hyperactivity limits
I wrote: > It is not completely satisfactory: I don't have the resources to test > up to 3000 active users which I believe is an important target. Just to clarify this: it was actually client resources I ran out of, not the server (though that must have been getting close to melt down). I used hyperactivity, but could only maintain about 250 connections from each instance. Guillaume: you mentioned somewhere that you had worked on a Gabble bug relating to hyperactivity, so I tried a git snapshot and got a recurring trace back with this punchline: dbus.exceptions.DBusException: org.freedesktop.Telepathy.Errors.NotImplemented: \ Unknown property BuddyGadgetAvailable on org.laptop.Telepathy.Gadget Do I need to replace other stuff than just Gabble? Or should I not bother yet? Is 250 connections in the order that you get? Perhaps my hyperactivity has issues all of its own. Douglas ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: testing ejabberd
I've written up my recent testing of ejabberd for the wiki: http://wiki.laptop.org/go/Ejabberd_resource_tests It is not completely satisfactory: I don't have the resources to test up to 3000 active users which I believe is an important target. At lower numbers, however, ejabberd's memory consumption seems to be linear, and it looks to be roughly the case that 0.5 GB per 1000 users is enough. (Just barely -- that's a limit, not a recommendation). With 1200 users making some communication every 15 seconds, the 2GHz dual core pentium was bouncing along with a load average around 2 and ejabberd over 100% CPU usage. I don't know whether 15 seconds is a reasonable interval: if e.g. each keystroke in a shared Write touches ejabberd, then 15 seconds seems long; otherwise perhaps it's very short. Once I realised that the open files resource limit was killing ejabberd (which took an embarrassingly long time, not helped by cryptic log messages), it was stable under all loads. From time to time I tried sharing activities between XOs and they were always responsive. Douglas ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: release 8.2 build 762 still has olpc-update manifest failure at line 383 problem
On Wed, Sep 24, 2008 at 5:51 AM, C. Scott Ananian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I need to know what version you are updating *from*. > --scott Seeing the same problem with 8.2-764, updating to 8.2-766 - the error complains about the contents manifest line 319 . cheers, martin -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- School Server Architect - ask interesting questions - don't get distracted with shiny stuff - working code first - http://wiki.laptop.org/go/User:Martinlanghoff ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: "Walter Bender": Re: devkeys, prettyboot, and G1G1
On Wed, Oct 1, 2008 at 10:35 PM, Edward Cherlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I don't mind if the G1G1 donors have the option to participate in > testing secured laptops, but I utterly reject the notion that we can > jerk customer/donors around like this without their permission in > advance. They _will_ complain publicly. While it is a SMALL hassle, I don't understand how it is jerking customers around before they've even bought a machine. As long as the policy (whatever it turns out to be) is clearly stated on the wiki/amazon site, by purchasing a laptop they are consenting to this. With that said, I would probably lean towards preferring unsecured machines (with pretty boot enabled, of course). bobby > Engineering and marketing should never have the authority to trump > customer service or product quality. > > On Wed, Oct 1, 2008 at 7:15 PM, John Gilmore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Mitch and I have come up with a way to ship G1G1 laptops so that they >> will pretty-boot, but still come from the factory without any need >> for developer keys (in the Forth "disable-security" setting). >> >> This requires a small edit to /boot/olpc.fth in the OS build, >> to load the XO child image, freeze the screen, and put the >> first "progress dot" down just before jumping to Linux. It's >> detailed here: >> >> http://dev.laptop.org/ticket/7896 >> >> I know the support crew would be much happier if G1G1 laptops were >> shipped able to run test builds and patched software, if users could >> interact with Forth to diagnose their hardware, if they could run >> unsigned Forth code from USB collector