Re: [hackers] About swapfocus dwm patch

From: Aaron Duxler <aaron_AT_duxler.xyz>
Date: Thu, 01 Oct 2020 13:53:58 +0200

Hi Vinícius,

sorry for the inconveniences. I have added a view features to the swapfocus patch, because I did not like the default behavior of it.

Though I'm not using this patch any more and for that reason I won't fix the patch.
If it is really not working I will remove the recent swapfocus patch from the wiki.

I'm using now the stacker patch instead. It also provides the features swapfocus provided as well as some other useful stuff.
Imho the stacker patch is also a lot cleaner.
I would recommend you to either try an older version of swapfocus or the stacker patch instead.

Sorry and kind regards,
Aaron


Am 30. September 2020 04:58:01 MESZ schrieb "vinícius mota" <vcmota78_AT_gmail.com>:
>Thank you very much Chris for your reply.
>
>I just tried again, from scratch, and failed again, with the same
>error.
>Early on today I successfully installed other suckless patches, this
>time
>for st, following the same procedure and everything worked flawlessly.
>In
>fact since I have two other patches for dwm in place, everytime dwm is
>reinstalled those two patches are reinstalled as well, and that
>happened
>several times today.
>
>It may be nonsense but I have looked up several patches' codes today
>and
>noticed that the beginning of the swapfocus patch is different, with a
>different "diff" command:
>
>diff -up a/config.def.h b/config.def.h
>--- a/config.def.h 2020-01-29 00:06:12.415681126 +0100
>+++ b/config.def.h 2020-01-29 13:25:14.167910093 +0100
>_AT_@ -66,6 +66,7
>
>while for all others that I have looked in such as hide vacant tags the
>diff command reads
>
>diff --git a/dwm.c b/dwm.c
>index 4465af1..c4aa3de 100644
>--- a/dwm.c
>+++ b/dwm.c
>_AT_@ -416,7 +416,7 @@
>
>Other than that I have no idea of why it is failing the way it is.
>
>Anyway, thank you again very much for your reply.
>
>Vinícius.
>
>
>
>
>--
>Fingerprint: 1224546E7D5435465E1777CB8E65EA37669D90BE
>Long Key ID:
>8E65EA37669D90BE
>Short Key ID:
> 669D90BE
>
>
>On Tue, Sep 29, 2020 at 10:29 PM Chris Down <chris_AT_chrisdown.name>
>wrote:
>
>> Hi Vinícius,
>>
>> The error message from patch is quite clear that it failed to apply,
>so
>> compilation is premature. You need to either massage it in, or find a
>> patch
>> which roughly matches your version.
>>
>>
Received on Thu Oct 01 2020 - 13:53:58 CEST