Hi,
Do you believe that Wayland will replace X11 one day?;)
Besides, don't you believe that Ubuntu may have time to time some
negative influence on Linux phylosophy?
Quote:
Display server expert Daniel Stone explains what is really happening
with the future of graphical display protocols on
On Tue, 2 Aug 2016 18:04:20 +0200
patrick295767 patrick295767 wrote:
> Hi,
Ahoy!
>
> Do you believe that Wayland will replace X11 one
> day?;)
Yes — and it will be horrible.
The worst part of Wayland it encourages you
to write your own display server with all of
features in one single pr
On Tue, 2 Aug 2016 18:04:20 +0200
patrick295767 patrick295767 wrote:
Hey Patrick,
> Do you believe that Wayland will replace X11 one day?;)
this is a tough question to answer. If we are headed on the current
course, I think we will face even more difficult times in the future
with worse mon
Greetings.
Thanks for your patch.
On Tue, 02 Aug 2016 19:39:23 +0200 Eric Pruitt wrote:
> Modifies st to support user-defined fallback fonts specified in an
> array. This change also resolves an issue where fallback fonts were used
> in place of default fonts in an inconsistent manner which caus
Heyho
On Tue, Aug 02, 2016 at 06:27:49PM +0200, FRIGN wrote:
> On Tue, 2 Aug 2016 18:04:20 +0200
> patrick295767 patrick295767 wrote:
>
> Hey Patrick,
>
> > Do you believe that Wayland will replace X11 one day?;)
>
> this is a tough question to answer. If we are headed on the current
> cou
On Tue, 2 Aug 2016 20:33:39 +0200
Silvan Jegen wrote:
Hey Silvan,
> One can argue that having a simple protocol *is* the suckless part of
> Wayland (dont forget Xprint[0] :P). The Wayland protocol also does not
> allow for communication between clients directly[1] but only through
> the Wayland
this has been discussed here often enough.
just discuss this bullshit with your hackernews friends next time.
On Tue, Aug 02, 2016 at 08:41:57PM +0200, FRIGN wrote:
> On Tue, 2 Aug 2016 20:33:39 +0200
> Silvan Jegen wrote:
>
> Hey Silvan,
>
> > One can argue that having a simple protocol *is* the suckless part of
> > Wayland (dont forget Xprint[0] :P). The Wayland protocol also does not
> > allow for co
On Tue, 2 Aug 2016 22:08:08 +0200
Silvan Jegen wrote:
> As far as I can tell, the goal of the Wayland devs is to keep the
> required protocols to a minimum and graduate prooven protocol
> extensions to official Wayland ones.
It sounds good on paper, but really turns out to be a horrible mess
in
Good evening,
I think that JWM could be made visible on the website of www.suckless.org.
Please check the code of jwm...
JWM is relatively light, and people like it very much jwm as much as
dwm. For jwm, only libx11-dev is necessary. JWM is fluid, it looks
nice. With xbindkeys it is a nice alter
I believe that we will have to strive to keep X11.
2016-08-02 20:33 GMT+02:00 Silvan Jegen :
> Heyho
>
> On Tue, Aug 02, 2016 at 06:27:49PM +0200, FRIGN wrote:
>> On Tue, 2 Aug 2016 18:04:20 +0200
>> patrick295767 patrick295767 wrote:
>>
>> Hey Patrick,
>>
>> > Do you believe that Wayland will re
On Tue, 2 Aug 2016 22:35:45 +0200
patrick295767 patrick295767 wrote:
> /*
> JWM v2.3.5 by Joe Wingbermuehle
> compiled options: confirm icons nls xbm
> */
>
> My theme:
>
>
> FreeSans-9:bold
> 4
> 20
>
> white
> #70849d:#2e3a67
> bl
Sure that it needs a bit of improvements...
2016-08-02 22:41 GMT+02:00 FRIGN :
> On Tue, 2 Aug 2016 22:35:45 +0200
> patrick295767 patrick295767 wrote:
>
>> /*
>> JWM v2.3.5 by Joe Wingbermuehle
>> compiled options: confirm icons nls xbm
>> */
>>
>> My theme:
>>
>>
>> FreeSans-9
JWM is hosted on github already and that is definitely where it
belongs. From there:
To build JWM you will need a C compiler (gcc works), X11, and the
"development headers" for X11 and Xlib. If available and not disabled
at compile time, JWM will also use the following libraries:
cairo and librsv
On Tue, Aug 02, 2016 at 10:16:06PM +0200, FRIGN wrote:
> On Tue, 2 Aug 2016 22:08:08 +0200
> Silvan Jegen wrote:
> > Since Wayland is only a protocol, as long as both the client and the
> > server follow it closely enough both the clients and the server will
> > be happy. What is crucial is that t
Hi Pat,
> Sure that it needs a bit of improvements...
