From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on inbox.vuxu.org
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.1 required=5.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,
	DKIM_VALID_AU,T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
	version=3.4.4
Received: (qmail 21740 invoked from network); 11 May 2022 11:48:42 -0000
Received: from 9front.inri.net (168.235.81.73)
  by inbox.vuxu.org with ESMTPUTF8; 11 May 2022 11:48:42 -0000
Received: from mx0.riseup.net ([198.252.153.6]) by 9front; Wed May 11 07:45:57 -0400 2022
Received: from fews1.riseup.net (fews1-pn.riseup.net [10.0.1.83])
	(using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)
	 key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256
	 client-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) client-digest SHA256)
	(Client CN "mail.riseup.net", Issuer "R3" (not verified))
	by mx0.riseup.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4KytQS6MG2z9sxF
	for <9front@9front.org>; Wed, 11 May 2022 04:45:52 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=riseup.net; s=squak;
	t=1652269552; bh=fA6sO5KoXG0G9OFuZSN337JKEOOlSFrdrv/ovZ04G48=;
	h=Subject:To:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To:From;
	b=CuQglXnM3MpY5ftRQWeuWKoUAa5lASWJKx6PiN2qPXGvCP8XwegKGnnvd00P7+JKC
	 aQiKdGyOp6nTDurv3YRx01eXZhsyT9VFIFVLI/qqCVD80Ni3LsQrDCKOhUQ6uJgNr5
	 WC0TQwZNErojepvHNXZeQ+oBTyJpWnXYHva+Nkeo=
X-Riseup-User-ID: 3D2E1C6F12AC6A57B6CD35624B96E81500F175E553C2D7CA1AD4C4F947BE54A0
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	 by fews1.riseup.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4KytQS1rR5z5yHl
	for <9front@9front.org>; Wed, 11 May 2022 04:45:51 -0700 (PDT)
To: 9front@9front.org
References: <1A18E2DECEF098E18AA850ABA3BFB26D@prosimetrum.com>
 <fc98c271-0a81-4236-8dbb-e9a9927ae4e5@sirjofri.de>
 <f369070e-c31f-4f4e-bdaf-f76c39a7c72b@sirjofri.de>
From: mkf9 <mkf9@riseup.net>
Message-ID: <4213280c-af69-7b86-b263-b507009a6ebe@riseup.net>
Date: Wed, 11 May 2022 16:15:49 +0430
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <f369070e-c31f-4f4e-bdaf-f76c39a7c72b@sirjofri.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
List-ID: <9front.9front.org>
List-Help: <http://lists.9front.org>
X-Glyph: ➈
X-Bullshit: scripting extension-based element wrapper CSS controller 
Subject: Re: [9front] wloc - rc doesn't work because of pid
Reply-To: 9front@9front.org
Precedence: bulk

sirjofri wrote:
> One potential other solution for wloc: don't use the full label, but 
> only the first token, which is likely a command without arguments.
> 
> This would fix the rc pid issue and still work the same as always. Of 
> course you lose the ability to reconstruct your programs with arguments 
> (e. g. filenames).
> 
> sirjofri

i had following solution in my mind
if label shows a pid, check what binary? (using proc name?) it's 
running, usually it's rc, but some programs won't change label of 
default window's label.