Re: Proposed suite: developer tools
I might be stupid but Vermine reversed would be enimrev? Heh. No. What you say is not stupid :-) What I reversed is not the string of characters, but the string of syllables (or phonemes, if you prefer). I agree Syllables are hard to define because their definition is at least language specific. But well, this is also part of the beauty of human languages. It's impressive to see how various the kinds of discussions on desktop-devel-list can be. Cheers, Dodji. ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: printing options not totally efficient
On Thu, 2007-01-11 at 16:06 +0100, Ruben Vermeersch wrote: On Thu, 2007-01-11 at 13:17 +0100, David Prieto wrote: Which is obviously wrong and makes the final printed document difficult as hell to read. So my proposal is, when setting printing options like even/odd or inverse order, could gnome base the final result on the actual sheets instead of the document pages? I've ran into this too some time ago and I agree, it's very confusing. To make the matter worse, the wording in the printing dialog leads the user to believe that everything will be printed as we expect: In the only print dropdown, it uses the word sheets, while it clearly seems to apply to document pages. Thats because that was the intended behaviour. However, maybe we're sending the wrong cups commands for this (page-set is even or odd, and number-up for the more pages per sheet). =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Alexander LarssonRed Hat, Inc [EMAIL PROTECTED][EMAIL PROTECTED] He's an old-fashioned arachnophobic librarian plagued by the memory of his family's brutal murder. She's a provocative African-American soap star who hides her beauty behind a pair of thick-framed spectacles. They fight crime! ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: printing options not totally efficient
Thats because that was the intended behaviour. However, maybe we're sending the wrong cups commands for this (page-set is even or odd, and number-up for the more pages per sheet). Where should I file a bug so in time this issue can be fixed? ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: printing options not totally efficient
On Fri, 2007-01-12 at 10:18 +0100, David Prieto wrote: Thats because that was the intended behaviour. However, maybe we're sending the wrong cups commands for this (page-set is even or odd, and number-up for the more pages per sheet). Where should I file a bug so in time this issue can be fixed? Gnome Bugzilla, component gtk+ =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Alexander LarssonRed Hat, Inc [EMAIL PROTECTED][EMAIL PROTECTED] He's a benighted Catholic cat burglar for the 21st century. She's a cold-hearted paranoid bounty hunter who can talk to animals. They fight crime! ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Proposed module: tracker
2007/1/12, Gustavo J. A. M. Carneiro [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Having tried tracker 0.5.3 for a couple of days what I have to say is: 1. it uses little memory; 2. it requires _a lot_ of CPU power. Basically point 2 is a killer. No one is going to want to run this except in servers. Keeping the CPU busy almost 100% of the time is not nice: consumes more power, gets my computer fan running faster and more loudly.. I can't even begin to imagine what a nightmare it will be for laptop users.. How much cpu does updatedb takes? It is what we are using with gnome-search-tool right now. Everytime cron start it, it starts eating my cpu every day. Tracker don't have to every file every day since it uses inotify and keeps track of what's been indexed. From a T-S-T inclusion point of view, I can't see anything but benfits. Maybe this kind of indexing technology, be it tracker or beagle, is simply not something that we want to shove into users' desktops. Either this gets much much better optimised in the future, or we have to wait for more powerful hardware. In any case, I'm -1 for including tracker in GNOME 2.18; let's wait and see how this evolves at GNOME 2.20 time. -- Gustavo J. A. M. Carneiro [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] The universe is always one step beyond logic. ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list -- Un saludo, Alberto Ruiz ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Proposed module: tracker
Adam Schreiber wrote: On 1/12/07, Gustavo J. A. M. Carneiro [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Basically point 2 is a killer. No one is going to want to run this except in servers. Keeping the CPU busy almost 100% of the time is not nice: consumes more power, gets my computer fan running faster and more loudly.. I can't even begin to imagine what a nightmare it will be for laptop users.. Is it possible for tracker to use the gnome-power-manager api so that the indexer will only run at all or at full speed when AC power is available? There could be some kind of throttled mode or only process file change notifications while running on battery power. thanks thats a good idea (I assume I can use dbus to get the info so dont have to depend on any gnome stuff) please consider adding enhancement requests to: http://bugzilla.gnome.org/browse.cgi?product=tracker -- Mr Jamie McCracken http://jamiemcc.livejournal.com/ ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Proposed module: tracker
