Re: [dev] [sxiv] Discussion

From: Ciprian Dorin Craciun <ciprian.craciun_AT_gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2016 11:03:35 +0300

On Tue, Aug 9, 2016 at 10:39 PM, Bert Münnich <ber.t_AT_posteo.de> wrote:
> There's already lel[0] that does just this. But sxiv is not only an
> image viewer. I heavily use it to organize my image library, e.g.
> visually selecting files to import from a huge collection of freshly
> taken photos or performing simple editing tasks like rotating--lossless
> in case of JPEG--and tagging images with the external key-handler.
> Using temporary farbfeld files as input would not make this easier.


First of all, thanks Bert for developing `sxiv`!

Of all the "lightweight" image viewers out there it's almost the
"perfect" combination of simplicity (thus lightness), but with a few
useful features like the thumbnail view, marking pictures, navigating
among them, refreshing on image update, and stdin/stdout consumption
and outputing of images, etc.

In fact, like you, I have also integrated `sxiv` into my "photography"
workflow, for both selecting potential images, and "analysing" them
with a few tools I've wrote myself.




Thus if I were to "vote", I would say `sxiv` fits quite well into the
"suckless" tools collection.


Thanks again Bert!
Ciprian.




P.S.: Regarding the "suckless" philosophy of reducing "dependencies":
 we are all aware that these "lightweight" tools run (I would bet in
most cases) on modern Linux distributions (thus most likely with
systemd), under Xserver (or whatever it is called today), and are
compiled with GCC, right? :)

Thus if one counts the OS kernel (plus its systemd counterpart), and
the OS utilities needed to boot it up, and the needed X environment,
and the compiler as dependencies (because they are, or without them
the tool wouldn't actually work), then a handful of libraries pale in
comparison... :)


And not to mention the "code quality" (or "beauty") mantra...
Wouldn't want to start that topic, as I know I've written countless
lines of sh***y code myself... Who hasn't? :) In the end, if the
tool works, great! Glory to its author! :)
Received on Thu Aug 11 2016 - 10:03:35 CEST