Re: joyride-activities.py --mirror
Am 14.10.2008 um 05:01 schrieb James Cameron: Added a --mirror flag to joyride-activities.py so that the script can be used on a system without dbus or sugar, in order to create a mirror of the activity files for later pickup. git clone http://dev.laptop.org/~quozl/berts-script.git Thanks - merged. - Bert - ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Greg Smith Weekly Report for Week Ending 10/10
Greg's User Feedback URLs of the Week (Spanish): http://ceibalpuertosauce.blogspot.com/ and http://www.ceibalbellaunion.blogspot.com/ Two great teacher generated blogs out of Uruguay showing how XOs and activities are used in real schools. Greg's User Feedback URLs of the Week (English): http://dspace.mit.edu/handle/1721.1/41706?show=full PhD Thesis of OLPC Learning team member Claudia Urrea. Includes detailed overview of and analysis of 1:1 learning projects in Latin America. http://lists.laptop.org/pipermail/devel/2008-October/019994.html Input on devel list from Elena based on experience in Mongolia. See also the extensive thread that grew out of this. ** Status of last weeks goals: 1 - Get sign off and incorporate final edits on 8.2 release notes. GS - Done. That upgrade section was a bear! Thanks to Frances, Mel, and Lionel who helped get it finalized and as clean as possible. 2 - Prepare 8.2 marketing launch. Update Releases wiki pages and write announcement e-mail, wiki home page update, post for OLPC News, open source participants acknowledgment list, (other source material or communication vehicles?). All of the above should be in place for posting Monday 10/13. GS - Done. Release announcement e-mail written. On Tuesday 10/14, I will send it to all lists (except devel where Michael gets the honor of making the announcement). Will also update wiki home page and send announcement to OLPC News 3 - Start weekly 8.2.1 and 9.1 meetings. Update 8.2.1 and 9.1 pages. Start triaging Trac to create queries which will show target 8.2.1 bugs. Reach out to target customers for 8.2.1 and track deployment time frames. GS - Partially done. Internal 8.2.1 meeting held. Further meetings on hold until we identify the lead customer needing a critical bug fix. First internal 9.1 meeting postponed to next week. The goal is to make both of these meetings public meetings on IRC after an initial internal kick off. ** Goals for next week in priority order: 1 - Send out 8.2 announcement e-mail to public lists and technical leads at deployments. 2 - Update and restructure 9.1 page. Continue to engage learning team, Ed, engineering and others to come up with use cases and high level strategic plans which can motivate development over the course of multiple releases. 3 - Join more sugar and other design meetings. I want to add more motivation and customer side info to features planned. Also want to communicate better what work is essentially underway and being worked on now. Lastly, want to write more detailed requirements and see if I can get an engineer to write at least one full design document (best chance is design for activation/security management in response to: http://wiki.laptop.org/go/9.1.0#Activation_lease_security_feature) 4 - Update deployments page with the latest status details. 5 - Engage more users to understand their needs. Focus especially on Sur list and country technical leads (top targets: Peru, Uruguay, Ethiopia, Rwanda and Haiti). Thanks, Greg S ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Fedora 10 for 9.1.0?
On Tue, Oct 14, 2008 at 6:49 PM, Tomeu Vizoso [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, Oct 14, 2008 at 6:21 PM, Jeremy Katz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sun, 2008-10-12 at 13:34 +0200, Marco Pesenti Gritti wrote: do we plan to rebase to F10 for 9.1.0? I'm asking because I'd need to know if I can depend on gtk 2.14... If not, then you're going to be basing on a Fedora release which will be EOL'd[1] very soon after the OLPC release... Jeremy [1] Fedora 9 EOL will be 1 month after Fedora 11's release, so say June-ish gtk 2.14 has some good stuff, would be nice to start to rebase on F10 ASAP so we don't have so much stress as with the F8 rebase. Ahem, I meant the F9 rebase. Tomeu ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Fedora 10 for 9.1.0?
Marco - I think this is one of the important questions we should be discussing in the near term. I'm not advocating either for or against it, but simply that it is something we should consider seriously. That includes identifying all the consequences/implications of rebasing on F10, along with any advantages. - Ed On Oct 12, 2008, at 7:34 AM, Marco Pesenti Gritti wrote: Hello, do we plan to rebase to F10 for 9.1.0? I'm asking because I'd need to know if I can depend on gtk 2.14... http://lists.laptop.org/pipermail/sugar/2008-October/009194.html Marco ___ 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
Re: [Server-devel] Revisor / yum odd error with f9 updates.newkey repo: Missing Dependency: glibc-common = 2.8-3 is needed by package glibc-2.8-3.i386
Martin Langhoff wrote: Right now, revisor can build a pristine F9 installer CD but cannot build a F9 + updates installer CD. The problem appears by merely enabling the additional repo in the stock F9 config files that ship with Revisor. It has also been reported elsewhere: https://fedorahosted.org/genome/ticket/28 The error is Missing Dependency: glibc-common = 2.8-3 is needed by package glibc-2.8-3.i386 even though the updates.newkey repo clearly has the full set of glibc-* packages at 2.8-8 Fedora Unity has just released a Re-Spin of Fedora 9 + updates, and we have not seen this problem. Nevertheless I dug through the code and found a little discrepancy, now having resolved the issue (in GIT). Kind regards, Jeroen van Meeuwen -kanarip ___ Server-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/server-devel
OLPC as Project of the Day at FOSS.in
Hello, The CFP for FOSS.in 2008, one of the largest Free/Open Source Software conference in Asia, is out, and this time they are following a very different format, with the emphasis on _producing code_. The CFP is at http://foss.in/news/call-for-participation.html I'm thinking of proposing OLPC as a Project of the Day (or maybe a FOSS Workout - though I don't think much can be achieved in 3 hours). Possible talks that come to my mind (and on which I can talk with, some effort) include: a) Developing Sugar activities with GTK+ b) Hacking Sugar c) Collaboration in Sugar d) Developing Sugar Activities with PyGame Is anyone interested in presenting anything else on OLPC in FOSS.in ? Possible projects/workout sessions I'm willing to help coordinate include a Media (audio/video) viewer for Browse (similar to the PDF viewer I came up a few days back), a Translate sugar activity for on the fly translation of activities. Are there any projects/features which you can think of which can reach a demo-able state after one day of (possibly distributed) hacking ? If you cna think of them, do you think it will be possible for you to come to FOSS.in and help coordinate the hacking session ? Thanks, Sayamindu -- Sayamindu Dasgupta [http://sayamindu.randomink.org/ramblings] ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Updated UBIFS 8.2 image