keys, etc. >> >> Unfortunately, an IRC discussion with Scott today revealed that the >> engineering team has decided that we *must* ship G1G1 laptops with a >> requirement for development keys. The reason: because too many kids >> in the third world will be getting lockdown laptops, and we want the >> G1G1 recipients to be guinea pigs to debug the laptops, to be sure the >> laptops work even when locked down (and that they unlock properly when >> the kid requests a jailbreak key). >> >> I see this is utterly backwards. The countries that want DRM on their >> laptops should be paying the price in support problems and >> infrastructure. Not the donors who sponsor a G1G1 laptop, and not the >> free software community who donate to help push this project along. >> As believers in freedom, we shouldn't be defaulting EVERY laptop to >> being locked by its manufacturer. Yet that's the argument: because >> some of them are locked, all of them must be locked. Or perhaps it's >> slightly more nuanced: A country that orders thousands can order them >> without DRM, but G1G1 users can't. That sounds reasonable, but I've >> interacted with several country teams (Nepal and South Pacific), who >> had come away from OLPC with the impression that it would be >> incredibly dangerous to turn off the "security" of the laptops. In >> Nepal's case I was unable to disabuse them of this odd notion. So no >> country asks for freedom in their laptop shipments, and no G1G1 is >> shipped with freedom, and thus every OLPC laptop is jailed, like every >> iPhone. >> >>John >> >> Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2008 08:34:09 -0400 >> From: "Walter Bender" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> To: "John Gilmore" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> Subject: Re: devkeys, prettyboot, and G1G1 >> Cc: "Mitch Bradley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> >> If Mitch is comfortable with his fix, I cannot see any reason not to >> ship developer keys with G1G1 machines--it would save everyone >> headaches, especially on support; but of course I cannot speak for >> OLPC these days. >> >> -walter >> >> On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 7:26 PM, John Gilmore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I recall discussing this last time but don't recall the reasons not to do it this way. We did ship them all pre-activated. >>> >>> I questioned people after the fateful meeting, and it seemed to me >>> that the problem was that Nicholas wanted pretty-boot, and Mitch was >>> unwilling to try to disentangle pretty-boot from secure-boot. Secure-boot >>> was already a tangle of ugly Forth code, and he was sure that adding >>> more complexity there would result in security holes or bugs. >>> >>> Since then, he has figured out the one-line circumvention that's >>> documented in bug #7896. The circumvention is in the OS (since OFW >>> keeps no state). >>> >>>John >> >> >> -- >> Walter Bender >> Sugar Labs >> http://www.sugarlabs.org >> >> >> [gnu: I also cc'd this to support-gang, but that required sending it >> from a different email address, due to how I am subscribed there.] >> ___ >> Devel mailing list >> Devel@lists.laptop.org >> http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel >> > > > > -- > Don't panic.--HHGTTG, Douglas Adams > fivethirtyeight.com, 3bluedudes.com Obama still moving ahead in EC! > http://www.obamapedia.org/ Join us! > http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/User:Mokurai For
Re: "Walter Bender": Re: devkeys, prettyboot, and G1G1
I don't mind if the G1G1 donors have the option to participate in testing secured laptops, but I utterly reject the notion that we can jerk customer/donors around like this without their permission in advance. They _will_ complain publicly. Engineering and marketing should never have the authority to trump customer service or product quality. On Wed, Oct 1, 2008 at 7:15 PM, John Gilmore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Mitch and I have come up with a way to ship G1G1 laptops so that they > will pretty-boot, but still come from the factory without any need > for developer keys (in the Forth "disable-security" setting). > > This requires a small edit to /boot/olpc.fth in the OS build, > to load the XO child image, freeze the screen, and put the > first "progress dot" down just before jumping to Linux. It's > detailed here: > > http://dev.laptop.org/ticket/7896 > > I know the support