, m->wx, m->wy, m->ww - 2 * c->bw, (n == 1 ? m->wh : mh) - 2 * 
c->bw, False);
+   if(--n == 0)
+   return;
+   /* tile stack */
+   x = m->wx;
+   y = (m->wy + mh > c->y + c->h) ? c->y + c->h + 2 * c->bw : m->wy + mh;
+   w = m->ww;
+   h = (m->wy + mh > c->y + c->h) ? m->wy + m->wh - y : m->wh - mh;
+   h /= n;
+   if(h < bh)
+   h = m->wh;
+   for(i = 0, c = nexttiled(c->next); c; c = nexttiled(c->next), i++) {
+   resize(c, x, y, w - 2 * c->bw, /* remainder */ ((i + 1 == n)
+  ? m->wy + m->wh - y - 2 * c->bw : h - 2 * c->bw), False);
+   if(h != m->wh)
+   y = c->y + HEIGHT(c);
+   }
+}
diff -NU5 -r dwm-5.8.2/config.def.h dwm-5.8.2-bstack/config.def.h
--- dwm-5.8.2/config.def.h  2010-06-04 12:39:15.0 +0200
+++ dwm-5.8.2-bstack/config.def.h   2010-06-15 17:47:44.0 +0200
@@ -29,1 +29,3 @@
+#include "bstack.c"
+#include "bstackhoriz.c"
 static const Layout layouts[] = {
@@ -34,5 +36,7 @@
+   { "TTT",  bstack },
+   { "===",  bstackhoriz },
 };
 
 /* key definitions */
 #define MODKEY Mod1Mask
 #define TAGKEYS(KEY,TAG) \
diff --git a/config.def.h b/config.def.h
index cca37df..91b91aa 100644
--- a/config.def.h
+++ b/config.def.h
@@ -29,1 +29,2 @@
+#include "fibonacci.c"
 static const Layout layouts[] = {
@@ -34,3 +35,5 @@
+   { "[...@]",  spiral },
+   { "[\\]",  dwindle },
 };
 
 /* key definitions */
diff --git a/fibonacci.c b/fibonacci.c
new file mode 100644
index 000..fce0a57
--- /dev/null
+++ b/fibonacci.c
@@ -0,0 +1,66 @@
+void
+fibonacci(Monitor *mon, int s) {
+   unsigned int i, n, nx, ny, nw, nh;
+   Client *c;
+
+   for(n = 0, c = nexttiled(mon->clients); c; c = nexttiled(c->next), n++);
+   if(n == 0)
+   return;
+   
+   nx = mon->wx;
+   ny = 0;
+   nw = mon->ww;
+   nh = mon->wh;
+   
+   for(i = 0, c = nexttiled(mon->clients); c; c = nexttiled(c->next)) {
+   if((i % 2 && nh / 2 > 2 * c->bw)
+   

Re: [dev] dwm 5.8.2 patches

[Anselm R Garbe]

On 15 June 2010 18:04, v4hn  wrote:
> ev'ning everyone,
>
> I thought about updating my current dwm installation(5.2)
> for some time. Well, now I had some spare time left
> and updated my old monocle_count-patch to 5.8.2 -
> if anyone is interested: it prints the total number of
> clients and the number of the currently activated client
> besides the symbol of the monocle layout, while the current release
> prints only the number of total clients within the symbol.
>
> Also I tweaked the patches of bstack, fibonacci and gridmode
> to apply clean if applied incrementally. So the following does
> work without rejections now:
>
> dwm-5.8.2 $ cat ../dwm-5.8.2-bstack.diff \
>                ../dwm-5.8.2-fibonacci.diff \
>                ../dwm-5.8.2-gridmode.diff \
>                ../dwm-5.8.2-monocle_count.diff \
>                ../dwm-5.8.2-pertag_without_bar.diff | patch -p1
>
> Last but not least in my current setup I see no point of
> one showbar flag for each tag, while I really like pertag.
> So I hacked pertag, to keep one boolean showbar,
> while layout and mfact are stored per tag.
>
>
> All patched are attached, have fun :)

Cool, anyone volunteering to add them to the wiki?

Many thanks,
Anselm

Re: [dev] Suckless operating system

[Uriel]

On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 4:18 PM, Kris Maglione  wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 04:05:24PM +0200, Dieter Plaetinck wrote:
>>
>> What's wrong with arch hurd?
>
> The HURD part, obviously.

s/H/T/

uriel

Re: [dev] [9base] rc can't find .

[Uriel]

On Fri, Jun 11, 2010 at 12:43 PM, Jan Winkelmann  wrote:
> Looks like this is some weird GCC/glibc/binutils error (correct me if
> I'm wrong).

When in doubt, blaming GCC is a safe bet: http://harmful.cat-v.org/software/GCC

But in this case it seems that the glibc monkeys have surpassed their
GCC brothers in their skill at fucking shit up. *sigh*

uriel

Re: [dev] Interesting post about X11

[Robert Ransom]

On Tue, 15 Jun 2010 16:05:03 +0200
Alexander Teinum  wrote:

> That did cause some reactions.
> 
> The reason why I brought this up is because I for a year have been
> working on a personal project named Brevity, and I have been
> experimenting with the idea of basing an OS on a web browser engine on
> top of Linux.

Nuke it.

> But that’s not the goal of the OS – it’s just one possible way to
> reach the goal. The technical goal is to have a system with as clean
> architecture as possible. For the user, the goal is to have a UI that
> doesn’t get in the way. I have been playing around with MVC patterns
> in native DOM JavaScript (by that I mean that I don’t use libraries)
> for some time, but issues such as JavaScript not having an
> import-statement has made me look for workarounds. I’m not sure if
> it’s worth it. Judging from the the general opinion of this
> discussion, it’s definitely not worth it. :)

Use Scheme.  See Scheme 48  for a nice, simple
implementation to start hacking on.

> So I’m not sure what will happen to my project. I’d really just like
> to have my computer as simple as possible. I love dwm because of its
> simplicity, and right now I would like to have the same kind of
> simplicity in the lower layers.

Then get into the hardware business and start selling reliable hardware
with simple interfaces.

Robert Ransom


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: [dev] Suckless operating system

[Bjartur Thorlacius]

On 6/14/10, Ethan Grammatikidis  wrote:
>
> On 15 Jun 2010, at 00:28, Antoni Grzymala wrote:
>
>> Bjartur Thorlacius dixit (2010-06-14, 23:24):
>>
>>> On 6/14/10, Matthew Bauer  wrote:
 I wish modern filesystems would allow some way of identifying a
 file type
 besides in the filename. It seems like that would make things more
 straight
 forward.
>>
>>> Surely many modern filesystem support xattrs (extended file
>>> attributes)?
>>> One should be able to use them to store media types.
>
> Should, or will?
WDYM? AFAIK ext4, Reiserfs, ZFS (if that's categorized as a FS), btrfs
and others support xattr /if/ properly configured. OTOH I think they're
disabled by default on many distros. Any examples of filesystems that
don't support them besides NFS?
> I get the impression storing file type information was much more
> common in the past, which raises the question why is it not now? I
> think it's pointless because most file types can be identified from
> their first few bytes. This loops back around to my content-type
> argument, why should the server go looking for file type when the
> client gets it handed to it anyway?
Not all media types contain magic numbers. In theory one could just
wrap all files in a metadata container that would allow for seperation of
"static" metadatata about files seperately from transfer info (such as
Date and Transfer-*), but that would require long transition period and
standardization on a new Content-Encoding that may become default
in, say, HTTP/2.0 and get some basic support in MS IE 11 or 12.

P.S. When I say "wrapper" I mean something like an shebang/PS style
header like #=text/html.
--
kv,
  - Bjartur

Re: [dev] Suckless operating system

[Dieter Plaetinck]

On Tue, 15 Jun 2010 10:18:20 -0400
Kris Maglione  wrote:

> On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 04:05:24PM +0200, Dieter Plaetinck wrote:
> >On Tue, 15 Jun 2010 08:43:31 -0400
> >Kurt H Maier  wrote:
> >> This is what makes the suckless list better.  Otherwise you wind up
> >> with shit like http://www.archhurd.org/
> >> 
> >
> >What's wrong with arch hurd?
> 
> The HURD part, obviously.
> 

hmm. i'm not too familiar with hurd, but afaik it's supposed to be
simpler and more elegant then Linux

Dieter

Re: [dev] Suckless operating system

[Kris Maglione]

On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 10:49:04PM +0200, Dieter Plaetinck wrote:

On Tue, 15 Jun 2010 10:18:20 -0400
Kris Maglione  wrote:


On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 04:05:24PM +0200, Dieter Plaetinck wrote:
>On Tue, 15 Jun 2010 08:43:31 -0400
>Kurt H Maier  wrote:
>> This is what makes the suckless list better.  Otherwise you wind up
>> with shit like http://www.archhurd.org/
>> 
>

>What's wrong with arch hurd?