On Mon, Oct 13, 2008 at 01:26:32PM -0700, Deepak Saxena wrote: Hi, I have updated the UBIFS 8.2 image on d.l.o with a new kernel that includes various backports from kernel.org. One major change that is noticeable is that the free space calculation reports 921MiB free instead of 822MiB due to improved df reporting. I've also disabled debug messages and this will improve performance (UBI attach time dropped from 50s to 2s). Directions for installation: * Make sure your XO has security disabled * Make sure your XO is running the latest OFW. The best way to do this is to update it to 8.2.0. * Download the following files to a USB stick: http://dev.laptop.org/~dsaxena/ubi_test/data.img http://dev.laptop.org/~dsaxena/ubi_test/nand.img * Boot the laptop with USB stick and escape into the OFW prompt. * Run: ok dev nand : write-blocks write-pages ; dend write-blocks isn't unique # You can ignore this ok update-nand u:\data.img By including the attached file on the same USB stick you can both run the workaround and the flash with the following command: ok fl u:u.fth Untested here as I only have one laptop at my disposal and I'm working on other issues at the moment, but should work as I've just copied the commands you note into a forth source file. Erik \ ubi tests \ nand updater script \ Deepak Saxena ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) \ Erik Garrison ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) dev nand : write-blocks write-pages ; dend update-nand u:\data.img ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: OLPC as Project of the Day at FOSS.in
How about Collaboration as project of the day? Isn't our collaboration framework already shipped in other distros? The problem is that few applications actually use it to allow easy collaboration among end-users. There's probably some GUI work needed, and some integration with each app. If we could catalyze/bootstrap the collaborative aspect of general Linux applications, we'd get a lot more community buy-in than if we proposed a project that only runs on XO hardware (no end user runs Sugar off XO hardware). (Unless we provided an XO to each conference attendee...) As a result, we'd have a lot more collab-ified Linux applications that could be run by the kids on their XO's. And a lot more app developers would have collab in mind as they wrote their next app. John ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: [Server-devel] Tying yum to a package stream?
On Tue, 2008-10-14 at 18:49 +1300, Martin Langhoff wrote: On Tue, Oct 14, 2008 at 6:16 PM, Mike McLean [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If you go this route, I think what you want is obsoletes. Obsoletes says this packages replaces this one. Conflicts says this package cannot be installed at the same time as this other one. Does 'obsoletes' also mean this package cannot be installed at the same time as this other one.? Because things *will* go wrong if someone installs moodle and moodle-xs :-/ You can obsolete and conflict Obsoletes: pkgname=ver.rel Conflicts: pkgname=ver.rel -sv ___ Server-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/server-devel
Re: [Server-devel] Offline moodle notes in moodle.org
On Wed, Oct 15, 2008 at 3:52 AM, John Watlington [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I've talked to Google specifically about using Gears on the XO. Once they understood OLPC's goals and operating environment, they didn't think Gears was appropriate. It was really designed for constant connectivity. That's kind of odd -- the model I'm looking to support is pretty much *identical* to Google Reader's offline mode, which is their flagship Gears-using app... Anyway, who at Google did you talk to? Can I get in touch with Gears people @ Google? cheers, m -- [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 ___ Server-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/server-devel
Re: Fedora 10 for 9.1.0?
On Tue, Oct 14, 2008 at 6:21 PM, Jeremy Katz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sun, 2008-10-12 at 13:34 +0200, Marco Pesenti Gritti wrote: do we plan to rebase to F10 for 9.1.0? I'm asking because I'd need to know if I can depend on gtk 2.14... If not, then you're going to be basing on a Fedora release which will be EOL'd[1] very soon after the OLPC release... Jeremy [1] Fedora 9 EOL will be 1 month after Fedora 11's release, so say June-ish gtk 2.14 has some good stuff, would be nice to start to rebase on F10 ASAP so we don't have so much stress as with the F8 rebase. Regards, Tomeu ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: OLPC as Project of the Day at FOSS.in
+1 On Tue, Oct 14, 2008 at 3:15 PM, John Gilmore [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: How about Collaboration as project of the day? Isn't our collaboration framework already shipped in other distros? The problem is that few applications actually use it to allow easy collaboration among end-users. There's probably some GUI work needed, and some integration with each app. If we could catalyze/bootstrap the collaborative aspect of general Linux applications, we'd get a lot more community buy-in than if we proposed a project that only runs on XO hardware (no end user runs Sugar off XO hardware). (Unless we provided an XO to each conference attendee...) As a result, we'd have a lot more collab-ified Linux applications that could be run by the kids on their XO's. And a lot more app developers would have collab in mind as they wrote their next app. John ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel -- Walter Bender Sugar Labs http://www.sugarlabs.org ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: [Server-devel] Offline moodle notes in moodle.org
This discussion should move to [EMAIL PROTECTED], as it refers to software running on the laptop, not the server. Some context for my comment: I had told them that we were working with schools that were completely offline (although with servers). The problem might have been a mismatch with their business model more than a mismatch of technologies. I'm looking for the name/address of the software architect I was speaking to. But, SJ already brought up this question on devel back in February, and cc'ed a gears developer (attached). cheers, wad From: Samuel Klein [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: February 16, 2008 1:21:36 PM EST To: edward baafi [EMAIL PROTECTED], OLPC Devel [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Ben Lisbakken [EMAIL PROTECTED], Luke Closs [EMAIL PROTECTED], Marco Pesenti Gritti [EMAIL PROTECTED], Dan Bricklin [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: using the browser as an activity platform : pyxpcom / hulahop / Gears The core use here is being able to use the browser as activity platform -- letting web developers good at JS code and test on most any platform, and develop something that can be a first-class activity within Sugar. One example is Dan's javascript spreadsheet, anothe ris a dynamic library (see for instance http://wiki.laptop.org/go/Dynamic_library), another is an existing web service online that one might want to run locally. In addition to pyxpcom, let me add Google Gears as a useful piece of this platform, especially when offering local use of popular online tools. Off the top of my head, MediaWiki, MindMeister, I copy Ben Lisbakken, a gears maintainer, who reports that there is a Gears patch to make it work without extension support... Ben, I'll also introduce you to marcopg separately. ___ Server-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/server-devel
Re: [sugar] 0.84/9.1 planning.
