On Sun, Jul 3, 2011 at 9:10 PM, Connor Lane Smith wrote:
> I don't know about all you, but I find dwm's sloppy focus can be
> really annoying at times -- focusing a window when I accidentally
> nudge my atrophying pointer -- and would rather click-to-focus. The
> great thing about dropping dwm's s
I use a script for weechat that fires off a sound, sends a dbus
notification and sets the urgent hint on the window. Works relatively
well for me. I know there is a similar script for irssi, but for
smaller clients (like ii or sic) you'll need to script something
yourself, if I'm not mistaken.
hi
> > one first sorrow: the goal of dwm-sprinkles is to add all the
> > available patches...
> >
> No, definitely not :)
>
> > i would be happier to some of them... plus a few which i would not
> > use but other think are important.
> >
> I intend to make some patches optional (eg the bar
On Mon, 4 Jul 2011, Connor Lane Smith wrote:
On 4 July 2011 22:36, Benjamin R. Haskell wrote:
possibly message #997, based on the URL:
http://www.mail-archive.com/dev@suckless.org/msg00997.html
I don't why you're looking there and not at the actual suckless
archive,[1] which shows that it's
On 4 July 2011 22:36, Benjamin R. Haskell wrote:
> possibly message #997, based on the URL:
> http://www.mail-archive.com/dev@suckless.org/msg00997.html
I don't why you're looking there and not at the actual suckless
archive,[1] which shows that it's message #986.[2] But I didn't get a
reply from
The mailing list page¹ mentions that message 'N' can be fetched by
sending a message to dev+get-N@MAILHOST. I tried to get the
dwm-urgent-blink patch I mentioned before as an email (possibly message
#997, based on the URL:
http://www.mail-archive.com/dev@suckless.org/msg00997.html ) by sending
On Mon, 4 Jul 2011, Benjamin R. Haskell wrote:
On Mon, 4 Jul 2011, Christoph Lohmann wrote:
Hello,
Benjamin R. Haskell wrote:
So, broadening: what (if anything) do dwm users use for
"notifications" or indicating urgency?
[...]
urxvt.urgentOnBell: true
Ah, thanks. Halfway there. So, t
2. having some kind of indication that you've been addressed (urgent
hints or whatever).
In other wm's, #2 is often handled by having a little flashing systray
icon. So, broadening: what (if anything) do dwm users use for
"notifications" or indicating urgency?
Hello,
I use seturgent to
"Benjamin R. Haskell" wrote:
> On Mon, 4 Jul 2011, Josh Rickmar wrote:
>
> > Um, why is a systray needed for IRC?
>
> It's not necessary for IRC, per se. I wrote:
>
> > Without a systray, I don't understand where one gets the spare screen
> > real estate to dedicate to IRC.
>
> I don't understa
On Mon, 4 Jul 2011, Christoph Lohmann wrote:
Hello,
Benjamin R. Haskell wrote:
In other wm's, #2 is often handled by having a little flashing
systray icon.
So, broadening: what (if anything) do dwm users use for
"notifications" or indicating urgency?
my IRC client is sending a bell characte
On Mon, 4 Jul 2011 18:16:48 +0200
garbeam wrote:
> Well, dwm had focus follows mouse since its first minute. I'm not going to
> change this when it is approaching the age of 5 tomorrow.
I have the opposite problem to the OP. DWM sometimes does some clever focusing
stuff which doesn't depend on
On Mon, 4 Jul 2011 13:46:20 -0400 (EDT)
"Benjamin R. Haskell" wrote:
> That said, what do people here use for IRC and how do you deal with it
> in dwm? Without a systray, I don't understand where one gets the spare
> screen real estate to dedicate to IRC. And w/o dedicated space for it,
> I
On Mon, Jul 04, 2011 at 04:17:33PM +0100, Nick wrote:
> Or a nice suckless program that does HTTP that I can derive inspiration from?
http://hg.suckless.org/quark/
> Well, the thing is, I don't ever use the mouse for window management,
> but I sometimes move the mouse out of the way and in doing so
> accidentally focus a completely different window. I personally would
> rather dwm had no mouse support at all, but clearly that would be
> controversial... Still
If you have one, use the windows key as the modifier.
