Re: [dev] [dwm] Fedora package

From: TJ Robotham <>
Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2010 11:33:34 -0400

On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 05:02:02PM +0200, Moritz Wilhelmy wrote:
> Petr, as most users also need to patch dwm.c to make dwm fit their needs, this
> seems pointless to me... maybe you should also respect dwm.c if it's put in
> ~/.dwm?
> that way, one can also just extract the mainline tarball or clone the hg repo in
> ~/.dwm and perform local modifications. I think it's the sanest way to package
> dwm (if at all)

If a user is modifying dwm.c, I think that they've crossed the threshold where
relying on a package manager for dwm has ceased to make any sense at all.

A precompiled default version of dwm to give prospective users a sample of
what it's like? Makes sense. Helping to compile in changes from a custom
config.h? Eh, sure - encouraging people to treat it like a runtime config
file is kind of bad but not all that terrible. But once they're fiddling with
dwm.c what's the point in holding their hand? The next step to running make
themselves is laughably small.
Received on Tue Oct 19 2010 - 17:33:34 CEST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Tue Oct 19 2010 - 17:36:02 CEST