On Mon, Oct 13, 2008 at 2:46 PM, Ed McNierney [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I would also like to stop calling this 9.1 planning. We need to plan Sounds like it is time for a naming contest for this [repeating] event. Some that have been suggested / implied: OLPCSW [08.11.1] OLPC Miniconference [2] XOcamp [Cambridge 2008] ship that as 9.1. And we'll keep going to qualify and ship more of it in 9.2, and more in 10.1 (or is that 0.1??), etc. +1(isn't that A.1 ?) Other questions : should this be a full week, or closer to three days? How often is this sort of week-long meeting valuable to have? SJ ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: [Server-devel] Offline moodle notes in moodle.org
Wow, I don't understand. gears, according to the presentations out there is intended to make run the application while offline ? On Tue, Oct 14, 2008 at 4:52 PM, John Watlington [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I've talked to Google specifically about using Gears on the XO. Once they understood OLPC's goals and operating environment, they didn't think Gears was appropriate. It was really designed for constant connectivity. That doesn't mean Google should support Gears in a BitFrost environment (for those kids fortunate enough to have connectivity). But it does call into question building anything for ALL XOs on top of it. wad On Oct 10, 2008, at 5:51 AM, Ludo (Marc Alier) wrote: Gears sounded like a exciting way to go right when Martin L told me on Skype two weeks ago. That's why I've committed a talented guy like Ruben to dig on this task. We are starting to work on it, and it might even work BUT, in I've been working on a WS architecture for Moodle that can allow SOME features of Moodle to be taken out to offline clients (I'm thinking about Java Phones, iPhones and other no Gears powered machines. As Martin L. says some things move so fast we will not keep up to, BUT maybe we can choose a part of moodle that makes sense to have in a limited device like a phone or an ipod or nintendo ds, and bring it there. This way will never aspire to take out all the features (due to the development rithms that wise ML tells me ) like the gears approach... but hey! is worth a try. So I will put people on both bets. And we are working on WS for other purposes as important as this one http://tracker.moodle.org/browse/MDL-12886 Sleeping is optional, sure :p On Fri, Oct 10, 2008 at 11:18 AM, Martin Langhoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Posted on moodle.org http://moodle.org/mod/forum/discuss.php?d=107920 Hi all! I have been away for a while working on other olpc stuff, but now my attention is returning to Moodle, and offline moodle is definitely in my roadmap. In the AU and NZ moot I had good chances to talk with Dan and MartinD about a cunning plan to get a Gears-based offline moodle going. When we disscussed architecture for the current moodle-on-a-stick (MoaS) based we also talked quite a bit about a Gears-based approach. At the time, it looked huge and risky. Google had just released GG, and was talking about upgrading Reader to use it. So there many things stacked against it: Noone had seen Reader doing the offline thing yet, Gears had a somewhat restrictive license, and it seemed that we'd have to implement a significant chunk of Moodle as an AJAX application. Things have changed between then and now. Google has made things much simpler now with a BSD license and Reader shows it can make the offline thing work very well. Reimplementing Moodle as an AJAX app was still a big monster in my head until recently. But a volunteer approached me recently saying he could take a stab at it, and I thought what would be the simplest thing that could possibly work? The answer was suprisingly simple: store the damn HTML, CSS and JS in the sqlite DB that Gears provides. So from the course page, we can go offline by - Storing the html+css in sqlite - - Requesting a special 'manifest of resources that are ok to use offline' - published by the course-format page... - Retrieving those offline resources. Initially, just mod/resource contents. Later we can extend this support to work with other modules. - When we use the course homepage later while offline, we'll walk the DOM to show CSS blocks 'disabled' (by graying them out) and we will disable links to resources we cannot support offline. - As the user browses the content we do have offline, the JS code keeps track of resources visited. Upon reconnection to the moodle site, we push back the collected logs to mdl_log(*) - Other modules (mod/forum for example) can be supported with ob magic and/or more explicit/AJAXy use of JS. * - we'll need to review the log handling code. So far we've never had out-of-sequence log entries, and this will introduce them for the first time. I'm sure there'll be a few gotchas there. Hearing this, MartinD suggested that - as long as we go the store html way (supported with output buffering tricks if needed) then we can add the ability to produce a plain old zipfile with a course homepage + static resources. I think it's a good secondary goal to have -- though I'm not sure what limits we'll have with this. Tony Anderson - the volunteer who sparked this - has been working on a proof-of-concept implementation. It currently uses Gears and GreaseMonkey, and requires a few manual tweaks. Unfortunately, I don't think that code can be merged directly - we will want to refine the approach to avoid GreaseMonkey and other inconveniences. My take is that we can either adapt it, or use it as a reference for a more moodlish implentation -- Tony is not a moodle dev, so he's
Reminder: Demo of next-gen journal ideas *tomorrow noon* @ 1cc
On Wed, Oct 8, 2008 at 2:41 PM, C. Scott Ananian [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'll be giving a demo of some next-generation journal ideas (and code) at noon Wednesday at OLPC's 1cc offices. I'll make sure to have it recorded, and you can expect it posted online shortly afterwards (for all those not in the Cambridge area). A taste to whet your appetite: http://wiki.laptop.org/go/Experiments_with_unordered_paths http://dev.laptop.org/git?p=users/cscott/journal2;a=blob_plain;f=research/cscott-journal-proposal.pdf;hb=HEAD http://dev.laptop.org/~cscott/journal-ss.png http://dev.laptop.org/~cscott/journal-ss-2.png http://dev.laptop.org/git/users/cscott/journal2 When I spoke to the GNOME folks yesterday, my talk also touched on tag cd, olpcfs, comparison of desktop search engines, RSS, OpenSearch, Ferraris, and application launch protocols. No promises, though. I don't even promise to have slides. I can promise to talk about journal security bitfrost and evil linker tricks now. I can't yet promise to talk about opensearch and stupidly-basic-collaboration-we-still-don't-have, but I'm hoping that a few more hours of hacking will yield sufficient demoware for that. I'm hoping to have slides, so that I can recycle them for a talk in Peru next week. Again: this talk is *tomorrow noon* at OLPC's offices, and shortly after online. --scott -- ( http://cscott.net/ ) ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
[Server-devel] Announcing the General Availability of XO Software Release 8.2.0
