Re: [IAEP] devel announce list; publicizing major software firmware updates
El Mon, 19-07-2010 a las 17:32 -0400, Samuel Klein escribió: We have a devel-announce list that hasn't been much used. We also have many people who are interested in getting news about any major release or security update, but don't have time to read all of the traffic that goes to devel. Reuben, Paul and I were discussing this earlier today; I would be happy to see more people using devel-announce to publicize major updates. As there is some demand for this kind of low-traffic list, if you are interested in that information, please sign up. http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel-announce Is this list appropriate also for announcing unofficial builds for the XO, such as the F11-0.88 series? (lately I've become too lazy^W busy to post release notes for our builds...) -- // Bernie Innocenti - http://codewiz.org/ \X/ Sugar Labs - http://sugarlabs.org/ ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: os206 - slow data transfers
On Mon, Jul 19, 2010 at 11:41:07PM -0500, Mikus Grinbergs wrote: Earlier, I reported that ethernet data transfers into my XO-1.5 were now running slower than ethernet data transfers into XO-1 systems. I've just tested this, though I only had one ethernet device that I could test with. XO-1 10.1.2-beta os301 wireless 13.2 Mbit/sec wired 93.2 Mbit/sec. XO-1 8.2.1 os802 wireless 14.3 Mbit/sec wired 93.8 Mbit/sec. XO-1.5 10.1.1 os206 wireless 15.5 Mbit/sec wired 80.0 Mbit/sec. The test was with NetworkManager disabled (so as to prevent wireless scans), and manual configuration of the wireless and wired adapters. The test was with iperf 2.0.4 using flags -c -n 100M for wireless, and 1000M for wired. Internal SD storage was excluded from the test. I was surprised that the XO-1.5 wired performance was lower. -- James Cameron http://quozl.linux.org.au/ ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: [IAEP] devel announce list; publicizing major software firmware updates
bernie wrote: El Mon, 19-07-2010 a las 17:32 -0400, Samuel Klein escribió: We have a devel-announce list that hasn't been much used. We also have many people who are interested in getting news about any major release or security update, but don't have time to read all of the traffic that goes to devel. Reuben, Paul and I were discussing this earlier today; I would be happy to see more people using devel-announce to publicize major updates. As there is some demand for this kind of low-traffic list, if you are interested in that information, please sign up. http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel-announce Is this list appropriate also for announcing unofficial builds for the XO, such as the F11-0.88 series? (lately I've become too lazy^W busy to post release notes for our builds...) i believe devel-announce is / will be moderated, and that yes, announcements of non-OLPC builds would be appropriate. since the list won't allow discussion, announcements should probably include a pointer to where discussions of and feedback on the release being announced should occur. paul =- paul fox, p...@laptop.org ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: os206 - slow data transfers
El Tue, 20-07-2010 a las 16:26 +1000, James Cameron escribió: On Mon, Jul 19, 2010 at 11:41:07PM -0500, Mikus Grinbergs wrote: Earlier, I reported that ethernet data transfers into my XO-1.5 were now running slower than ethernet data transfers into XO-1 systems. I've just tested this, though I only had one ethernet device that I could test with. James and Mikus: what specific ethernet dongle were you using in these tests? Also, what does top say during the test? In particular, what are the percentages of system (sy), i/o wait (wa) and irq servicing (hi)? -- // Bernie Innocenti - http://codewiz.org/ \X/ Sugar Labs - http://sugarlabs.org/ ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] behaviour of F-keys on XO HS
james wrote: On Tue, Jul 20, 2010 at 01:04:06AM -0400, Raul Gutierrez Segales wrote: On Mon, 2010-07-19 at 21:33 -0400, Walter Bender wrote: On Mon, Jul 19, 2010 at 9:27 PM, Gonzalo Odiard godi...@gmail.com wrote: Yeah How we detect what keyboard is present? http://wiki.laptop.org/go/OLPC_Firmware_q3a44 mentions: 1889: OLPC keyboard driver, avoid confusing EC with enable scan command That's unrelated, I think. yes. the keyboards are indistinguishable electrically, without user input. I wonder if somehow the type of detected keyboard is discoverable via /ofw. The manufacturing data may help to narrow the possibilities, but they would have to be maintained correctly in conjunction with any keyboard changes by deployment repair. Perhaps someone else knows more. right. when the laptops are build, the included keyboard is identified with a specific tag. specifically, the KM tag is olpcm for the mechanical keyboard, and olpc for the membrane keyboards. however, someday it will be possible to swap between membrane and mechanical keyboards (it isn't yet), and that will raise a new identification issue. i suspect we'll end up with a user utility of some sort to correctly identify the keyboard