crew would be much happier if G1G1 laptops were > shipped able to run test builds and patched software, if users could > interact with Forth to diagnose their hardware, if they could run > unsigned Forth code from USB collector keys, etc. > > Unfortunately, an IRC discussion with Scott today revealed that the > engineering team has decided that we *must* ship G1G1 laptops with a > requirement for development keys. The reason: because too many kids > in the third world will be getting lockdown laptops, and we want the > G1G1 recipients to be guinea pigs to debug the laptops, to be sure the > laptops work even when locked down (and that they unlock properly when > the kid requests a jailbreak key). > > I see this is utterly backwards. The countries that want DRM on their > laptops should be paying the price in support problems and > infrastructure. Not the donors who sponsor a G1G1 laptop, and not the > free software community who donate to help push this project along. > As believers in freedom, we shouldn't be defaulting EVERY laptop to > being locked by its manufacturer. Yet that's the argument: because > some of them are locked, all of them must be locked. Or perhaps it's > slightly more nuanced: A country that orders thousands can order them > without DRM, but G1G1 users can't. That sounds reasonable, but I've > interacted with several country teams (Nepal and South Pacific), who > had come away from OLPC with the impression that it would be > incredibly dangerous to turn off the "security" of the laptops. In > Nepal's case I was unable to disabuse them of this odd notion. So no > country asks for freedom in their laptop shipments, and no G1G1 is > shipped with freedom, and thus every OLPC laptop is jailed, like every > iPhone. > >John > > Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2008 08:34:09 -0400 > From: "Walter Bender" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "John Gilmore" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: devkeys, prettyboot, and G1G1 > Cc: "Mitch Bradley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > If Mitch is comfortable with his fix, I cannot see any reason not to > ship developer keys with G1G1 machines--it would save everyone > headaches, especially on support; but of course I cannot speak for > OLPC these days. > > -walter > > On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 7:26 PM, John Gilmore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> I recall discussing this last time but don't recall the reasons not >>> to do it this way. We did ship them all pre-activated. >> >> I questioned people after the fateful meeting, and it seemed to me >> that the problem was that Nicholas wanted pretty-boot, and Mitch was >> unwilling to try to disentangle pretty-boot from secure-boot. Secure-boot >> was already a tangle of ugly Forth code, and he was sure that adding >> more complexity there would result in security holes or bugs. >> >> Since then, he has figured out the one-line circumvention that's >> documented in bug #7896. The circumvention is in the OS (since OFW >> keeps no state). >> >>John > > > -- > Walter Bender > Sugar Labs > http://www.sugarlabs.org > > > [gnu: I also cc'd this to support-gang, but that required sending it > from a different email address, due to how I am subscribed there.] > ___ > Devel mailing list > Devel@lists.laptop.org > http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel > -- Don't panic.--HHGTTG, Douglas Adams fivethirtyeight.com, 3bluedudes.com Obama still moving ahead in EC! http://www.obamapedia.org/ Join us! http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/User:Mokurai For the children ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: "Walter Bender": Re: devkeys, prettyboot, and G1G1
On Wed, 2008-10-01 at 19:15 -0700, John Gilmore wrote: > I know the support crew would be much happier if G1G1 laptops were > shipped able to run test builds and patched software, if users could > interact with Forth to diagnose their hardware, if they could run > unsigned Forth code from USB collector keys, etc. FWIW, it also would be a huge benefit to those that want to run any sort of Fedora build on their XO. Having to request the developer key and wait a day for that is probably going to be somewhat off-putting. Jeremy ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
"Walter Bender": Re: devkeys, prettyboot, and G1G1