Announcing the General Availability of XO Software Release 8.2.0 XO Software Release 8.2.0 was developed by OLPC engineers and the OLPC open source community. The XO and its software is the only major computing platform designed specifically for the educational benefit of children in the developing world. Release 8.2 is based on a child focused graphical interface called Sugar, a Red Hat Fedora 9 Linux operating system and OLPC customized implementations of core software including power management, wireless drivers, NAND flash file system, Open Firmware, and other components. XO Software Release 8.2.0 runs on the award winning XO Laptop. http://laptop.org/laptop/ Major new features in this release include: - A updated Home view and Journal with new options for finding and organizing activities. - An enhanced Frame for collaborating with other XOs, switching between running activities and accessing external USB sticks. - A graphical Control Panel for setting language, network, and power preferences. - An automated Software Update tool which finds the latest version of activities and updates them over the Internet. - Integration with the School Server for backup of XOs and restore of files to the Journal as needed. - New and updated translations for many languages. - A new user manual shipped with the XO as an activity. - Hundreds of bug fixes. For installation instructions and more details on the new features, see the the 8.2.0 Release Notes at: http://wiki.laptop.org/go/Release_notes/8.2.0 Thanks to the many people who gave their time and energy to make this release a reality. Thanks, Greg Smith OLPC Product Manager ___ Server-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/server-devel
Re: Devel Digest, Vol 32, Issue 61 (Licencia)
Estaré de licencia por maternidad hasta el 15 de enero. Por cualquier consulta dirigirse al Ing. Andrés Bergeret: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: [Server-devel] Revisor / yum odd error with f9 updates.newkey repo: Missing Dependency: glibc-common = 2.8-3 is needed by package glibc-2.8-3.i386
On Tue, 14 Oct 2008, Jeroen van Meeuwen wrote: Martin Langhoff wrote: Right now, revisor can build a pristine F9 installer CD but cannot build a F9 + updates installer CD. The problem appears by merely enabling the additional repo in the stock F9 config files that ship with Revisor. It has also been reported elsewhere: https://fedorahosted.org/genome/ticket/28 The error is Missing Dependency: glibc-common = 2.8-3 is needed by package glibc-2.8-3.i386 even though the updates.newkey repo clearly has the full set of glibc-* packages at 2.8-8 Fedora Unity has just released a Re-Spin of Fedora 9 + updates, and we have not seen this problem. I installed this respin and then tried to rebuild fedora 9 + updates on this respin and got this glibc error. Nevertheless I dug through the code and found a little discrepancy, now having resolved the issue (in GIT). Kind regards, Jeroen van Meeuwen -kanarip -- Fedora-buildsys-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-buildsys-list -Connie Sieh http://www.scientificlinux.org ___ Server-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/server-devel
Re: Fedora 10 for 9.1.0?
On Sun, 2008-10-12 at 13:34 +0200, Marco Pesenti Gritti wrote: do we plan to rebase to F10 for 9.1.0? I'm asking because I'd need to know if I can depend on gtk 2.14... If not, then you're going to be basing on a Fedora release which will be EOL'd[1] very soon after the OLPC release... Jeremy [1] Fedora 9 EOL will be 1 month after Fedora 11's release, so say June-ish ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: [Server-devel] revisor - strange regression with comps-cleanup misplaced...
Martin Langhoff wrote: After 2 weeks of not building the XS build, I built it again today. It didn't want to build. Running with --debug 10 the output ends with... Running command: /usr/bin/xsltproc --novalid -o /var/tmp/revisor-pungi/0.5/xs-f9-i386/comps.xml /usr/share/revisor/comps/comps-cleanup.xsl /var/tmp/revisor-pungi/0.5/xs-f9-i386/comps.xml Extra information: /var/tmp/revisor-rundir False None Got an error from /usr/bin/xsltproc (return code 4) xsltproc's manpage says that 4 means trouble parsing the stylesheet. I tried to look at/usr/share/revisor/comps/comps-cleanup.xsl and it wasn't there. It was a directory higher. this fixed the problem: sudo ln -s /usr/share/revisor/comps-cleanup.xsl /usr/share/revisor/comps/comps-cleanup.xsl Fixed in GIT, thanks. Kind regards, Jeroen van Meeuwen -kanarip ___ Server-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/server-devel
Re: [sugar] 0.84/9.1 planning.
On Mon, Oct 13, 2008 at 2:46 PM, Ed McNierney [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I would also like to stop calling this 9.1 planning. We need to plan the development work we need to get done, regardless of whether that work will be able to ship next March. At a certain point we will have some of this work complete and available for qualification in a March delivery, and we'll ship that as 9.1. And we'll keep going to qualify and ship more of it in 9.2, and more in 10.1 (or is that 0.1??), etc. I disagree. Part of the focus of the meeting is to present all the ideas for future development, and then drive stakes in the ground for what's going to be in 9.1. We need to know where we are going, but we don't need to have decided schedules when we give the talk. We might decide that (say) feature Foo Bar is really nice, but we can't possibly have it in place for March, but that we *should* certainly implement *one small piece* of it by then. In the past we have divided tasks into next release and future release where the future really means never because we don't do *any* of the work in the next release timeframe. That needs to stop. *Everything* we want in a future release must have *some* piece we can do now, so that we continue to make progress on our long-term goals. So, when I called it a *9.1* meeting, I meant it: we've got lots of crazy and not-so-crazy ideas. *What part of them are we going to put in 9.1*, because if we're not going to do at least a little of the work by 9.1, it will always be future and never make it to ship. After 9.1, we'll have a 9.2 planning meeting. This seems a totally sane way to schedule and name these meetings. We can have other miniconferences or summits or whatever, but just after each release we have an urgent need to gather whatever we need to plan the next one. Let's call this one the 9.1 planning meeting. Let's call the next the 9.2 planning meeting. --scott -- ( http://cscott.net/ ) ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Updated UBIFS 8.2 image
On Oct 14 2008, at 15:13, John Watlington was caught saying: I get 898,452 KiB free, on several machines. How did you get 921,000 KiB free ? My bad, accidently used 'df -H' instead of '-h' in my initial check. So we now have ~878MiB available instead of 822. That's better but that is still 71Mib (~8%) overhead for the filesystem. 8Mib of that (~1%) is reserved for the journal, and the rest is being used for index data (as UBI keeps the fs index on-flash which is one way it decreases boot time vs jffs2) or not properly accounted for. I'll keep working with Artem upstream on understanding the overhead and where we can tweak it. One obvious way to do this is to decrease the journal size at the expense of some performance as we have to commit more often. There is also an index fanout option to mkfs.ubifs that I need to understand a bit better. ~Deepak -- Deepak Saxena - Kernel Developer - [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: [sugar] 0.84/9.1 planning.
