Thanks, but I can't read french.
On 3/15/15, Sébastien Poher <sbphr_AT_volted.net> wrote:
> Le dimanche 15 mars 2015 à 10:55:11, Ivan Tham a écrit :
>> I does not like to compile as when I run `make`:
>> ```
>> dwm build options:
>> CFLAGS = -std=c99 -pedantic -Wall -Wno-deprecated-declarations -Os
>> -I/usr/X11R6/include -D_BSD_SOURCE -D_POSIX_C_SOURCE=2 -DVERSION="6.1"
>> -DXINERAMA
>> LDFLAGS = -s -L/usr/X11R6/lib -lX11 -lXinerama
>> CC = cc
>> creating config.h from config.def.h
>> CC drw.c
>> CC dwm.c
>> dwm.c:40:37: fatal error: X11/extensions/Xinerama.h: No such file or
>> directory
>> compilation terminated.
>> Makefile:18: recipe for target 'dwm.o' failed
>> make: *** [dwm.o] Error 1
>> ```
>>
>> And what does the Xlib header files means in the README?
>
> Hi,
>
> It means that you have to install the dev library (for example libx11-dev
> as
> named in debian).
>
> As for the difference between i3 and dwm, beside the compilation point,
> here
> are some that I have noticed (I have used both but prefered dwm):
>
> - dwm is faster and simpler to use (less "functionnalities" if you want to
> call it like that);
> - they use different paradigm : i3 "creates" workspace and associated tags
> when a client appears or is sent to the considered workspace // dwm has
> defined tags that you apply to clients;
> - both uses different layout: in i3 windows can be tiled, stacked or tabbed
> (or floating);
> in dwm you have tiling, floating and maximising layout
>
> For the rest, its more or less a question of taste.
> Try both and make you're choice.
> dwm is not difficult and there is documentation.
> Take a look at the i3 config file, the first time, you may find it hard as
> well.
>
> I've written tutorials for both (french):
>
> http://www.volted.net/tutos/dwm.html
> http://www.volted.net/tutos/i3.html
>
> Regards,
> --
> Sébastien Poher
> www.volted.net
> Aidez-nous à défendre la liberté du logiciel:
> http://www.fsf.org/register_form?referrer=11902
>
Received on Sun Mar 15 2015 - 16:17:08 CET