I would probably go insane without that (also using emacs)
At Mon, 04 Jul 2011 22:34:45 +0700,
Toan Le wrote:
>
> [1 ]
> [1.1 ]
> Hi,
>
> I setup Arch linux on VMWare and decide to use DWM. I see some emacs
> command does not work well und
On Mon, Jul 04, 2011 at 03:19:12PM +0200, Hiltjo Posthuma wrote:
>
> I'm not sure if you intended it
> as an upstream patch, but most people probably won't like it in
> upstream dwm.
I know there are some people using dwm around here,
it was intended for who could find a use case to it.
> Note
On Mon, 4 Jul 2011 11:18:16 -0700, Noah Birnel wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 04, 2011 at 07:00:33PM +0200, hiro wrote:
> > I don't get it, are you calibrating your printer so that it matches
> > the display instead?
> >
> No. The printer and the monitor are not going to match. There is no
> hope for that.
Hello,
Benjamin R. Haskell wrote:
In other wm's, #2 is often handled by having a little flashing systray icon.
So, broadening: what (if anything) do dwm users use for "notifications" or
indicating urgency?
my IRC client is sending a bell character to my terminal, which is
setting the urgent bi
Þann mán 4.júl 2011 17:46, skrifaði Benjamin R. Haskell:
On Mon, 4 Jul 2011, Bjartur Thorlacius wrote:
Þann mán 4.júl 2011 15:14, skrifaði Connor Lane Smith:
Interesting, those on IRC were very 'for' this idea. Different
demographics? Oh you silly ML people!
So people who use mice prefer la
On Mon, Jul 04, 2011 at 07:00:33PM +0200, hiro wrote:
> I don't get it, are you calibrating your printer so that it matches
> the display instead?
>
No. The printer and the monitor are not going to match. There is no
hope for that. What matters to us is the print.
I am not arguing that no one sho
On Mon, 4 Jul 2011, Josh Rickmar wrote:
Um, why is a systray needed for IRC?
It's not necessary for IRC, per se. I wrote:
Without a systray, I don't understand where one gets the spare screen
real estate to dedicate to IRC.
I don't understand how to effectively use IRC without doing one o
"Benjamin R. Haskell" wrote:
> On Mon, 4 Jul 2011, Bjartur Thorlacius wrote:
>
> > ??ann m??n 4.j??l 2011 15:14, skrifa??i Connor Lane Smith:
> >> Interesting, those on IRC were very 'for' this idea. Different
> >> demographics? Oh you silly ML people!
> >>
> > So people who use mice prefer la
On Mon, 4 Jul 2011, Bjartur Thorlacius wrote:
Þann mán 4.júl 2011 15:14, skrifaði Connor Lane Smith:
Interesting, those on IRC were very 'for' this idea. Different
demographics? Oh you silly ML people!
So people who use mice prefer laggy ML communications over IM?
I hate mice, but I also
Þann mán 4.júl 2011 15:34, skrifaði Toan Le:
Hi,
I setup Arch linux on VMWare and decide to use DWM. I see some emacs
command does not work well under DWM. I doubt DWM uses some duplicate
key-binding.
Is there anyone who can consult me on changing DWM key-binding to suit
with Emacs. Sorry for
Þann mán 4.júl 2011 15:14, skrifaði Connor Lane Smith:
Interesting, those on IRC were very 'for' this idea. Different
demographics? Oh you silly ML people!
So people who use mice prefer laggy ML communications over IM?
Well, the thing is, I don't ever use the mouse for window management,
but
I don't get it, are you calibrating your printer so that it matches
the display instead?
On Mon, Jul 4, 2011 at 18:39, Noah Birnel wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 04, 2011 at 06:00:49PM +0200, Pieter Praet wrote:
>> Color calibration [1] (and frequent recalibration) is mandatory when
>> doing *anything* gra
On Mon, Jul 4, 2011 at 4:14 PM, Connor Lane Smith wrote:
> Interesting, those on IRC were very 'for' this idea. Different
> demographics? Oh you silly ML people!
>
> On 4 July 2011 06:51, garbeam wrote:
>> No I totally disagree. Click to focus makes the life uneccessary harder.
>> Doing this just
On Mon, Jul 04, 2011 at 04:14:06PM +0100, Connor Lane Smith wrote:
> Well, the thing is, I don't ever use the mouse for window management,
> but I sometimes move the mouse out of the way and in doing so
> accidentally focus a completely different window.
unclutter?
http://www.ibiblio.org/pub/X11/
On Mon, Jul 04, 2011 at 06:00:49PM +0200, Pieter Praet wrote:
> Color calibration [1] (and frequent recalibration) is mandatory when
> doing *anything* graphics-related for production purposes, as the output
> of any and every visual output device known to man *will* be distorted,
> due to used mat
On 4 July 2011 17:16, garbeam wrote:
> Well, dwm had focus follows mouse since its first minute. I'm not going to
> change this when it is approaching the age of 5 tomorrow.
Since the two sides seem fairly even, as far as I can tell, I agree
it's probably best not to change it. It can just be a l
Well, dwm had focus follows mouse since its first minute. I'm not going to
change this when it is approaching the age of 5 tomorrow.
Cheers,
Anselm
Unless, of course, you don't HAVE a touchpad to disable. (However, the
touchpad is definitely 100% easier to hit than the mouse.)
On Mon, 4 Jul 2011 16:13:09 +0100, Ethan Grammatikidis
wrote:
> [...]
> I do seem to have less of a problem when there's a color management
> system in the display, but I can't imagine anything more sucky in a
> display than a system to adjust every already-rendered pixel.
> [...]
Color calibrat
On 04/07/11 17:14, Connor Lane Smith wrote:
Interesting, those on IRC were very 'for' this idea. Different
demographics? Oh you silly ML people!
On 4 July 2011 06:51, garbeam wrote:
No I totally disagree. Click to focus makes the life uneccessary harder.
Doing this just for the rare corner cas
On Mon, Jul 04, 2011 at 04:14:06PM +0100, Connor Lane Smith wrote:
> I personally would
> rather dwm had no mouse support at all, but clearly that would be
> controversial...
I'd be interested in seeing the patch. Is the mouse used for
anything much other than sloppy focus (it's all I use the
mou
Hello,
Toan Le wrote:
Hi,
I setup Arch linux on VMWare and decide to use DWM. I see some emacs command
does not work well under DWM. I doubt DWM uses some duplicate key-binding.
Is there anyone who can consult me on changing DWM key-binding to suit with
Emacs. Sorry for my request, I use Emacs
> Is there anyone who can consult me on changing DWM key-binding to suit
> with Emacs. Sorry for my request, I use Emacs key-binding frequently so
> changing DWM key-binding is my preferable.
config.h
-p
--
sic dicit magister P
PhD Candidate
Collaborative Programme in Ancient and Medieval P
Hey,
On 4 July 2011 16:34, Toan Le wrote:
> Is there anyone who can consult me on changing DWM key-binding to suit with
> Emacs.
Have you looked at dwm/config.h? Specifically search for "keys[]". See
also [1] and [2].
[1]: http://dwm.suckless.org/customisation/
[2]: http://dwm.suckless.org/cust
On 4 July 2011 16:14, Connor Lane Smith wrote:
> But apparently opinions are split on this topic!
Suppose it depends, I've been conditioned, and expect that when I move a
mouse into another window, focus should go there, so much that when I'm
on Windows I'll use some tweaking program to implement
Hi,
I setup Arch linux on VMWare and decide to use DWM. I see some emacs
command does not work well under DWM. I doubt DWM uses some duplicate
key-binding.
Is there anyone who can consult me on changing DWM key-binding to suit
with Emacs. Sorry for my request, I use Emacs key-binding frequen
On 4 July 2011 16:23, Connor Lane Smith wrote:
> I would rather dwm only displayed the visible tags
... And those in use, ofc.
cls
On 4 July 2011 14:19, Hiltjo Posthuma wrote:
> Note that drawsquare() is not only used for showing if a
> tag is used by clients but also to indicate floating clients in the
> titlebar so your patch removes that also.
The patch also makes it impossible to see which tags the focused
client is tagg
Does anyone know of a reasonable C library for HTTP
client interaction? Or a nice suckless program that does
HTTP that I can derive inspiration from?
Thanks
Nick
Interesting, those on IRC were very 'for' this idea. Different
demographics? Oh you silly ML people!
On 4 July 2011 06:51, garbeam wrote:
> No I totally disagree. Click to focus makes the life uneccessary harder.
> Doing this just for the rare corner case of touching your pointing device by
> acc
On Mon, 04 Jul 2011 15:23:05 +0200
Pieter Praet wrote:
> On Mon, 4 Jul 2011 14:55:38 +0200, hiro <23h...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> > Most people getting eye problems in front of the computer are caused
> > by the concentrated day-long staring without blinking once.
>
> ^ Also rather influential.