to the system. the upper right-hand key, for instance, is unique on each, so asking the user to hit that will be sufficient. the utility will then rewrite the mfg tag (doubtful) or modify the filesystem (more likely) to record the identification. further background: the KM mfg tag is used by /etc/init.d/olpc-configure to set up the XKB_MODEL variable assignment in /etc/sysconfig/keyboard (this happens just once per software install). when the user session starts, olpc-session sources /etc/sysconfig/keyboard, and passes the XKB_MODEL value to setxkbmap. setxkbmap can in turn be queried to find out what keyboard model (and layout and variant) is in use. i suspect that this is the mechanism that applications should use to detect which keyboard they have, because it's xkb that has to have the right answer in order for all the characters to work correctly. i don't know if there's a programming API lurking under the covers in setxkbmap -print, or not. paul =- paul fox, p...@laptop.org ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Filesystem in F11 builds
On 19 July 2010 06:22, Esteban Bordon ebor...@plan.ceibal.edu.uy wrote: Can this happen because the option versioned_fs=0 under base section? Reading the README file of base module I found this text: [base] options: - versioned_fs (default 1) Set to 0 to disable the upgradeable /versions-based filesystem layout. Yes, that's exactly it. That's your way of saying I don't want olpc-update or the filesystem layout that it entails Daniel ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Redesigning: Library, Read, Get-Books, and Content bundles
There has been a lot of great progress with the Read and Get-Books (IA) activities. However, we have neglected to think about how we can better fit all of these pieces together. For instance, consider deployments that would like to install content bundles. They package these files into .xol packages and these packages get installed into the Library, which is contained on the left hand side of the Browse activity. Yes, you read that correctly...the BROWSE activity, an activity intended for online exploration is used to view offline content. Every deployment that I have shown this to has found it very unintuitive. Consider another example: You want to use Get-Books to get a new book. So you open Get-Books search for a book and download the book. But where did it go? I guess one could assume (correctly) that it went to the journal. So you close Get-Books. Go to the Journal. Find the book you downloaded. Open the book (in Read.) IMHO, a series of needless steps. So what if we created a Library Activity The activity would: -Open a book from within the activity -Highlight and annotate books -List all of the books you have downloaded -Allow you to search and download additional books from Feed Books, Internet Archive, the XS, etc.. -List the resources in /home/olpc/Library (so this can be removed from Browse) -Allow one to synchronously or asynchronously share a book to their Neighborhood so anyone can download and read it. I have filed a bug here if anyone would like to follow it: http://bugs.sugarlabs.org/ticket/2110 I look forward to hearing your thoughts. Regards, Reuben ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: [IAEP] Redesigning: Library, Read, Get-Books, and Content bundles
On 20 July 2010 12:33, Reuben K. Caron reu...@laptop.org wrote: So what if we created a Library Activity The activity would: -Open a book from within the activity -Highlight and annotate books -List all of the books you have downloaded -Allow you to search and download additional books from Feed Books, Internet Archive, the XS, etc.. -List the resources in /home/olpc/Library (so this can be removed from Browse) -Allow one to synchronously or asynchronously share a book to their Neighborhood so anyone can download and read it. I'd argue that some of this is duplication of functionality that belongs (or already is) in the Journal and the Read activity, having such a design might kill some UI complications but add others. Parts of your concerns could be addressed with some ideas I wrote here: http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Features/Content_support#Accessing_content_from_home_screen I agree that this definitely merits further design/discussion. Daniel ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: [IAEP] Redesigning: Library, Read, Get-Books, and Content bundles
