> Although taking a different approach (conf file parsed at start-up,
> additional features), the sxhkd/shkd might be of interest.
> The former is for X and the latter for the console. The two have
> compatible configuration files formats.
>
> https://github.com/baskerville/sxhkd
> https://github.
I was reading the opengroup specifications for make(1) recently[0],
and found that even our standard makefile practise of using 'include'
for config variables is nonstandard, as far as they're concerned.
Needless to say I think 'include' is a perfectly reasonable feature
to use, and it evidently wo
Nick wrote:
> I was reading the opengroup specifications for make(1) recently[0],
> and found that even our standard makefile practise of using 'include'
> for config variables is nonstandard, as far as they're concerned.
> Needless to say I think 'include' is a perfectly reasonable feature
> to us
On 14-02-11 13:28:25, Markus Teich wrote:
Nick wrote:
I was reading the opengroup specifications for make(1) recently[0],
and found that even our standard makefile practise of using 'include'
for config variables is nonstandard, as far as they're concerned.
Needless to say I think 'include' is a
On Tue, 11 Feb 2014 13:28:25 +0100
Markus Teich wrote:
> Heyho,
>
> Regarding the include config.mk used in various suckless projects: What is the
> benefit? If a user needs to adapt it to his system, he effectively has to
> edit a
> file. Would there be a problem if this file would be the Make
On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 01:28:25PM +0100, Markus Teich wrote:
> Nick wrote:
> > I was reading the opengroup specifications for make(1) recently[0],
> > and found that even our standard makefile practise of using 'include'
> > for config variables is nonstandard, as far as they're concerned.
> > Nee
On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 01:28:25PM +0100, Markus Teich wrote:
> Nick wrote:
> > I was reading the opengroup specifications for make(1) recently[0],
> > and found that even our standard makefile practise of using 'include'
> > for config variables is nonstandard, as far as they're concerned.
> > Nee
On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 11:41:43AM +0100, FRIGN wrote:
> On Tue, 11 Feb 2014 13:28:25 +0100
> Markus Teich wrote:
>
> > Heyho,
> >
> > Regarding the include config.mk used in various suckless projects: What is
> > the
> > benefit? If a user needs to adapt it to his system, he effectively has to
You don't need to use the include statement.
cat config.mk Makefile | make -f -
pmarin.
On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 1:19 PM, Nick wrote:
> I was reading the opengroup specifications for make(1) recently[0],
> and found that even our standard makefile practise of using 'include'
> for config variable
On Tue, 11 Feb 2014 14:32:58 +0100
Kurt Van Dijck wrote:
> I would using 2 files hardly call 'decentralized'. Things can become worse
> than that :-)
Haha, yeah, that's definitely true!
Thanks for the heads up, these are definitely good reasons to go for
the separated approach.
Cheers
FRIGN
On Wed, Feb 05, 2014 at 11:17:27PM +0100, Mark Edgar wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 11, 2014 at 11:15 PM, Marc André Tanner
> wrote:
> > If I recall correctly you mentioned that you have a patch which makes
> > the window title configurable: top / bottom / disable. Would you mind
> > posting it? Someone ju
On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 02:39:43PM +0100, pmarin wrote:
> You don't need to use the include statement.
> cat config.mk Makefile | make -f -
I usually use a rule in Makefile that, using cat in a similar way of
you, generates a file with the name makefile (it usually generates
the inclussion depende
On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 01:28:42PM +, sin wrote:
> It also makes it easy to have a configure script like as shown below:
>
> #!/bin/sh
>
> case `uname` in
> OpenBSD)
> ln config.bsd config.mk
> ;;
> *)
> ln config.posix config.mk
> ;;
> esac
Aha! Now there's a good id
On Sun, Jan 26, 2014 at 04:19:56PM +0700, Peter A. Shevtsov wrote:
> Hello Marc! Thank you for this fine software dvtm! I really like it!
>
> Today I was playing with cmd-fifo feature to automate some of my daily tasks.
Out of interest, for what do you use the cmd-fifo interface?
I originally ad
On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 03:41:43PM +0100, Roberto E. Vargas Caballero wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 02:39:43PM +0100, pmarin wrote:
> > You don't need to use the include statement.
> > cat config.mk Makefile | make -f -
>
> I usually use a rule in Makefile that, using cat in a similar way of
>
> The disadvantage of that is that having files called Makefile and
> makefile in the same directory, users may well look for the former to
> make changes, leading to confusion. I certainly didn't know that
Yes, it is true, you have to be carefull with this point, but usually
is not a problem.
>
On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 12:19:59PM +, Nick wrote:
> I was reading the opengroup specifications for make(1) recently[0],
> and found that even our standard makefile practise of using 'include'
> for config variables is nonstandard, as far as they're concerned.
> Needless to say I think 'include'
On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 07:16:35PM +0100, Markus Wichmann wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 12:19:59PM +, Nick wrote:
> > I was reading the opengroup specifications for make(1) recently[0],
> > and found that even our standard makefile practise of using 'include'
> > for config variables is nons
“Re: *** GMX Spamverdacht *** [dev] Reasonable Makefiles”.
Honestly!
Markus Wichmann dixit:
>A typical Makefile of mine looks like this:
Ugh, a horrid GNUmakefile… I normally write:
PROG= foo
.include
Or, if the sources are more than just foo.c, and if the manpage
is in section 8
On Tue, 11 Feb 2014 20:15:06 + (UTC)
Thorsten Glaser wrote:
>
> Ugh, a horrid GNUmakefile… I normally write:
>
> PROG= foo
>
> .include
>
Not that I defend GNU make, but you can do:
foo:
This will use implicit rules and will compile foo.c. If you have more
than one file with s
I added hotkey config file support. It is so ugly, and requires much
more code. I am ashamed of it to be honest, but it works.
except when it segfaults if your config isn't written pefectly. i'm
working on that.
On 11 February 2014 06:07, Kurt Van Dijck
wrote:
>> Although taking a different ap
Dnia 2014-02-11, o godz. 20:15:06
Thorsten Glaser napisał(a):
> “Re: *** GMX Spamverdacht *** [dev] Reasonable Makefiles”.
> Honestly!
>
>
> Markus Wichmann dixit:
>
> >A typical Makefile of mine looks like this:
>
> Ugh, a horrid GNUmakefile… I normally write:
>
> PROG= foo
>
> .i
Hello,
Classical example of when this is required is Midnight Commander - it
have useful mouse integration, but copy-pasting a filename or two is
sometimes a nice thing to be able to do. Some other terminal emulators
achieve this by not sending mouse events to the program whenever "Shift"
is
On 11/02/14 at 03:49pm, Marc André Tanner wrote:
> Out of interest, for what do you use the cmd-fifo interface?
For irssi and nicklist[0]
[0] http://wouter.coekaerts.be/irssi/nicklist
--
Peter A. Shevtsov
24 matches
Mail list logo
