Re: FVWM: acrobat/adobe reader, firefox and FVWM
...
> On my system if I go full screen (control-L in acrobat reader), the
> CONTENT of the PDF document occupies entirely my screen (as it should be),
> no borders, no titlebar.
>
> On the laptop instead when I hit control-L in acrobat reader, there is
> also the window manager decoration. Which is annoying (since the bottom
> part of the PDF document goes below the bottom of the screen.
>
> Is this an fvwm thing, an acrobat thing or both ?
>
> My local .fvwmrc contains
> Style "AcroRead" StartsRaised, FPGrabFocus
I'm puzzled -- what in that is removing the decorations from AcroRead?
> The .fvwrc on the laptop contained the same, I added
> Style "AcroRead" StartsRaised, FPGrabFocus, NoTitle
> with no effect.
>
> I added an entire line with:
> Style "Adobe Reader" StartsRaised, FPGrabFocus,NoTitle
I use Adobe Reader 7.0 (when I have -- I prefer version 4 because it's
leaner!) and it works fine for me. I have:
Style AcroRead NoTitle,NoHandles,BorderWidth 0
Style "Acroread" NoTitle,NoHandles,BorderWidth 0
I think I remember having to add the second line because with 7.0 the Class
changed from AcroRead to Acroread.
> The window manager title bar correctly disappears when I start acrobat
> reader in a window, but as soon as I go full screen it appears again. !!
It's possible that Adobe Reader 7.0 uses a different Name for the window when
it's full screen? The above (Acroread) is the Class.
Actually, if it does use a different name when in full screen that may be a
way to have it undecorated full screen, but decorated when not full screen --
which is what I've always wanted!
...
> On my system if there is an URL link in the PDF document (generated by
> latex), when I click on it, a new firefox window is opened AND I'm
> automatically switched to the second desktop.
>
> On the laptop the new firefox window is opened in the second desktop, but
> I am not automatically switched to it. I can do it via the pager which is
> sticky.
>
> There is nothing different in the .fvwmrc's which causes this as far as I
> can tell. Both have
>
> Style Gecko StartsOnPage 1 0 0, SkipMapping, NoPPosition
>
> QUESTION: how can I force the automatical desktop switching ?
If the Latex (presumeably presentations) are generated by you, then you could
make them call a script when the URL is clicked on which changes desktop via
FvwmCommand before invoking Firefox. I do this sort of thing when teaching
programming -- click on a `button' in my pdf which changes desktop to one
where I can run programs, etc..
E.g.:
\newcommand{\run}[2]{#1
\href{run:./DEMOS/#2}{\includegraphics[height=0.2in]{run.eps}}}
#1 is a text label, run.eps is the picture of a button, and #2 is teh script I
want to run.
The only snag is that the script can't be given paremeters via the \href, so
you have to have a script for each `demo'.
E.g.:
\run{1/6/demo-1.sh}
DEMOS/1/6/demo-1.sh includes:
FvwmCommand "GotoDesk 0 1"
# Create somw windows on thsi desktop, e.g.:
nedit -geometry "$neditGeometry" `ls *.java 2>/dev/null` &
xterm -title "1 Xterm" -geometry "$xtermGeometry" \
-e /bin/bash -c "$scriptName nonNull; /bin/bash" &
# Wait for processes to end.
wait
FvwmCommand "GotoDesk 0 0"
exit
So, when I click on the button, the desktop changes, some windows are created,
and when I quit those windows I am taken back to my presentation. ;-)
Thanks, John
Re: FVWM: Desktops versus Pages - how to use?
> I've never quite made my mind up whether to use several Desktops or > several Pages on one desktop, what are the reasons (if any) for > choosing one or the other? > > I've never found any use for running a program with a window larger > than my screen size, I rarely (but very occasionally) would like to > drag a window from one place to another. > > So for me Pages will work *slightly* better than Desktops except that > they don't have names. > > In many ways it seems a rather artificial distinction that causes some > confusion and doesn't offer much useful, but maybe I'm not seeing > something obvious. > > (Yes, I know a Page is a 'screens worth' of a Desktop, but I don't see > what use that is to me) I use both -- typically 4 pages on each of 4 desktops (though both are configurable easily via AnotherLevelUp preferences). I typically have ~6 or so windows open on each desktop at any time, using ~2 or 3 pages of each. Why? * FvwmTaskBar can be set to show only windows on the current desktop, (and iconised ones), which is less cluttered if you organise your desktops into `task' activities. * I use have it so that each desktop is associated with a directory of my filestore, so everything run from the menus there already has that directory as CWD. (I could say how this is done if you would like.) * Pages are used as more desk space within each `task', e.g. I might have a web browser open on the Java API in the page next to the one I am writing code in: I can just slide between the two with either the mouse or shortcuts. > Chris Green Thanks, John
Re: FVWM: Desktops versus Pages - how to use?