1. I am not sure what problem JWM is trying to solve.
2. I do not think "improvements" will make it suck less.
Certainly there is a place in the world for JWM, just as there is a place
in the world for Openbox, Awesome, even Gnome and KDE. I
On Tue, 2 Aug 2016 22:54:43 +0200
Silvan Jegen wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 02, 2016 at 10:16:06PM +0200, FRIGN wrote:
> > On Tue, 2 Aug 2016 22:08:08 +0200
> > Silvan Jegen wrote:
> > > Since Wayland is only a protocol, as long as both the
> > > client and the server follow it closely enough both
> >
I believe than an alternative to dwm might be good. dwm is fine, but
an alternative could be useful.
Concerning the source, I knows those addtional libs... well, several
drawbacks to be solved.
jwm needs to be simplified and optimized first. Giving a new birth name ??WM...
2016-08-02 22:47 GM
You likely could mean... a rewrite might the easiest and much faster.
I think that only dwm on suckless is too little. It needs a new sort
of wm, visually like jwm, filliing the gap between tinywm and dwm.
Cheers!
2016-08-02 23:04 GMT+02:00 Timothy Rice :
> Hi Pat,
>
>> Sure that it needs a
It is on the way, I look for more ideas.
What surprised me is that there aren't so much nice code for tiny
window managers.
There are quite too little choices today.
http://incise.org/not-so-tiny-window-managers.html
2016-08-02 23:08 GMT+02:00 Timothy Rice :
>> jwm needs to be simplified and op
It was indeed quite interesting decision from Fedora. It seems that
Fedora is serious about it.
"The rumors of its death are greatly exaggerated... Sailfish OS has been
using Wayland from the start and Fedora wants to make Wayland the default
for their next release (I wouldn't count on it)."
2016
> jwm needs to be simplified and optimized first. Giving a new birth name
> ??WM...
Well, make it happen. Show, don't tell.
~ Tim
On Tue, Aug 2, 2016 at 1:08 PM, Silvan Jegen wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 02, 2016 at 08:41:57PM +0200, FRIGN wrote:
> > On Tue, 2 Aug 2016 20:33:39 +0200
> > Silvan Jegen wrote:
> >
> > Hey Silvan,
> >
> > > One can argue that having a simple protocol *is* the suckless part of
> > > Wayland (dont forget
Hi Pat,
> http://incise.org/not-so-tiny-window-managers.html
On that list I see evilwm. Apparently it is stacking, and if I'm not
mistaken it appears to have a similar size to dwm (maybe even smaller).
So why propose JWM instead of EvilWM?
~ Tim
I just compile without xinerama, and dwm is slighty lighter than jwm.
If you stick to the minimum with jwm, it is not that heavy at all. This is nice.
Why jwm, because after chopping some lines into code, it can give a
nice minimalist fork.
2016-08-02 23:25 GMT+02:00 Timothy Rice :
> Hi Pat,
>
On Tue, Aug 02, 2016 at 11:31:53PM +0200, patrick295767 patrick295767 wrote:
> I just compile without xinerama, and dwm is slighty lighter than jwm.
> If you stick to the minimum with jwm, it is not that heavy at all. This is
> nice.
>
> Why jwm, because after chopping some lines into code, it can
> /*
> JWM v2.3.5 by Joe Wingbermuehle
> compiled options: confirm icons nls xbm
> */
>
> My theme:
>
>
> FreeSans-9:bold
> 4
> 20
>
> white
> #70849d:#2e3a67
> black
> 1.0
>
>
> #aa
> #8084
MIght you have a well-balanced discussion, not over-too-serious or the
other side? simply just in the middle, balanced.
Gnome is sure heavy. I wrote "check the code". After considering the
code, it might be nice input for a nice idea of making a fork of it.
Once done, the code can be considered o
On Wed, Aug 03, 2016 at 12:30:17AM +0200, patrick295767 patrick295767 wrote:
> MIght you have a well-balanced discussion, not over-too-serious or the
> other side? simply just in the middle, balanced.
A nice sentiment, but indeed for it to be a discussion it should be
two-sided. At the moment you
I'd say cwm instead of evilwm. When I had to use an ant screen laptop, it was
pretty nice. The only thing I lacked is workspaces.
On Wed, Aug 03, 2016 at 07:25:56AM +1000, Timothy Rice wrote:
> Hi Pat,
>
> > http://incise.org/not-so-tiny-window-managers.html
>
> On that list I see evilwm. Appar
On Wed, Aug 03, 2016 at 12:48:05AM +0200, hadrien.lac...@openmailbox.org wrote:
> I'd say cwm instead of evilwm. When I had to use an ant screen laptop, it was
> pretty nice. The only thing I lacked is workspaces.
Ah, someone who knows how to have a discussion, how lovely! :D
~ Tim
On Tue, Aug 02, 2016 at 06:04:20PM +0200, patrick295767 patrick295767 wrote:
> Quote:
> Display server expert Daniel Stone explains what is really happening
Display server expert.
On Tue, Aug 02, 2016 at 10:47:31PM +0200, Martin Kühne wrote:
> libXmu for rounded corners.
kill me
I've just replaced the shadow package on my slackware systems with the
su, passwd etc programs from ubase, but was missing pwck and grpck. So
I threw something together, maybe not particularly suckless (wc -l *.c
gives 548..), but if somebody might find it useful, here [0] it is.
cheers
Lars
[0]
34 matches
Mail list logo
