Re: [dev] Tiling windowmanager workflow (Was: [dvtm] Fibonacci layout patch)

On 6 Jun 2010, at 19:26, Antoni Grzymala wrote:

> Ethan Grammatikidis dixit (2010-06-06, 12:37):
>
>>> What is a minor annoyance for me is how the “m”-mode in dwm is
>>> implemented. The clients that aren’t in focus are visible underneath
>>> the focused window. At least I think that’s how it’s done, since I
>>> can
>>> see Chromium at the bottom of urxvtc.
>>
>> This is why I suggested st not bother with size hints, although it
>> ought to be fixed in the WM really. A quick fix might be to put all
>> non-visible windows in iconified state. ion3 does this (although it
>> doesn't really need to), and it seems not to have any problems.
>
> You're welcome to disrespect hints at dwm level (resizehints=false) in
> which case urxvtc will truly cover the full screen. Hints make sense
> though, and not using them may mess up the terminal occasionally –
> this
> has been of course argued about and discussed here a million times.

Ah, I'm sure it has. XD Disrespecting hints Worked For me(TM) using
ion3 for a few years, but the terminal was XFCE Terminal which is
built around vte which is used in some terminals which don't set size
hints anyway, so it's all fixed up to work like that.

>
> Iconising clients *might* be a solution, though I'm not certain
> whether
> I'd be more scared than comforted *not* seeing another client from
> under
> a non-fullscreen window (be it terminal or anything else).

Well, to see a bright (and slightly noisy) border around a black xterm
disturbs my concentration, so I have to get used to not seeing
anything. :)

>
> --
> [a]
>

-- 
Do not specify what the computer should do for you, research what the  
computer can do for you.