Re: [ctwm] ctwm-3.8b? ctwm-3.9?

"Matthew D. Fuller" <fullermd_at_over-yonder.net> asked:

[AS]
> > Unfortunately monontone has a terrible bug: unlike wget, it loses
> > all information about when the files were created, so I don't know
> > how old this system is.
>
[MDF]
> I'm not really sure what you mean by this.

Apologies. It was not really relevant to ctwm: I object generally to
people who copy files or directories using cp, instead of cp -p (or
rsynch, or tar) because that loses useful historical information
shown by 'ls -l', 'ls -lt', etc.

In contrast, wget, by default, keeps the information when it fetches
files, though browsers, e.g. firefox, typically don't (when you
'save as').

It turns out that monotone also loses the information. After
downloading a package I like to use 'ls -lt' to see how old the
files are and which ones were most recently changed. But that's
impossible with monotone -- at least as I used it (blindly following
instructions!)

Anyhow, that gripe has nothing to do with ctwm and I should not have
let it intrude.

> For one thing, most of
> the files were probably created 10 or 15 years ago, so that doesn't
> seem a useful question; there probably haven't been any new files in a
> couple releases :)

The files that I have for ctwm-3.8a were all dated Feb 16 2007,
though I appreciate that many of them must be much older. But
ls -lt could have shown me which files had changed since then.

Anyhow, it's all academic, as the changes I was hoping for don't
exist!

> You can use log or annotate or other such VCS operations to find out
> what changes were made when, if you care about details.

 ...if you know what 'vcs' is, which I don't -- Sorry!

> If the thrust
> of your question is more general "up to dateness", though, you grabbed
> the dev head; you're as up to date as anybody, until the next sporadic
> commits (and then you just do the pull/update dance, as you'd do
> comparable ops in any VCS).

I think I must have inadvertently given the impression of being more
knowledgable than I actually am about such things. sorry!

>
> > Alas, full screen flash,
>
> Not unexpected; I'd be quite surprised, actually, if it acted any
> differently than the last release. None of the changes since then get
> near the realms that would probably have to get touched for that.
>
> Unfortunately, fixing it will probably require somebody seeing and
> caring about it to knuckle down and trudge through it. EWMH is the
> most likely culprit as mentioned, but that'll take some digging
> (first, you check the flash source... ;).

I had hoped that the standard specification would simply determine a
list of operations required, which could be installed without read
any code that will invoke them. But perhaps EWMH is not clear enough
for that. I haven't looked at it.

> I for one couldn't even
> take a first stab at it, since I neither have nor want flash on my
> system (and couldn't easily get it if I did for that matter, my
> platform not being showered with blessings from our Mudbrick
> Overlords).

OK. I'll have to stick with Openbox for now. It's not too bad.

Thanks for the information.

Aaron
http://www.cs.bham.ac.uk/~axs
Received on Fri Aug 21 2009 - 01:47:09 CEST