On Sun, 27 Nov 2011 17:51:03 -0500
Kurt H Maier wrote:
> Just call it 'stest'. If there's a collision, that's what packagers
> are for.
If you can avoid conflicts, that's better than expecting packagers (of each
distro) to fix it.
On Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 4:48 AM, Dieter Plaetinck wrote:
> If you can avoid conflicts, that's better than expecting packagers (of each
> distro) to fix it.
I disagree. lsx-lrzsz is clearly less useful or important than
lsx-dmenu. Just because some idiot camped out on a three-letter
string does
remove minicom
Connor Lane Smith writes:
> On 27 November 2011 23:13, Roger wrote:
>> Very well. I'm considering renaming lsx to dmenu_lsx and it looks like lsx's
>> only occurance is within /usr/bin/dmenu_run? Or is the name change going to
>> break anything else?
>
> Correct, it only appears in dmenu_run.
On Mon, 28 Nov 2011 07:52:17 -0500
Kurt H Maier wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 4:48 AM, Dieter Plaetinck
> wrote:
> > If you can avoid conflicts, that's better than expecting packagers
> > (of each distro) to fix it.
>
> I disagree. lsx-lrzsz is clearly less useful or important than
> lsx-dm
On 28 November 2011 13:35, Christian Neukirchen wrote:
> Any reason we don't replace lsx with this?
>
> find -L . -maxdepth 1 -type f -perm -111
POSIX compatibility.
cls
Connor Lane Smith writes:
> On 28 November 2011 13:35, Christian Neukirchen
> wrote:
>> Any reason we don't replace lsx with this?
>>
>> find -L . -maxdepth 1 -type f -perm -111
>
> POSIX compatibility.
All supported except for -maxdepth, but you can use:
find -L . -type d \! -name . -prune
Christian Neukirchen writes:
> Connor Lane Smith writes:
>
>> On 28 November 2011 13:35, Christian Neukirchen
>> wrote:
>>> Any reason we don't replace lsx with this?
>>>
>>> find -L . -maxdepth 1 -type f -perm -111
>>
>> POSIX compatibility.
>
> All supported except for -maxdepth, but you ca
On 28 November 2011 14:43, Christian Neukirchen wrote:
> All supported except for -maxdepth, but you can use:
>
> find -L . -type d \! -name . -prune -o -type f -perm -111 -print
I've seen things like this before. All it does is prove how much find
needs replacing. I'm considering using stest (ls
On Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 8:37 AM, Dieter Plaetinck wrote:
> I was talking in general.
> The case where an "idiot" "stole" a 3-letter string is a very specific case
> where it can be justified
> to reuse the same name.
"Clearly" "there" "is" "no" "general" "case". "Things" "like" "this"
"should"
On Mon, 28 Nov 2011 15:43:55 +0100
Christian Neukirchen wrote:
>Connor Lane Smith writes:
>
>> On 28 November 2011 13:35, Christian Neukirchen
>> wrote:
>>> Any reason we don't replace lsx with this?
>>>
>>> find -L . -maxdepth 1 -type f -perm -111
>>
>> POSIX compatibility.
>
>All supported e
Hadrian Węgrzynowski writes:
> On Mon, 28 Nov 2011 15:43:55 +0100
> Christian Neukirchen wrote:
>
>>Connor Lane Smith writes:
>>
>>> On 28 November 2011 13:35, Christian Neukirchen
>>> wrote:
Any reason we don't replace lsx with this?
find -L . -maxdepth 1 -type f -perm -111
>>
Troels Henriksen writes:
> Christian Neukirchen writes:
>
>> Connor Lane Smith writes:
>>
>>> On 28 November 2011 13:35, Christian Neukirchen
>>> wrote:
Any reason we don't replace lsx with this?
find -L . -maxdepth 1 -type f -perm -111
>>>
>>> POSIX compatibility.
>>
>> All s
On 11/28/11, Kurt H Maier wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 8:37 AM, Dieter Plaetinck
>> to reuse the same name.
>
> "Clearly" "there" "is" "no" "general" "case". "Things" "like" "this"
> "should" "be" "dealt" "with" "on" "a" "case-by-case" "basis".
>
Scripts have to be able to depend on command
On Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 12:08 PM, Bjartur Thorlacius
wrote:
> Scripts have to be able to depend on command names; command line
> interfaces are interfaces too. In theory, bin directories should
> contain directories containing the actual commands. Yes, I would
> suggest namespaces if compatibility
That's not a machine, it's a moka.
2011/11/28 Kurt H Maier :
> On Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 12:08 PM, Bjartur Thorlacius
> wrote:
>> Scripts have to be able to depend on command names; command line
>> interfaces are interfaces too. In theory, bin directories should
>> contain directories containing th
On 28 November 2011 17:08, Bjartur Thorlacius wrote:
> Scripts have to be able to depend on command names; command line
> interfaces are interfaces too. In theory, bin directories should
> contain directories containing the actual commands.
Plan 9 does this to some extent. It's always seemed obvi
> On Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 07:52:17AM -0500, Kurt H Maier wrote:
>On Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 4:48 AM, Dieter Plaetinck wrote:
>> If you can avoid conflicts, that's better than expecting packagers (of each
>> distro) to fix it.
>
>I disagree. lsx-lrzsz is clearly less useful or important than
>lsx-dm
> On Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 02:20:22PM +0100, hiro wrote:
>remove minicom
>
minicom & ckermit are still very useful in today's society. Although not as
useful for Internet connectivity, they're still used for debugging the kernel
and other low-level activities. The most recent from what I hear i
Heh,
On Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 09:59:59AM -0900, rogerx@gmail.com wrote:
> Thanks for the tip! Been awhile since I looked at man locate. ;-)
It is always amazing ;-)
> > On Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 04:19:10PM +0100, u...@netbeisser.de wrote:
> >Heh,
>On 27 November 2011 23:13, Roger wrote:
loc
The gtk3 resize issue with dwm was already reported. Hopefully it will be fixed
soon.
Begin forwarded message:
> From: "gtk+" (bugzilla.gnome.org)
> Date: 28 de novembre de 2011 20:22:11 GMT+01:00
> To: panc...@youterm.com
> Subject: [Bug 662862] gtk3 window resize using the corner widget caus
> minicom & ckermit are still very useful in today's society.
No, minicom is not useful. I never managed to remember any of their
stupid keybindings.
Of course screen is bloated in other ways, but what do you have against picocom?
> On Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 09:33:50PM +0100, hiro wrote:
>> minicom & ckermit are still very useful in today's society.
>
>No, minicom is not useful. I never managed to remember any of their
>stupid keybindings.
>Of course screen is bloated in other ways, but what do you have against
>picocom?
Not
Hi all,
thank you for all the great software!
Attached is a patch to turn off cookies in surf.
Thank you,
Tomas
>From 3de76376da8ba7533a9af0559d7594060f2eb606 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Tomas Hlavaty
Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2011 00:15:28 +0100
Subject: [dev][surf] -c command-line option to turn
24 matches
Mail list logo