On Mon, Jul 04, 2011 at 12:44:18PM +0100, Ethan Grammatikidis wrote:
> On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 06:34:03 +0400
> anonymous wrote:
>
> > Since revision 202 cursor is hidden after I quit from mutt. If I do
> > "update 201", everything is ok. I don't know how to fix it right way.
> >
> > Also "reset" c
On Mon, 4 Jul 2011 14:55:38 +0200, hiro <23h...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> Most people getting eye problems in front of the computer are caused
> by the concentrated day-long staring without blinking once.
^ Also rather influential.
Especially for Ethan, who (based on his reference to deviantART to
On Mon, Jul 4, 2011 at 11:37 AM, julien steinhauser
wrote:
> Code from Hiltjo Posthuma and Jeremiah Dow ( with minor add ) is merged in
> this patch.
> The behaviour is :
>
> - border is shown when one sees more than one client.
> - tags are shown when they are viewed or when clients are labelled
Most people getting eye problems in front of the computer are caused
by the concentrated day-long staring without blinking once.
Personally I hate the typical CRT flickering (especially if set to <85 Hz)
I did post a screenshot ages ago where I use multiple windows of opera
instead of stupid tabs and let wmii handle the rest.
It was a bit difficult, but it's still possible to hide all interfaces.
But people don't want to learn...
I still use only opera and dillo on linux.
On Mon, Jul 4, 2011 at 12
On Mon, 4 Jul 2011 12:20:02 +0100, Ethan Grammatikidis
wrote:
> On Sun, 12 Jun 2011 22:23:03 +0200
> pancake wrote:
>
> > Also crt and lcd/tft screens have differet brightness effects. Tft are less
> > damaging to eyes than crt.. So i think discussion about colors on text
> > moved to only st
On Mon, 20 Jun 2011 06:47:35 -0400
Kurt H Maier wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 5:59 AM, ilf wrote:
> > I have done this the /proc/acpi/battery/BAT0/state | shell way for years and
> > found it to be way more resource intense then calling acpi -b.
> >
> > Let's face it, the Shell/Perl/Python/wh
On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 06:34:03 +0400
anonymous wrote:
> Since revision 202 cursor is hidden after I quit from mutt. If I do
> "update 201", everything is ok. I don't know how to fix it right way.
>
> Also "reset" command don't help, cursor is still hidden. Is it a bug?
>
> http://hg.suckless.or
On Sun, 12 Jun 2011 22:23:03 +0200
pancake wrote:
> Also crt and lcd/tft screens have differet brightness effects. Tft are less
> damaging to eyes than crt.. So i think discussion about colors on text moved
> to only stethical and personal issue because its no longer dramatic as it was
> in th
On Tue, 21 Jun 2011 16:28:06 +0200
hiro <23h...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> He's deep into troll recruiting too.
> Everyone on this list seems to have learned how to troll on a wholly
> different level. Different to catch and way more fun.
> Yay for the crusade against Technical arguments.
If it's s
Code from Hiltjo Posthuma and Jeremiah Dow ( with minor add ) is merged in this
patch.
The behaviour is :
- border is shown when one sees more than one client.
- tags are shown when they are viewed or when clients are labelled with them.
drawsquare is removed.
As i don't know C, please say anyt
hi,
On Mon, Jul 04, 2011 at 11:28:54AM +0300, Ruben Mikkonen wrote:
> > I don't know about all you, but I find dwm's sloppy focus can be
> > really annoying at times -- focusing a window when I accidentally
> > nudge my atrophying pointer -- and would rather click-to-focus. The
> > great thing abou
I also find sloppy focus quite annoying, but I don't prefer click-to-focus
neither. Since I anyway use mostly keyboard, it's irritating to grab the
mouse to switch the window - therefore I use keyboard for that stuff.
On Mon, Jul 4, 2011 at 4:10 AM, Connor Lane Smith wrote:
> Hey,
>
> I don't kn
On Mon, Jul 04, 2011 at 02:10:33AM +0100, Connor Lane Smith wrote:
> I don't know about all you, but I find dwm's sloppy focus can be
> really annoying at times -- focusing a window when I accidentally
> nudge my atrophying pointer -- and would rather click-to-focus. The
Occasionally it is annoyin
As my vote, I prefer to keep sloppy focus, at the very least as an
option, (the fact that sloppy focus doesn't seem to work properly on
Windows means I'm forced back to click to focus at work at it's
driving me mad the sheer volume of unnecessary clicking).
Incidentally, I use the mouse a LOT with
60 matches
Mail list logo
