Re: [dwm] Re: Crash-only software

From: Simon Parent <>
Date: Sat, 28 Feb 2009 17:00:50 -0500

On Sat, Feb 7, 2009 at 11:41 PM, Marcin Cieslak <> wrote:
> David Tweed wrote:
>>> I think that authors unnecessarily assume that software components are
>>> "black boxes" that need to be kept up at all costs. This is not the right
>> My reading was more to try and avoid the usual software development
>> "tendency" that developers really don't like to think about things
>> going wrong, so they spend time on code that feels "positive" like
>> save routines, etc, and do as little stress testing of things as they
>> can, and certainly with no regard to the users data when a programming
>> error manifests.
> To bring the thread back on-topic - I usually restart dwm (after
> configuration change or upgrade) by killing the dwm process and
> restarting my 'while...' loop in the xterm that's left open
> (my X server does not die after this).
> The only slight problem that all windows get tagged in the tag 1
> after restart, since dwm has no clue what was the previous tag
> assignement. How this internal dwm 'state' could be passed over
> to the new instance?
> --
>              << Marcin Cieslak // >>

Here is what I use. Note that it only saves the tags, all the other
stuff like client order still gets reset.


Received on Sat Feb 28 2009 - 22:00:50 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Sat Feb 28 2009 - 22:12:04 UTC