The HURD part, obviously.



hmm. i'm not too familiar with hurd, but afaik it's supposed to be
simpler and more elegant then Linux


It's neither.

--
Kris Maglione

Advertising may be described as the science of arresting human
intelligence long enough to get money from it.

Re: [dev] Suckless operating system

[Kurt H Maier]

On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 4:51 PM, Kris Maglione  wrote:
>> hmm. i'm not too familiar with hurd, but afaik it's supposed to be
>> simpler and more elegant then Linux
>
> It's neither.

And it won't be, even if by some miracle someone gets it working one day.


-- 
# Kurt H Maier

Re: [dev] Suckless operating system

[pancake]

I was the author of Bee GNU/Hurd. Few years ago I did my own GNU/Hurd
distro based on pkgsrc package system and with my own build system,
because the Debian and GNU ones were completely unusable and inpracticable.

The sitaution didnt changed too much. Debian maintains many patches that
fixes things, and GNU will never accept them, the system is unusable and
unstable.

The main reason why GNU/HURD is in this situation is because Mach is a
bloated microkernel. The L4 port has never been adopted by the whole
community and the OSKIT is a 800MB userland monster to handle drivers.

As the system is not usable for editing/compiling code because the
console is broken and the X is quite slow and the kernel sometimes crashes.
it makes the system very weird as for development..to not say for users.

Nothing changed in hurd in the past 20 years. In fact.. I dont think this
will never change :)

--pancake

On Tue, 15 Jun 2010 22:49:04 +0200
Dieter Plaetinck  wrote:

> On Tue, 15 Jun 2010 10:18:20 -0400
> Kris Maglione  wrote:
> 
> > On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 04:05:24PM +0200, Dieter Plaetinck wrote:
> > >On Tue, 15 Jun 2010 08:43:31 -0400
> > >Kurt H Maier  wrote:
> > >> This is what makes the suckless list better.  Otherwise you wind up
> > >> with shit like http://www.archhurd.org/
> > >> 
> > >
> > >What's wrong with arch hurd?
> > 
> > The HURD part, obviously.
> > 
> 
> hmm. i'm not too familiar with hurd, but afaik it's supposed to be
> simpler and more elegant then Linux
> 
> Dieter
> 

Re: [dev] Interesting post about X11

[Connor Lane Smith]

On 15 June 2010 14:05, Ethan Grammatikidis  wrote:
> On 15 Jun 2010, at 12:51, Connor Lane Smith wrote:
> > In my opinion the problem is purely user experience:
>
> Is this your opinion, or lines you've been fed?

My own, strangely enough. UX is one of my interests, particularly
since most programmers seem to suck so hard at it. Let's at least
assume for the time being that suckless devs have minds of their own.

> > (a) installing
> > software is perceived as difficult, so not having to bother with that
> > is an instant plus, and (b) your data is available everywhere.
>
> Neither is a reason to use horse-shit like HTTP, HTML, CSS or JavaScript.

You clearly didn't read anything else I wrote. Just for you I will
repeat myself:

On 15 Jun 2010 12:51, Connor Lane Smith  wrote:
> However, HTML and HTTP do not form a panacea. It's just the "in thing"
> nowadays to write slow, buggy clones of existing software in
> JavaScript and to call it innovation.

> Both of
> these problems could be solved with improved package management and
> data synchronisation, but it's an uphill struggle, since everyone's
> just fixated with the intertubes now...

How tiring. Next time I suggest reading what people actually write
before replying with snotty shit.

Thanks,
cls

Re: [dev] Interesting post about X11

[Robert Ransom]

On Tue, 15 Jun 2010 12:51:01 +0100
Connor Lane Smith  wrote:

> On 15 June 2010 09:58, Robert Ransom  wrote:
> > - a terminal emulator written in JavaScript
> > - which produces its output by manipulating XML DOM objects
> > - which in turn cause a browser to rerun its page *layout* algorithm
> > - and then redraw the terminal screen
> 
> You have heard of HTML5's , right?