> From: John Latham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: Thu, 22 May 2008 18:54:17 +0100 (BST) > * Pages are used as more desk space within each `task', e.g. I might > have a web browser open on the Java API in the page next to the one I > am writing code in: I can just slide between the two with either the > mouse or shortcuts. Having thought about it more than ever before, I suppose what I'm saying here is that desktops are associated with tasks, and pages with sub-tasks! E.g. on one desktop I may be writing a Java text book with an editor and dvi viewer on page 0,0 but in page 0,1 I have xfig open to edit diagrams for the book. Meanwhile on a different desktop I have my main email client windows on page 0,0 with maybe some particular emails in process of being written -- but stalled while I think about them, each on another page of that desktop.
Re: FVWM: Desktops versus Pages - how to use?
> On Thu, May 22, 2008 at 07:15:46PM +0100, John Latham wrote: > > > From: John Latham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > Date: Thu, 22 May 2008 18:54:17 +0100 (BST) > > > > > * Pages are used as more desk space within each `task', e.g. I might > > > have a web browser open on the Java API in the page next to the one I > > > am writing code in: I can just slide between the two with either the > > > mouse or shortcuts. > > > > Having thought about it more than ever before, I suppose what I'm saying > > here > > is that desktops are associated with tasks, and pages with sub-tasks! > > > > E.g. on one desktop I may be writing a Java text book with an editor and dvi > > viewer on page 0,0 but in page 0,1 I have xfig open to edit diagrams for the > > book. Meanwhile on a different desktop I have my main email client windows > > on > > page 0,0 with maybe some particular emails in process of being written -- > > but > > stalled while I think about them, each on another page of that desktop. > > > That makes it more of an organisational convenience than anything else > though doesn't it. If you named your Pages (or Desktops) to reflect > that organisation would it actually make any difference how they were > implemented? If one was able to (arbitrarily?) nest desktops within another, in some organised shape (e.g. a grid) then, yes, there perhaps would become no distinction between page and desktop. But one cannot do so (I think?). Instead there are exactly two levels of structure: pages within desktop, and they are set up to be used as such. So, the idea, which you like, of scrolling over the edge of a page with the mouse (EdgeScroll) is implemented for changing pages, but (I think?) not for changing desktops, because one wouldn't want it for the latter. And windows (be they larger than the page size or not) can straddle pages, but not desktops (I think?). So, if you don't want to use the two level structure then perhaps your question becomes ``what is the difference between multiple desktops each with one page, and multiple pages in one desktop?'' And I guess the answer is whether or not you can scroll between them with the mouse and allow windows to straddle the boundaries. > Chris Green Thanks, John
Re: FVWM: (Icon)TitleFormat doesnt quite work like IndexedWindowName
> On 20 October 2011 09:13, Thomas Adam wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 10:51:59AM -0700, elliot s wrote: > >> Version 2.6.3: > >> Previous versions only added the "(%t)" when there was a repeated name. > >> The new code always adds it. > > > > This is not a bug, but rather very much by deliberate design. =A0The old = > logic > > tried to do this before but failed, and when I refactored everything I > > fixed it. =A0So this is how it's going to be with %t from now on. > > i too liked the original behavior. Can you add it back please? Its not > good that you reimplement features and remove functionality at the > same time. How is this not a bug precisely? It would seem you have not read the man page! ;-) Thank you Thomas for, yet again, fixing a bug so that fvwm behaves as specified.
Re: FVWM: Deprecating certain Fvwm* modules
> Both FvwmComand and FvwmConsole are used a lot, so the goal is to replace= > them with a more verstile tool. They won't be removed until this tool is= > functional, been tested in many situations and people have had plenty of= > time to change their configs. As I thought, thanks. One thing to point out though, for FvwmCommand it's not just configs that would be affected, but *software* built to run on fvwm. There may be an argument for providing a compat script, called FvwmCommand, to use the new module, when the old one is deleted. But I expect you would in any case have thought of that when the time comes! ;-) > jaimos Thanks, John
Re: FVWM: "Stepping down" from next year.
> >Having a single maintainer is too much of a burden. I've always been > >surprised that anyone would take on that role. > > Yes, that's probably true. I think Thomas is at the end of his power. > The permanent attacks against him the last time weren't very cooperative at > all ... Wait a moment: surely Thomas' decision isn't influenced by a few (one?), at best, misguided individuals' attempts to, at best, help in a bad way? Thomas: please reassure us this is the case?! (Or let us protect you from such trivial undermining so you can carry on!) In fact, if we all call ``encore'' -- would you stay a little longer? ;-)