Mitch and I have come up with a way to ship G1G1 laptops so that they will pretty-boot, but still come from the factory without any need for developer keys (in the Forth "disable-security" setting). This requires a small edit to /boot/olpc.fth in the OS build, to load the XO child image, freeze the screen, and put the first "progress dot" down just before jumping to Linux. It's detailed here: http://dev.laptop.org/ticket/7896 I know the support crew would be much happier if G1G1 laptops were shipped able to run test builds and patched software, if users could interact with Forth to diagnose their hardware, if they could run unsigned Forth code from USB collector keys, etc. Unfortunately, an IRC discussion with Scott today revealed that the engineering team has decided that we *must* ship G1G1 laptops with a requirement for development keys. The reason: because too many kids in the third world will be getting lockdown laptops, and we want the G1G1 recipients to be guinea pigs to debug the laptops, to be sure the laptops work even when locked down (and that they unlock properly when the kid requests a jailbreak key). I see this is utterly backwards. The countries that want DRM on their laptops should be paying the price in support problems and infrastructure. Not the donors who sponsor a G1G1 laptop, and not the free software community who donate to help push this project along. As believers in freedom, we shouldn't be defaulting EVERY laptop to being locked by its manufacturer. Yet that's the argument: because some of them are locked, all of them must be locked. Or perhaps it's slightly more nuanced: A country that orders thousands can order them without DRM, but G1G1 users can't. That sounds reasonable, but I've interacted with several country teams (Nepal and South Pacific), who had come away from OLPC with the impression that it would be incredibly dangerous to turn off the "security" of the laptops. In Nepal's case I was unable to disabuse them of this odd notion. So no country asks for freedom in their laptop shipments, and no G1G1 is shipped with freedom, and thus every OLPC laptop is jailed, like every iPhone. John Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2008 08:34:09 -0400 From: "Walter Bender" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "John Gilmore" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: devkeys, prettyboot, and G1G1 Cc: "Mitch Bradley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> If Mitch is comfortable with his fix, I cannot see any reason not to ship developer keys with G1G1 machines--it would save everyone headaches, especially on support; but of course I cannot speak for OLPC these days. -walter On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 7:26 PM, John Gilmore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> I recall discussing this last time but don't recall the reasons not >> to do it this way. We did ship them all pre-activated. > > I questioned people after the fateful meeting, and it seemed to me > that the problem was that Nicholas wanted pretty-boot, and Mitch was > unwilling to try to disentangle pretty-boot from secure-boot. Secure-boot > was already a tangle of ugly Forth code, and he was sure that adding > more complexity there would result in security holes or bugs. > > Since then, he has figured out the one-line circumvention that's > documented in bug #7896. The circumvention is in the OS (since OFW > keeps no state). > >John -- Walter Bender Sugar Labs http://www.sugarlabs.org [gnu: I also cc'd this to support-gang, but that required sending it from a different email address, due to how I am subscribed there.] ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Flash Tests
Carlos Nazareno wrote: > > Now the worst part is that now I can't > yum update > > says I'm missing network dependencies :-/ > > :( > > -Naz > Howdy, Try Sudo Yum Update -x where is whichever one that is missing dependencies. If one package won't yum update then none in the queue will yum update. Same in Yumex, only prettier. It's NetworkManager-glib on my xo running joyride-2500. Sudo yum update -x NetworkManger-glib works for me. Have you done the RPM-GPG-KEY patch since the recent Fedora server problems? Dunno, might help. BTW, Flash = slow with no sound, (Gnash not fit for duty at all). ¡Gracias! genesee -- View this message in context: http://n2.nabble.com/Flash-tests-tp1092716p1132980.html Sent from the OLPC Software development mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: New release8.2 build 767