On 20 Jul 2010, at 19:33, Reuben K. Caron reu...@laptop.org wrote: There has been a lot of great progress with the Read and Get-Books (IA) activities. However, we have neglected to think about how we can better fit all of these pieces together. For instance, consider deployments that would like to install content bundles. They package these files into .xol packages and these packages get installed into the Library, which is contained on the left hand side of the Browse activity. Yes, you read that correctly...the BROWSE activity, an activity intended for online exploration is used to view offline content. Every deployment that I have shown this to has found it very unintuitive. Consider another example: You want to use Get-Books to get a new book. So you open Get-Books search for a book and download the book. But where did it go? I guess one could assume (correctly) that it went to the journal. So you close Get-Books. Go to the Journal. Find the book you downloaded. Open the book (in Read.) IMHO, a series of needless steps. So what if we created a Library Activity The activity would: -Open a book from within the activity -Highlight and annotate books -List all of the books you have downloaded -Allow you to search and download additional books from Feed Books, Internet Archive, the XS, etc.. -List the resources in /home/olpc/Library (so this can be removed from Browse) -Allow one to synchronously or asynchronously share a book to their Neighborhood so anyone can download and read it. I have filed a bug here if anyone would like to follow it: http://bugs.sugarlabs.org/ticket/2110 I look forward to hearing your thoughts. I'm all for keeping activities simple, and then trying to smooth the workflow path when you need to use several in conjunction; however Apple did much as you suggest for their iBooks, a single app that has an epub book shelf, a PDF book shelf, and a store mode for downloading commercial and free ebooks. Read could be extended with a book shelf grid view of all (supported format) books in the Journal, and perhaps integrate download code from one of the get book activities. Would need support from the community as this would make Read harder/larger to maintain... I'd lean towards improving the Journal with a grid view and background sharing, as it could provide much the same thing for _all_ activities not just books (Alekseys Library was along this vector, as are I think his plans for future Journal). Journal is really in need of love, and a plan, for so long now :) Regards, --Gary Regards, Reuben ___ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) i...@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: [IAEP] Redesigning: Library, Read, Get-Books, and Content bundles
On Tue, Jul 20, 2010 at 2:33 PM, Reuben K. Caron reu...@laptop.org wrote: deployments that would like to install content bundles. They package these files into .xol packages and these packages get installed into the Library, which is contained on the left hand side of the Browse activity. Yes, you read that correctly...the BROWSE activity, an activity intended for online exploration is used to view offline content. Every deployment that I have shown this to has found it very unintuitive. Consider another example: You want to use Get-Books to The original goal was to blur the boundary between offline and online as much as possible. You would have a large-ish cache of online material available offline -- including not only your textbooks, but also many other web sites or educational resources. Updating a textbook would be as easy as updating the online source of that textbook, and the offline copy would get updated from that. Surfing while offline to a page which was not available in the offline cache would create a request for that content, which would be fetched when you are next online, or added to a queue for your teacher to fetch next time they travelled to a place with internet access. This is a pretty straightforward extension of the wwwoffle program, but the necessary tuits to integrate all the pieces never appeared. Anyway, that's just to say that there was justification once for putting library content in Browse. Don't know if that justification still applies. --scott -- ( http://cscott.net/ ) ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: os206 - slow data transfers
On Tue, Jul 20, 2010 at 09:01:01AM -0400, Bernie Innocenti wrote: El Tue, 20-07-2010 a las 16:26 +1000, James Cameron escribi??: On Mon, Jul 19, 2010 at 11:41:07PM -0500, Mikus Grinbergs wrote: Earlier, I reported that ethernet data transfers into my XO-1.5 were now running slower than ethernet data transfers into XO-1 systems. I've just tested this, though I only had one ethernet device that I could test with. James and Mikus: what specific ethernet dongle were you using in these tests? I am using a generic one with no particular history. USB ID 9710:7830 MosChip Semiconductor MCS7830 Ethernet. Causes kernel module loads mcs7830 usbnet mii. Also, what does top say during the test? In particular, what are the percentages of system (sy), i/o wait (wa) and irq servicing (hi)? Well, that's interesting. On XO-1 with os301, sy=3.6, wa=0, hi=5.4, and the iperf process sits at about 5% CPU utilisation. On XO-1.5 with os206, sy=58, wa=0, hi=19.3, and the iperf process is pinned at 99% CPU utilisation. Given that this is the same 2.6.31 kernel, on different hardware, with the same binaries ... I'm inclined to suspect there may be a problem lurking somewhere. -- James Cameron http://quozl.linux.org.au/ ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: [Server-devel] Samoa Deployment - planned hardware for 30 July 2010