We need to figure out how to start work that takes more than 5 - 6 months NOW. I'm concerned that if we start the 9.2 planning meeting after 9.1, we will (yet again) discover that there's no time to do anything that takes more than about 5 months. We need to break that cycle and try to figure out how to get the *most important* work started right away, whether that work is deliverable in a 9.1 timeframe, a 9.2 timeframe, or longer. In the past we have divided tasks into next release and future release where the future really means never because we don't do *any* of the work in the next release timeframe. That needs to stop. *Everything* we want in a future release must have *some* piece we can do now, so that we continue to make progress on our long-term goals. Yes, I very much agree with this sentiment, so I don't think we disagree much on the overall goals but need to reach a bit more consensus on the implementation details. I just want to acknowledge that the *some* piece we can do now might not produce anything shippable in a 9.1 timeframe. Or perhaps it's something shippable but not usable, so we do ship something in 9.1 that's really only a partial implementation so not many users need to know or care about it. I'm OK with considering any approach that lets us start that kind of work soon. - Ed ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Fedora 10 for 9.1.0?
On Wed, Oct 15, 2008 at 5:21 AM, Jeremy Katz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sun, 2008-10-12 at 13:34 +0200, Marco Pesenti Gritti wrote: do we plan to rebase to F10 for 9.1.0? I'm asking because I'd need to know if I can depend on gtk 2.14... If not, then you're going to be basing on a Fedora release which will be EOL'd[1] very soon after the OLPC release... Jeremy [1] Fedora 9 EOL will be 1 month after Fedora 11's release, so say June-ish Yeah - the Fedora lifecycle does not end up being a good fit for us. There is no clear (supported) path to go from a Fedora (bleeding edge) release to a LTS path with RHEL or CentOS. Is there any hints as to how that could be improved? Understanding how RH picks where to base RHEL would be a start... On one hand we need the latest freshest code as we're driving quite a few changes in the stack -- but we also need LTS. (I don't mean to complain or flame -- the focus is on lifecycle in the first para. Some things have been fantastic, including the beginning of the lifecycle - IOWs how quickly Fedora picks upstream changes...) cheers, m -- [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: Fedora 10 for 9.1.0?
We went through this early on in the development of the OLPC software stack. It became clear that we were not far enough along to be able to settle in on RHEL. Maybe we'll be at that point after another turn or two of the crank. Maybe the XS will be there sooner. But too much is in flux. -walter On Tue, Oct 14, 2008 at 7:06 PM, Martin Langhoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wed, Oct 15, 2008 at 5:21 AM, Jeremy Katz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sun, 2008-10-12 at 13:34 +0200, Marco Pesenti Gritti wrote: do we plan to rebase to F10 for 9.1.0? I'm asking because I'd need to know if I can depend on gtk 2.14... If not, then you're going to be basing on a Fedora release which will be EOL'd[1] very soon after the OLPC release... Jeremy [1] Fedora 9 EOL will be 1 month after Fedora 11's release, so say June-ish Yeah - the Fedora lifecycle does not end up being a good fit for us. There is no clear (supported) path to go from a Fedora (bleeding edge) release to a LTS path with RHEL or CentOS. Is there any hints as to how that could be improved? Understanding how RH picks where to base RHEL would be a start... On one hand we need the latest freshest code as we're driving quite a few changes in the stack -- but we also need LTS. (I don't mean to complain or flame -- the focus is on lifecycle in the first para. Some things have been fantastic, including the beginning of the lifecycle - IOWs how quickly Fedora picks upstream changes...) cheers, m -- [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 -- Walter Bender Sugar Labs http://www.sugarlabs.org ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Fedora 10 for 9.1.0?
Hi, gtk 2.14 has some good stuff, would be nice to start to rebase on F10 ASAP so we don't have so much stress as with the F8 rebase. Once we decide to do this, we'll need to talk about who would do it -- for the F7 rebase we had J5, and then Dennis for F9, and it's not clear who could take the lead on F10. Once we know we intend to go ahead with a rebase, we could ask the fedora-olpc-list if anyone's interested in volunteering to spearhead it? Jeremy seems like an obviously great candidate, but I wouldn't expect the Fedora-on-XO work to be finished up for another month or so, and we ran into troubles with rebasing too late in the release cycle last time. Just some thoughts, - Chris. -- Chris Ball [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Fedora 10 for 9.1.0?