On Wed, Oct 1, 2008 at 5:45 PM, Build Announcer v2 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > http://pilgrim.laptop.org/~pilgrim/xo-1/streams/8.2/build767 Full changelog at: http://dev.laptop.org/git?p=projects/pilgrim;a=shortlog;h=8.2 http://mock.laptop.org/gitweb/?p=repos;a=shortlog;h=koji.dist-olpc3-testing http://mock.laptop.org/gitweb/?p=repos;a=shortlog;h=local.8.2 http://dev.laptop.org/git?p=olpc-2.6;a=shortlog;h=testing Summary changelog from my notes: #8714: update library home page; clarify search. olpc-library-common-1-30 #8715XO doesn't activate in latest build/ofw olpcrd-0.48-1.20080930git7158dc196f #8726 Read icon appears in home view sugar-0.82.9-3.olpc3 #8740 Remove Simcity from G1G1 composite image. Simcity-5.xo See http://wiki.laptop.org/go/Release_notes/8.2.0/Changelog for all "build engineer's changelogs" since 759. --scott -- ( http://cscott.net/ ) ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
New release8.2 build 767
http://pilgrim.laptop.org/~pilgrim/xo-1/streams/8.2/build767 Changes in build 767 from build: 766 Size delta: 0.00M -olpcrd 0.47-0 +olpcrd 0.48-0 -olpc-library-common 1-28 +olpc-library-common 1-30 -sugar 0.82.9-2.olpc3 +sugar 0.82.9-3.olpc3 -- This mail was automatically generated See http://dev.laptop.org/~rwh/announcer/release8.2-pkgs.html for aggregate logs See http://dev.laptop.org/~rwh/announcer/joyride_vs_update1.html for a comparison ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
New joyride build 2503
http://xs-dev.laptop.org/~cscott/olpc/streams/joyride/build2503 Changes in build 2503 from build: 2502 Size delta: 0.00M -sugar 0.82.9-2.olpc3 +sugar 0.82.9-3.olpc3 -- This mail was automatically generated See http://dev.laptop.org/~rwh/announcer/joyride-pkgs.html for aggregate logs See http://dev.laptop.org/~rwh/announcer/joyride_vs_update1.html for a comparison ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Laptop Immersion
I just finished taking apart an XO that had been immersed in flood water for several days. It wasn't a pretty sight. The conclusion is that such a laptop is not a candidate for repair (with the possible exception of the display.) Additional details at: http://wiki.laptop.org/go/XO_Immersion_Repair wad ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
New joyride build 2502
http://xs-dev.laptop.org/~cscott/olpc/streams/joyride/build2502 Changes in build 2502 from build: 2501 Size delta: 0.00M -olpc-library-common 1-30 +olpc-library-common 1-31 --- Changes for olpc-library-common 1-31 from 1-30 --- + updated/clarified link to the 'update' page so it can be focused & for kids + updated common to include wiki searchbar and devkey/release-notes links + separated the two searchbars visually and with icons + made the laptop search more useful (all of laptop.org) -- This mail was automatically generated See http://dev.laptop.org/~rwh/announcer/joyride-pkgs.html for aggregate logs See http://dev.laptop.org/~rwh/announcer/joyride_vs_update1.html for a comparison ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: New release8.2 build 764
On Sun, Sep 28, 2008 at 12:34 PM, C. Scott Ananian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sun, Sep 28, 2008 at 12:31 PM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> On Sun, 28 Sep 2008, C. Scott Ananian wrote: >>> Requesting dev keys should not be difficult! How can we fix that problem? >> >> one headache (at least from the initial G1G1 machines) was the inability to >> do a cut-n-paste of the long key between the terminal and the browser and >> therefor the need to copy the long key manually between screens (or to and >> from paper) This part of the problem, fortunately, has been addressed. It's definitely possible to copy from Browse and paste into Terminal. (pasting can be done with the button in the Edit toolbar, or ctrl-shift-V). That should take a lot of the frustration out of the process, in the short term. As Scott mentioned, we hope to push the whole process into the control panel, so that it's not necessary to mess around with several activities, copy/paste, or other hassles in order to obtain a key. Instead, just open settings, click on the security icon, and press the "Request security key" button. This same module can then show progress updates, tell you when it's installed (install it automatically, of course), and even offer to back it up to a USB device for you if we want. - Eben > That is true. http://dev.laptop.org/ticket/5709 and > http://dev.laptop.org/ticket/6428 track these issues. I regret I > wasn't able to get time to fix them for 8.2; they are on my 9.1 > roadmap, but help would be appreciated! > >> another one (very relevant to conference situations) is the one business day >> delay in getting the keys issues. this isn't usually a problem, but when you >> only have people togeather for a couple of days (especially over the >> weekend) it may not be possible to get keys for people who don't already >> have them. > > http://wiki.laptop.org/go/Activation_and_developer_keys#Getting_devkey_data_for_many_XOs_at_once > >> many people who would be good testers don't consider themselves 'developers' >> so would not get them on their own. > > Can you suggest a better name, or how we might improve our documentation? > --scott > > -- > ( http://cscott.net/ ) > ___ > Devel mailing list > Devel@lists.laptop.org > http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel > ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
New joyride build 2501
http://xs-dev.laptop.org/~cscott/olpc/streams/joyride/build2501 Changes in build 2501 from build: 2500 Size delta: 0.39M -e2fsprogs 1.40.8-3.fc9 +e2fsprogs 1.41.0-2.fc9 -e2fsprogs-libs 1.40.8-3.fc9 +e2fsprogs-libs 1.41.0-2.fc9 -wget 1.11.1-1.fc9 +wget 1.11.4-1.fc9 --- Changes for e2fsprogs 1.41.0-2.fc9 from 1.40.8-3.fc9 --- + Don't check the group checksum when !GDT_CSUM (#459875) --- Changes for wget 1.11.4-1.fc9 from 1.11.1-1.fc9 --- + rebuild for F-9 + update + wget-1.11.3, downgrades the combination of the -N and -O options + wget-1.11.2, fixes #179962 -- This mail was automatically generated See http://dev.laptop.org/~rwh/announcer/joyride-pkgs.html for aggregate logs See http://dev.laptop.org/~rwh/announcer/joyride_vs_update1.html for a comparison ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Filesystem path ordering overrated.
C. Scott Ananian writes: > The response usually is that additional context is sufficient to > disambiguate tag sets, you don't actually need ordering. That is, > it's okay if a/b is indistinguishable from b/a -- in practice one > will really be c/a/b and the other will be b/a/d or whatever, and > you can use the extra tag 'c' or 'd' to disambiguate. Two big problems with this: 1. "usually" means "on rare occasions we overwrite your files" 2. Getting excess files is a problem. Imagine trying to use this (perhaps with a FUSE filesystem) with a Makefile $(wildcard *) or shell *. Extra files show up and get processed in some way. Maybe it's "rm -rf foo/bar/*" even. There is also the matter of assuming that tags are easier to handle than directories. The fact that some people struggle with directories does not automatically imply that any alternative will be easier. I tend to find tags more difficult in fact; they are disordered by nature and that's a disorganized mess. ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Is http://wiki.laptop.org/ down or vandalized?
How about putting up a simple page saying the main system is down for maintenance? That would at least be a bit better than complete failure to serve pages. On Oct 1, 2008, at 8:14 AM, Jim Gettys wrote: > Best guess is a success disaster: the server needs more RAM... > > Henry's scrambling to upgrade the system. > - Jim > > > On Wed, 2008-10-01 at 08:13 -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >> Is http://wiki.laptop.org/ down or vandalized? Since about 10 PM PST >> last night all I get is a blank page when I try to connect to the >> home page. >> ___ >> Devel mailing list >> Devel@lists.laptop.org >> http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel > -- > Jim Gettys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > One Laptop Per Child ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Is http://wiki.laptop.org/ down or vandalized?
Best guess is a success disaster: the server needs more RAM... Henry's scrambling to upgrade the system. - Jim On Wed, 2008-10-01 at 08:13 -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Is http://wiki.laptop.org/ down or vandalized? Since about 10 PM PST > last night all I get is a blank page when I try to connect to the > home page. > ___ > Devel mailing list > Devel@lists.laptop.org > http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel -- Jim Gettys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> One Laptop Per Child ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Is http://wiki.laptop.org/ down or vandalized?
