[dev] Testing suckless programs

2016-04-28 Thread Thomas Levine
Hi, I originally came across suckless about six years ago when I was looking at IRC clients and thus discovered ii. Since then I have periodically updated myself on suckless happenings and have always held the software in high regard. But I had never thought to contribute anything because I have p

[dev] [lnanohttp] content-type support

2016-04-28 Thread Sylvain BERTRAND
Hi, Added easy http content-type support to please www browsers like w3m and netsurf. https://github.com/sylware/lnanohttp http://repo.or.cz/lnanohttp.git cheers, -- Sylvain

Re: [dev] dmenu and dwm: is exec really needed

2016-04-28 Thread Martti Kühne
Greg, if you want to limit your dmenu to executables, use this line instead of the pipe-to-$SHELL: exec $(dmenu_path | dmenu "$@") I left the substitution unquoted, so you can still pass arguments to commands which are run. cheers! mar77i

Re: [dev] dmenu and dwm: is exec really needed

2016-04-28 Thread Martti Kühne
To allow for shell expressions is a neat thing, and if you don't need them, I can provide you with a patch. I did look into this topic another time, actually. I think I had modified dmenu_run to use exec in some way on one of my installations, but I appear to have currently misplaced it. cheers! m

Re: [dev] dmenu and dwm: is exec really needed

2016-04-28 Thread Mattias Andrée
On Thu, 28 Apr 2016 18:01:46 -0400 Greg Reagle wrote: > I use dwm. Sometimes I use Mod-p to start a GUI program > like firefox. I looked at the output of ps xf and noticed > that my shell is sticking around: > 21347 ?S 0:00 /usr/bin/fish > 21388 ?Rl 0:04 \_ iceweasel >

[dev] dmenu and dwm: is exec really needed

2016-04-28 Thread Greg Reagle
I use dwm. Sometimes I use Mod-p to start a GUI program like firefox. I looked at the output of ps xf and noticed that my shell is sticking around: 21347 ?S 0:00 /usr/bin/fish 21388 ?Rl 0:04 \_ iceweasel I can type `exec firefox` instead of `firefox` to avoid this, bu

Re: [dev] execline shell

2016-04-28 Thread Greg Reagle
On 04/24/2016 10:38 AM, Kamil Cholewiński wrote: execline is not exactly a shell. It's supposed to facilitate "DJB-style" command chaining, and focuses on little else. Suppose you have a bunch utilities that each do exactly one thing, and then 'execve(2)' the remainder of their arguments: