On Thu, Sep 11, 2008 at 6:51 PM, C. Scott Ananian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Thu, Sep 11, 2008 at 12:16 PM, Tomeu Vizoso <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> On Thu, Sep 11, 2008 at 5:30 PM, C. Scott Ananian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> On Wed, Sep 10, 2008 at 8:13 AM, Tomeu Vizoso <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>>> On Wed, Sep 10, 2008 at 2:05 PM, James Cameron <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>>>> But I did notice one odd thing that I wasn't fully aware of until now >>>>> ... the byte-code of the built-in modules was present, complete with doc >>>>> strings ... for example; >>>> >>>> Yes, we are aware of this one and have a fix on the line: >>>> >>>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=460334 >>>> >>>> There has been a thread recently on devel or sugar ml about it. >>>> >>>> If you could help us quantify how much this could help, it would be >>>> much appreciated. >>> >>> Here's a quick reference to that previous thread: >>> http://lists.laptop.org/pipermail/sugar/2008-August/007969.html >>> >>> I guess I meant to turn on -OO on joyride, but didn't quite get around >>> to it; it would require patching/forking our numpy and python, and >>> then tweaking the sugar-shell startup to use -OO. It looked like this >>> would save ~6M, but I don't know yet how much extra NAND space it >>> would take for the .pyo files. I might be able to experiment and make >>> a build or two on the faster branch to quantify this. >> >> Would be great if you could look into it. I guess we could drop the >> .pyc files and use the .pyo instead. > > http://dev.laptop.org/ticket/8431 now tracks the issue. > > I've started by putting appropriately patched versions of python and > numpy into joyride, so you can experiment with -OO on a joyride image > without having to worry about these particular bugs. I've confirmed > that python 2.5.2 and numpy 1.2.0 already have/will have the relevant > patches, so we probably won't need the fork by our next major release. > --scott > > p.s. does anyone know why fedora isn't using python 2.5.2 yet? It was > released in February '08; I'm surprised that it's not in F9 or F10.
I think the plan is to get one 2.5.1 more in rawhide with some new patches (including the -OO fix) and then doing a 2.5.2 rpm. If 2.5.2 brings more trouble than what can be solved for F10, then we can go back to 2.5.1+patches. Regards, Tomeu _______________________________________________ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