Is http://wiki.laptop.org/ down or vandalized? Since about 10 PM PST last night all I get is a blank page when I try to connect to the home page. ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Flash Tests
On Wed, Oct 1, 2008 at 2:59 AM, Carlos Nazareno <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Ugh. > > Okay, in an attempt to get sound working with Gnash 8.3.0 > (preinstalled with build 766), I did the following: > > su > wget http://rpm.livna.org/livna-release-9.rpm > rpm -vi livna-release-9.rpm > > Now livna is part of my repositories. > > next I did > yum install gstreamer-ffmpeg > > it installed, so far so good. > > No dice with sound in Gnash still. > > So I try > yum install gstreamer-plugins-ugly > > Doesn't want to install, says I have missing dependencies. Now the > dependencies are in gstreamer-plugins-good, I believe, but when I try > to > yum install gstreamer-plugins-good > it says already installed. yup, this is because of our old version of gstreamer. I don't know if there will be an easy fix, you might be able to update gstreamer if you don't care about Record behavior. > same with yum install gstreamer-plugins-base > > Now the worst part is that now I can't > yum update > > says I'm missing network dependencies :-/ might be a temporary problem, but you could try: sudo yum clean all (this was suggested to me last time I was having yum trouble by the nice people of IRC in #fedora on FreeNode) bobby > > :( > > -Naz > > -- > Carlos Nazareno > http://www.object404.com > > interactive media specialist > zen graffiti studios > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Stability and Memory Pressure in 8.2
Tomeu Vizoso wrote: > Read has serious memory problems because renders whole pages > into memory, regardless of what is the viewed area. Any chance the > first pages of the PDF you opened contained big images? Nope, it's a saved Project Gutenberg PDF Coradella_Collegiate_Bookshelf_Collection_austen-persuasion.pdf, looks like it has one small image. Of course when I reproduce everything works fine. Is there *anything* testers can run before or after their XO goes funny? My fantasy would be a section in http://wiki.laptop.org/go/Friends_in_testing : "Run log_mem.py from a console as you start Sugar. This snapshots memory every 10 seconds to a rotating set of files in tmpfs until it detects that the machine has serious memory problems, then it runs a detailed /sys/procmem dump. It also runs strace on the OOMKiller thread. If your XO locks up, zip this directory and attach it to bug 4321." Without something like that, it'll be hard to get anything more from testers than anecdotes. Sincerely, -- =S ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: why are removable storage devices just an adjunct ?
On Wed, Oct 1, 2008 at 6:01 AM, Mikus Grinbergs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Applications which I intend to use in the near future I keep > "resident" (Sugar Activities in /home/olpc/Activities, Linux > applications on my "permanent" SD card). Those I access rarely I > keep on a removable storage device. > > Just now was using Journal to access Activity bundles kept on a > removable storage device. All I wanted to do was to run them once > -- but Journal *installed* (in /home/olpc/Activities) each one that > I clicked on. I had not expected that. > > > The XO-1 does not have a lot of nand "storage". What interests me > is how best to "off-load" data *and programs* from nand. I had been > told that it was possible to run Activities from a removable storage > device -- but I now see that in the actual implementation it *still* > requires nand to run an "off-loaded" Activity -- in other words, the > removable storage device is just an "adjunct", not a "repository". > > There really ought to be a better way to "deposit" Activities which > are not being accessed each week. Sooner rather than later, there > simply will not be room in /home/olpc/Activities. You raise interesting points. The reason why there isn't better support for removable devices is that the current resources didn't allowed for more work to go in there. I think Scott has plans to make possible run activities without unpacking them anywhere, so I expect that would serve for your plans of offloading activities to removable storage. HTH, Tomeu ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: New release8.2 build 764
"C. Scott Ananian" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> But it appears that the Help activity (for example) is not listed in >> these pages. What URL should I use? > > You should use the URL listed on the [[Activities/G1G1]] page. The > data is machine-readable; there is a parser at: > > > http://dev.laptop.org/git?p=users/cscott/sugar-update-control;a=blob;f=bitfrost/update/microformat.py;h=4104bfdae43532125fbd1a94faf4ce489a6359ea;hb=HEAD > > and the format is described at > > http://wiki.laptop.org/go/Activity_microformat Thanks. IIUC I should use microformat.py functions in my (customized) create-customization-key to scrap the HTML page containing activities, and load them from there - is that right? Sadly enough, I don't speak python yet, and I don't know how to update create-customization-key to make it aware of microformats. Did anyone take this route? Or can someone give me some more hints on how to do this? Thanks, -- Bastien ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
