[dev] Re: freetype2/fc pain

From: AR Garbe <garbeam_AT_gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 22 Sep 2018 23:53:13 -0700

On Sat, 22 Sep 2018 at 21:10, AR Garbe <garbeam_AT_gmail.com> wrote:
> I can't get my head around on how much the elegance and clarity of
> dwm/dmenu/libsl code has suffered from the introduction of freetype2
> and fc usage.
[..]
> I barely use multihead setups and I don't give a f*ck about
> anti-aliasing. This whole freetype2 move seems utterly wrong. I didn't
> see it as critical before, but now I more and more conclude it has to
> go.

I did investigate the options and made up my mind. Here is my verdict:

 The idea behind libsl has to be improved in code and I will work on
this. The drw.h API is not strictly enough defined and both dwm and
dmenu access certain aspects of drw.h that they shouldn't, which makes
it currently impossible to cleanly implement either simple plain X11
support or let the Xft/fc abomination survive in one possible
direction or to introduce a different implementation like cairo-based.

I will reassess if the xlib dependent part in dwm can be separated
further as well, to allow a more agnostic WM core.

I know that I did raise the multihead question a couple of times in
the past, and mostly the picture I gathered was 50/50 -- one half uses
Xinerama setups, the other doesn't. Thus my old idea of arranging the
code in a different way might be an answer, which would allow building
dwm single-headed (without Screen) and multi-headed (witch Screen
derived from Xinerama).

I think this whole effort will lead to 6.2 rather than some fork. But
I want it be easier to built a clean dwm without the cruft in setups
where most of the cruft is (fortunately still) absent.

BR,
Anselm
Received on Sun Sep 23 2018 - 08:53:13 CEST