On Tue, 14 Oct 2008, Walter Bender wrote: We went through this early on in the development of the OLPC software stack. It became clear that we were not far enough along to be able to settle in on RHEL. Maybe we'll be at that point after another turn or two of the crank. Maybe the XS will be there sooner. But too much is in flux. I don't want to start a distro flamefest, but the question needs to be asked. the distro landscape has changed a bit in the last few years, is it worth considering a jump to Ubuntu if it has a better fit for your release cycle? at the very least it telegraphs the long-term support versions. it's not like you really depend on the underlying distro for very much. it's mostly a convienient codebase to start from in developing your own distro. David Lang -walter On Tue, Oct 14, 2008 at 7:06 PM, Martin Langhoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wed, Oct 15, 2008 at 5:21 AM, Jeremy Katz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sun, 2008-10-12 at 13:34 +0200, Marco Pesenti Gritti wrote: do we plan to rebase to F10 for 9.1.0? I'm asking because I'd need to know if I can depend on gtk 2.14... If not, then you're going to be basing on a Fedora release which will be EOL'd[1] very soon after the OLPC release... Jeremy [1] Fedora 9 EOL will be 1 month after Fedora 11's release, so say June-ish Yeah - the Fedora lifecycle does not end up being a good fit for us. There is no clear (supported) path to go from a Fedora (bleeding edge) release to a LTS path with RHEL or CentOS. Is there any hints as to how that could be improved? Understanding how RH picks where to base RHEL would be a start... On one hand we need the latest freshest code as we're driving quite a few changes in the stack -- but we also need LTS. (I don't mean to complain or flame -- the focus is on lifecycle in the first para. Some things have been fantastic, including the beginning of the lifecycle - IOWs how quickly Fedora picks upstream changes...) cheers, m -- [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 ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: [sugar] 0.84/9.1 planning.
Does it make sense to have an afternoon or a full day about long-term plans and their implications for immediate priorities and tests? Try to capture topics that could be specific agenda items with their own session or conversation -- by creating a separate thread about it on the list, a separate wiki page about it, or by adding a session to the draft agenda. (thread convergence : annotation v. creation) http://wiki.laptop.org/go/9.1#Agenda SJ Ed wrote: I just want to acknowledge that the *some* piece we can do now might not produce anything shippable in a 9.1 timeframe. I'd like to see [in future cycles] a more explicit option to include codepaths that are turned off (to make testing easier), or to suggest for a testing sprint something that is unlikely to be 'ready to ship' but does need the extra testing rigor for eventual completeness. On Tue, Oct 14, 2008 at 7:01 PM, Ed McNierney [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: We need to figure out how to start work that takes more than 5 - 6 months NOW. I'm concerned that if we start the 9.2 planning meeting after 9.1, we will (yet again) discover that there's no time to do anything that takes more than about 5 months. We need to break that cycle and try to figure out how to get the *most important* work started right away, whether that work is deliverable in a 9.1 timeframe, a 9.2 timeframe, or longer. In the past we have divided tasks into next release and future release where the future really means never because we don't do *any* of the work in the next release timeframe. That needs to stop. *Everything* we want in a future release must have *some* piece we can do now, so that we continue to make progress on our long-term goals. Yes, I very much agree with this sentiment, so I don't think we disagree much on the overall goals but need to reach a bit more consensus on the implementation details. I just want to acknowledge that the *some* piece we can do now might not produce anything shippable in a 9.1 timeframe. Or perhaps it's something shippable but not usable, so we do ship something in 9.1 that's really only a partial implementation so not many users need to know or care about it. I'm OK with considering any approach that lets us start that kind of work soon. - Ed ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: [Server-devel] Getting closer: XS-0.5-dev5 preview
Martin Langhoff wrote: On Tue, Oct 14, 2008 at 1:59 PM, Martin Langhoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Grab it and take it for a spin http://xs-dev.laptop.org/xs/other/OLPCXS-0.5-dev5-i386.iso http://xs-dev.laptop.org/xs/other/OLPCXS-0.5-dev6-i386.iso is now slowly being copied to the server. SHA1: 1872d30cb68d1c1b215bf1b7169bb9bc9df4aa3f Fixes the mistmatched distro name, avoids yum-priorities and still adds the right ejabberd (before the final release I do have to rename the ejabberd rpm though). cheers, m The automated kickstart install pauses at the method screen for input. This could be avoided by adding method=cdrom:/dev/sr0 to the boot prompt for the kickstart install. Should the cdrom device differ from sr0, that would be a quick hit tab and edit before you boot the install. The other alternative is to add the cdrom to the kickstart file. All the ifcfg-mshbond[012] files use the same CHANNEL=1, that should be 1,6,11 no? If you use AAs, don't plug them in until after the first boot, or udev might be a bit confused and may not write the correct udev rules on a fresh install. The bonding interface setup used should just add an AA to the first available mshbond device when plugged in later. What is failing, for me anyway, is if 2 AA are plugged in during a reboot, the initscripts fail to load the firmware for the second one: Oct 14 15:53:50 schoolserver kernel: firmware: requesting usb8388.bin Oct 14 15:53:50 schoolserver kernel: usb8xxx: request_firmware() failed with 0xfffe Oct 14 15:53:50 schoolserver kernel: usb8xxx: firmware usb8388.bin not found Oct 14 15:53:50 schoolserver kernel: usb8xxx: probe of 1-1:1.0 failed with error -12 While a re-plug of the downed AA brings it back online, could be caused by a slow usb bus though, because if I boot with modprobedebug both AA are found. I'll guess with the delay caused by modprobedebug, the boot process slows down enough to load the firmware correctly. Not sure if this is just my hardware, if others see this also, or where to look at this moment. Jerry ___ Server-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/server-devel
Re: [sugar] 0.84/9.1 planning.