On Fri, 2007-01-12 at 14:21 +, Jamie McCracken wrote: thanks thats a good idea (I assume I can use dbus to get the info so dont have to depend on any gnome stuff) Yes. You can either get the AC power info from HAL (if you want to play with all the devices and changed signals manually) or from gnome-power-manager if you just want a nice (gnome-specific at the moment) API to use. Give me a shout if you want some help or some reference code. Richard. ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Proposed module: tracker
Hi, Jamie McCracken wrote: point 2 is scheduled at nice +19 (same with Ionice +7) so it only uses more cpu if its idle. That's not quite how the nice level works, at least in Linux. Higher nice values get a shorter timeslice, so they merely have less time to get their work in before other tasks are scheduled. So all processes fight for the CPU, it's just that (in this case) Tracker gets it less often. Also note that the scheduler actually adjusts nice values under the covers based on how much CPU is being used. Processes with higher CPU utilization actually have their nice value *lowered*, with the idea that the CPU utilization is a short-lived thing. So it might be lowered to nice level +14. The same thing goes for ionice if it's in the best effort IO class. Only in the idle class does IO happen when no other IO happens, but to set that you need to be root due to potential DoS attacks with priority inversion. Joe ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Proposed module: tracker
Joe Shaw wrote: Hi, Jamie McCracken wrote: point 2 is scheduled at nice +19 (same with Ionice +7) so it only uses more cpu if its idle. That's not quite how the nice level works, at least in Linux. Higher nice values get a shorter timeslice, so they merely have less time to get their work in before other tasks are scheduled. So all processes fight for the CPU, it's just that (in this case) Tracker gets it less often. Also note that the scheduler actually adjusts nice values under the covers based on how much CPU is being used. Processes with higher CPU utilization actually have their nice value *lowered*, with the idea that the CPU utilization is a short-lived thing. So it might be lowered to nice level +14. The same thing goes for ionice if it's in the best effort IO class. Only in the idle class does IO happen when no other IO happens, but to set that you need to be root due to potential DoS attacks with priority inversion. yeah I know but I dont believe that minor adjustments by the kernel to nice is causing a slow down as such My suspicion is high IO Wait states from heavy disk writing (which is not affected by ionice at all) might be to blame in some circumstances but I may be wrong -- Mr Jamie McCracken http://jamiemcc.livejournal.com/ ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Beagle CPU usage (was Proposed module: tracker)
Hi, On Fri, 2007-01-12 at 12:04 +, Gustavo J. A. M. Carneiro wrote: 2. it requires _a lot_ of CPU power. Basically point 2 is a killer. No one is going to want to run this except in servers. Keeping the CPU busy almost 100% of the time is not nice: consumes more power, gets my computer fan running faster and more loudly.. I can't even begin to imagine what a nightmare it will be for laptop users.. Maybe this kind of indexing technology, be it tracker or beagle, is simply not something that we want to shove into users' desktops. Speaking for Beagle, any long-term ( 2 minutes) CPU pegging is a bug. And the only time when something that long is acceptable is on uncommon index merges or indexing very large documents. If it happens frequently, I would consider that a bug as well. Please file them. Beagle has unfortunately gotten a reputation for being CPU hungry because certain documents trigger bugs. I've spent a lot of my time recently fixing such issues and making it easier to identify and debug them. There's no reason why Beagle needs to be CPU heavy, and it hasn't been designed as such (in fact, quite the contrary). Thanks, Joe ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Proposed module: tracker
On 1/12/07, Jamie McCracken [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Im open to people's thoughts on this... (IE is 100% cpu usage at nice+19/ionice+7 during indexing really a problem?) Having tracker use 100% CPU while the computer is on my lap kinda sucks. Well, actually it blows. Lots of hot air on my leg. It's dual core so I almost always have the one core available for tracker to max out. updatedb never seems to use more than 17% or so so it's much easier to handle. -- Travis Watkins http://www.realistanew.com ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