No, I hadn't.  Does that only bypass the text layout step, or does it
allow directly painting on the screen?

> It's the JavaScript which makes me balk. I think the web will be a lot
> nicer to develop for once browsers begin to understand that 

Re: [dev] Interesting post about X11

[Kurt H Maier]

On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 6:33 PM, Connor Lane Smith  wrote:
> UX is one of my interests, particularly
> since most programmers seem to suck so hard at it. \



> How tiring. Next time I suggest reading what people actually write
> before replying with snotty shit.

Using the term 'user experience' at all, much less abbreviating it
'UX,' is every bit as snotty.  A lot of programmers don't give a shit
about 'user experience' because they are competent users of a
complicated machine, and they expect other people to be able to
maintain respiration while remembering which button to press next.

'User experience' these days means 'enabling ignorant people to do
things they don't need to do with devices they don't need to use.'
Try to keep that in mind while we all ignore your glowing buttons and
dynamic menus with pastel gradients.


-- 
# Kurt H Maier

Re: [dev] Interesting post about X11

[Connor Lane Smith]

On 16 June 2010 02:32, Kurt H Maier  wrote:
> Using the term 'user experience' at all, much less abbreviating it
> 'UX,' is every bit as snotty.  A lot of programmers don't give a shit
> about 'user experience' because they are competent users of a
> complicated machine, and they expect other people to be able to
> maintain respiration while remembering which button to press next.

I think one of the problems you're having is that when you read "user
experience" you think "graphical design", which means you sort of miss
the point. (Apologies if the term is snotty, but we don't really have
any others. If the term "these days means" something else, that's
unfortunate - a lot of terms we use around here these days mean
something new. "Unix", for instance.) Think of it more as how the user
interacts with the software, not on a graphical level but a
psychological one.

The Unix philosophy, creating simple tools which can be easily
combined in new ways, isn't an engineering improvement, it's an
interactive one. It's about allowing the user to more efficiently use
their software. That's why we have stderr (hey old thread), why we
prefer fewer flags, and why "silence is golden". It's more about usage
than machinery.

> Try to keep that in mind while we all ignore your glowing buttons and
> dynamic menus with pastel gradients.

Talking of pastel, have you ever used Acme? You should read the paper
on it [1]. The "nuances and heuristics" section is all about is how
Pike tried to make the user interface simple and efficient. But- but-
that's a user interface for Plan 9 programmers! Could it be that we
too need well-designed user interaction?

This may shock you, but we are mortal. Programmers cannot understand
the entire machine down to the last transistor, and computers are
becoming ever more complex. Some software we use may assume that it
has the undivided attention of some infallible user (*cough* vi), but
generally we try to use simple software which just lets us do whatever
it is we want to do.

However, you are right about one thing: a lot of programmers don't
give a shit about "user experience". That's a huge shame. That sort of
thinking will get us closer to vi and emacs and further from acme and
sam. None of the editors I've mentioned are perfect (please no holy
war), but the latter two are designed to be simple both internally and
externally. (If only internal simplicity mattered we would have stuck
with ed.)

I hope that someday more programmers will care about user experience.
I also hope that they realise programmers are users too, and aren't
perfect either.

[1] http://doc.cat-v.org/plan_9/4th_edition/papers/acme/

Thanks,
cls

Re: [dev] Interesting post about X11

[Connor Lane Smith]

I also just realised I missed an opportunity:

On 16 June 2010 02:32, Kurt H Maier  wrote:
> Try to keep that in mind while we all ignore your glowing buttons and
> dynamic menus with pastel gradients.

You're going to ignore the dynamic menu [1]? I do try to contribute... :(

[1] http://tools.suckless.org/dmenu/

cls

Re: [dev] Interesting post about X11

[Connor Lane Smith]

On 16 June 2010 00:44, Robert Ransom  wrote:
> > You have heard of HTML5's , right?
>
> No, I hadn't.  Does that only bypass the text layout step, or does it
> allow directly painting on the screen?

It supports a bunch of 2D raster drawing functions within the bounds
of the canvas.

> Try