On Tue, Oct 14, 2008 at 06:15:31PM -0400, C. Scott Ananian wrote: On Mon, Oct 13, 2008 at 2:46 PM, Ed McNierney [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I would also like to stop calling this 9.1 planning. We need to plan the development work we need to get done, regardless of whether that work will be able to ship next March. At a certain point we will have some of this work complete and available for qualification in a March delivery, and we'll ship that as 9.1. And we'll keep going to qualify and ship more of it in 9.2, and more in 10.1 (or is that 0.1??), etc. I disagree. Part of the focus of the meeting is to present all the ideas for future development, and then drive stakes in the ground for what's going to be in 9.1. ... In the past we have divided tasks into next release and future release where the future really means never because we don't do *any* of the work in the next release timeframe. That needs to stop. *Everything* we want in a future release must have *some* piece we can do now, so that we continue to make progress on our long-term goals. I think this is exactly the kind of issue which Ed's suggestion is aimed at resolving. By focusing our development on releases instead of problems, we tend to classify issues into next release and future release. It shouldn't matter what release a given issue will fall into. But this is not what occurs in practice. As release time draws near everyone is encouraged to drop long-term issues so that a release date can be met. And consequently the future issues are never approached. I agree with Ed in that I feel that focusing on the specific release so far before we have to pull software together is going to create exactly the dicotomy between next and future you note. I would prefer to have a general software planning meeting and not a 9.1-specific planning meeting. Erik ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: [Server-devel] physical security of the XS and XO-as-XS
Martin, you make some good points. Sorry for the late reply. On Sun, 2008-10-12 at 10:56 +1300, Martin Langhoff wrote: [Note: this is a resend - with some better editing - the earlier email got sent prematurely...] On Sun, Oct 12, 2008 at 3:43 AM, Bryan Berry [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 2) IMHO using the XO as XS is not a good idea. Nothing explains in your post why it's a bad idea. If you are going to setup a safe cabinet of some sort for the server, it's not very different to make an XO safe from making a tower pc safe. I just fail to see all that many advantages to using the XO. We can add a lot of value to the XS and deployments in general very quickly w/ a more powerful system. Your points about other bits of infra are very valuable. Cable theft, antenna theft are also important. Interstingly, _deployment countries_ are asking us whether the XOs can be used in the XS role. People on the ground there are asking for it. - Procurement process is complex. Once they have the govt OK to get XOs, it's relatively easier to request extra XOs for the role. Getting other hw for the XS can take months if not years. Sadly, it is very true that government's often have extremely onerous procurement procedures. This point is very true. - Very few hw makers are offering machines that are solid state, heat/dust/humidity resistant. The XO has all of that and is cheap. The few hw makers I've seen offering similar features are rather expensive. Additionally, I am convinced that school administrators would see the XO-as-XS as a spare XO and distribute to kids who don't have XO's at their school or take it home to their own child. It won't even boot to Sugar, and user education call take a part here -- I don't think the confusion will last very long. You may not want it for the Nepal deployment, but we cannot argue with the fact that there is intense interest. There are also other use cases where it's useful to be able to run the XS sw on an XO - for example, the warehouse scenarios where you take 1 XO and use it as the server that will update all the other XOs. The issue of theft is real, but is not limited to the XO hw -- and in fact, a normal tower pc is in some cases more desirable - as it's a general purpose machine. Uruguay has -- I believe -- done some interesting work in securing their school servers, though I don't know the details. This is work that needs to happen for a long list of reasons. Within the constraints we have, I aim for flexibility: give the local teams a range of options, and this is a _very_ valuable one, one that is within reach now that a vanilla Fedora boots on the XO. cheers, m -- [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 -- Bryan W. Berry Technology Director OLE Nepal, http://www.olenepal.org ___ Server-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/server-devel
Re: [Server-devel] Getting closer: XS-0.5-dev5 preview
Martin Langhoff wrote: Fantastic testing - thanks! More notes below... On Wed, Oct 15, 2008 at 12:35 PM, Jerry Vonau [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The automated kickstart install pauses at the method screen for input. This could be avoided by adding method=cdrom:/dev/sr0 to the boot prompt for the kickstart install. Should the cdrom device differ from sr0, that would be a quick hit tab and edit before you boot the install. The other alternative is to add the cdrom to the kickstart file. Looking into that... All the ifcfg-mshbond[012] files use the same CHANNEL=1, that should be 1,6,11 no? Doh! Fixed. If you use AAs, don't plug them in until after the first boot, or udev might be a bit confused and may not write the correct udev rules on a fresh install. Interesting. I wonder how we can deal with AAs during first-boot ( / install? ) and udev picking them up too realy. Hmmm. By the time we're in firstboot, our custom udev rules should have been installed already, so there is no room for udev to mess up I think. The udev rules aren't written until udev finds the AA plugged into the system. It's renaming what was an eth/msh combo to wlan/msh. Think this is more of an issue with the firmware not finding the second AA, than anything else. I'll dig around more tomorrow. Upon firstboot the server is still somewhat un-configured, you have to run domain_config, so waiting to plug the AA until after domain_config is run doesn't seem to be a showstopper to me. However domain_config is leaving its xs_domain_name file in olpc-scripts instead of sysconfig causing make dhcpd.conf and thus dhcpd to fail. Perhaps udev from the _anaconda stage2_ is writing its (uninformed) rules? Just for eth0, and that should be fine. What is failing, for me anyway, is if 2 AA are plugged in during a reboot, the initscripts fail to load the firmware for the second one: Good catch - but that's weird. I just tried to repro, but I have AAs from different generations and I locked up the machine badly. Mismatched AAs are no go. I'll try again with matching AAs tomorrow, but this is low-priority for this release. One AA setups are something we want to support (XS on the XO is a one AA setup) -- but multi-AA setups are currently not in vogue... One works perfect, two becomes an issue. More later, Jerry ___ Server-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/server-devel
[Server-devel] For xs-0.4 setups wanting many clients on the LAN port (AP setups)
Working through the network setup, I spotted an opportunity that is possibly the easiest path - hand dhcp leases in this netblock on eth1: $ ipcalculator 172.18.0.0/21 Address: 172.18.0.0 10101100.00010010.0 000. Netmask: 255.255.248.0 = 21 ..1 000. Wildcard: 0.0.7.255..0 111. = Network: 172.18.0.0/2110101100.00010010.0 000. HostMin: 172.18.0.1 10101100.00010010.0 000.0001 HostMax: 172.18.7.254 10101100.00010010.0 111.1110 Broadcast: 172.18.7.255 10101100.00010010.0 111. Hosts/Net: 2046 Class B, Private Internet you may have to touch the settings of the interface, and perhaps even the NAT'ing rules. cheers, m -- [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 ___ Server-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/server-devel
Re: [Server-devel] For xs-0.4 setups wanting many clients on the LAN port (AP setups)
On Wed, Oct 15, 2008 at 2:13 PM, Martin Langhoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Working through the network setup, I spotted an opportunity that is possibly the easiest path - hand dhcp leases in this netblock on eth1: $ ipcalculator 172.18.0.0/21 Actually that walks over 172.18.1.1 which will cause trouble. Better use: $ ipcalculator 172.18.96.0/19 Address: 172.18.96.0 10101100.00010010.011 0. Netmask: 255.255.224.0 = 19 ..111 0. Wildcard: 0.0.31.255 ..000 1. = Network: 172.18.96.0/19 10101100.00010010.011 0. HostMin: 172.18.96.1 10101100.00010010.011 0.0001 HostMax: 172.18.127.254 10101100.00010010.011 1.1110 Broadcast: 172.18.127.255 10101100.00010010.011 1. Hosts/Net: 8190 Class B, Private Internet cheers, m -- [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 ___ Server-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/server-devel
Re: Fedora 10 for 9.1.0?
On Wed, 2008-10-15 at 12:06 +1300, Martin Langhoff wrote: Yeah - the Fedora lifecycle does not end up being a good fit for us. There is no clear (supported) path to go from a Fedora (bleeding edge) release to a LTS path with RHEL or CentOS. Is there any hints as to how that could be improved? Understanding how RH picks where to base RHEL would be a start... RHEL is based off of the Fedora release which is most fitting for the desired RHEL schedule. Which makes it a bit of a black art and not entirely replicable. Past RHEL releases... RHEL 2.1 - based on Red Hat Linux 7.2 RHEL 3 -- based on something between Red Hat Linux 9 and what became FC1 RHEL 4 -- based on Fedora Core 3 RHEL 5 -- based on Fedora Core 6 The only real hint I have is that it's a sliding scale of which is more important -- having distro support for an extended period of time or having the most recent stuff. OLPC to this point, as Walter alludes, has definitely leaned more towards the latter. It's possible, perhaps even likely, that this will start to skew towards the former as OLPC matures as a platform. I think that this would be a great topic for some more in-depth discussion at the planning meeting previously mentioned On one hand we need the latest freshest code as we're driving quite a few changes in the stack -- but we also need LTS. The problem comes in that even if Fedora _were_ to pick hey, let's take Fedora n and choose it for longer term, it would only help a subset of the people. And the cost in doing so would end up negatively impacting the quickness with which we do other things. In addition, the update policies within Fedora (rebase early, rebase often? :) don't really mesh well with the needs of someone really looking at any sort of long-term support from my experience But, that's a flamewar which is ongoing on another list and which I stayed out of there, so I'm going to let it go after this here too :-) Jeremy ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Fedora 10 for 9.1.0?
On Tue, 2008-10-14 at 19:12 -0400, Chris Ball wrote: gtk 2.14 has some good stuff, would be nice to start to rebase on F10 ASAP so we don't have so much stress as with the F8 rebase. Once we decide to do this, we'll need to talk about who would do it -- for the F7 rebase we had J5, and then Dennis for F9, and it's not clear who could take the lead on F10. Once we know we intend to go ahead with a rebase, we could ask the fedora-olpc-list if anyone's interested in volunteering to spearhead it? There's the start of a listing of what some of the deltas from Fedora 10 to the current OLPC software stack is in bugzilla (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=FedoraOLPCDelta iirc) which would be where I'd recommend anyone interested to start with trying to get some of the changes resolved before Fedora 10 is released. Longer-term, I think at least from my ideal point of view, an OLPC software release can be viewed largely as just a spin of Fedora bits plus perhaps a few things which are not suitable for Fedora, thus making the amount of rebasing needed slim to none. One thing that would help there is having more OLPC people involved in maintaining/co-maintaining packages which are critical to OLPC in Fedora. If anyone's interested in stepping up here and needs pointers on how to get started, let me know. Jeremy ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Software developers needed for OLPC Afghanistan
Dear All, Perhaps Afghanistan is not the first place you think of when considering your next vacation or internship. But since OLPC are donating 10,000 G1G1 machines to Afghanistan and is working with the top level of the Ministry of Education this could very well become a showpiece for OLPC in S. Asia. We are looking for 2 software developing Interns / Graduates / Motivated volunteers to help us building the capacity of the local team. We need to operate university outreach programs, training, and a fair bit of direct server config in advance of having sufficient locally built capacity. We can offer flight support, accommodation, and a living stipend. Afghanistan day to day in most provinces and most places remains pretty safe - one can walk around, go out, visit people using taxis or your own car. Driving can be just a little chaotic, but nowhere near as bad as in India. If you look beyond the media there is a lot to see here, hospitality that even exceeds other developing countries, and really rapid progress. There are some places (like the south) that are dangerous, but in Kabul and the north things are pretty stable. One just needs to know places to go to and places to stay away from (like military bases, big foreigner parties, etc). Right now we are half way through setting up an open source localisation team for Afghanistan and building the open source community. For those of you who are more interested in remote contributions to Afghanistan specifically, a chance is here too. Afghanistan could be the case study that shows the ability of the XO to be at the center of redevelopment. If we can make the XO work here - then we can prove to the world that it can work almost anywhere! You might hear on the news about the chronic waste of money out here, the hundreds of millions missing, wasted, and worse. And you know how cost effectively the XO can change that. The great thing about Afghanistan, is being a development work in progress, we can together, and will, improve that situation. I hope we can find some people to join us on the ground and help make that happen. Thanks/Regards, -Svetla Details, country information, etc. for the formal job title can be found under 'IT Coach' at http://www.paiwastoon.com.af/mainpages-en/careers-intl.sxw.html . ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: [Server-devel] Getting closer: XS-0.5-dev5 preview
On Tue, Oct 14, 2008 at 6:14 PM, Jerry Vonau [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: With the change to OLPCXS, anaconda is no longer finding the cdrom as valid, think you have to revise xs-release. duh! Fixed and building a replacement. thanks for the sanitycheck! cheers, m -- [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 ___ Server-devel mailing list Server-devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/server-devel
[Server-devel] Install instructions cleanup - thanks!
A while ago the install instructions on the Wiki got a big cleanup, and now are short and simple. Once xs-0.5 is out the door I'll review and update them. But a lot of work has already been done. Thanks to Wad who tackled the main cleanup and to others thjat have done some editing on it since. I'm talking about http://wiki.laptop.org/go/XS_Installing_Software cheers, m -- [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 ___ Server-devel mailing list Server-devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/server-devel