This deployment involves only 50 laptops in each of two schools with 8 to 10 classrooms. I'm not sure if the laptops stay in two classrooms or if they move around the whole school. The 400mW Ubiquiti device seems a good choice for a smaller number of laptops over a wider area, but I'm no expert on these things. How many walls can the TL-WR741ND penetrate? Is a higher transmit power only really relevant if you're talking to an equally powerful partner? Is the building penetration limited by the less powerful laptop? On Mon, 2010-07-19 at 09:38 -0400, Carlos Daniel Garay Ayala wrote: In Paraguay we decided (and tested) Tp-Link TL-WR741ND, Access point plus router around 26 USS, which is fully supported by OpenWrt, in case you want to monitor usage (telnet + ssh). With two of this you can cover a school with 50 laptops, provided there are 25 per classroom. 2010/7/18 Tom Parker t...@carrott.org Hi, We are going to Samoa for 2 primary school deployments with 50 XO-1.0 laptops in each school, on 30 July 2010. We've been asked to set up a wifi network and School Server at each school. Here is what we think we are going to buy for each school (ie, we buy twice what is presented here, one set for each school), please advise if you think we are on the wrong track here. 1 EEE Box EB1012 - 2GB ram, 250GB hard disk, dual core 1.6GHz Atom 330 2 Ubiquity Networks NanoStation2 802.11b/g 400mW Outdoor AP/Bridge 1 Switch Climate: island nation so some salt but schools are somewhat inland, temperatures 24 to 31 degrees, humidity 70 to 80% Do we need a gigabit switch? Should we upgrade the harddisk or add more memory? Thanks Tom (and Tabitha) ___ Server-devel mailing list Server-devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/server-devel ___ Server-devel mailing list Server-devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/server-devel
Re: [Server-devel] Samoa Deployment - planned hardware for 30 July 2010
On Tue, Jul 20, 2010 at 11:02:47PM +1200, Tom Parker wrote: The 400mW Ubiquiti device seems a good choice for a smaller number of laptops over a wider area, but I'm no expert on these things. How many walls can the TL-WR741ND penetrate? Impossible to predict. It depends on the materials used in the walls, the thickness relative to the wavelength, the humidity, and the structure holding the wall. The floor and ceiling construction also has a significant impact on signal propagation; they are in the Fresnel zone. Is a higher transmit power only really relevant if you're talking to an equally powerful partner? As a general rule yes, but there are a few exceptions. 400mW isn't that much greater than 200mW; radio power doubling does not double the range. Despite it being specified for a maximum that is larger than the laptop, the access point may moderate the power it uses according to the signal level reports it receives from the laptop. In other words, while it might say 400mW, it might not use it if it does not need to. Where there is contention in the medium with other access points at considerable distance that cannot be coordinated, the higher power of the beacon may overcome the noise experienced by the nearby laptops. When there is a significant difference in receive signal levels between each end of the link (AP vs laptop), and the AP has the power or height advantage, then in the perimeter of coverage the laptop will be able to see that the AP exists, report a good signal strength, but will not be able to communicate with it. Is the building penetration limited by the less powerful laptop? Yes. But really the ultimate test is a site survey with the equipment chosen, including all the laptops. A network behaves quite differently once all the laptops are in use. If there is too much noise or contention, eventually a better design is a very low power access point in each room. But this becomes costly in cabling. -- James Cameron http://quozl.linux.org.au/ ___ Server-devel mailing list Server-devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/server-devel
Re: [Server-devel] Samoa Deployment - planned hardware for 30 July 2010
On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 11:21 AM, James Cameron qu...@laptop.org wrote: On Tue, Jul 20, 2010 at 11:02:47PM +1200, Tom Parker wrote: The 400mW Ubiquiti device seems a good choice for a smaller number of laptops over a wider area, but I'm no expert on these things. How many walls can the TL-WR741ND penetrate? Impossible to predict. It depends on the materials used in the walls, the thickness relative to the wavelength, the humidity, and the structure holding the wall. The floor and ceiling construction also has a significant impact on signal propagation; they are in the Fresnel zone. Is a higher transmit power only really relevant if you're talking to an equally powerful partner? As a general rule yes, but there are a few exceptions. 400mW isn't that much greater than 200mW; radio power doubling does not double the range. I've had more success with wifi by placing the antenna in the roof space. Generally walls go only as far as the ceiling, and ceilings are thinner than walls. ___ Server-devel mailing list Server-devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/server-devel
Re: [Server-devel] Samoa Deployment - planned hardware for 30 July 2010
On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 11:29:31AM +1200, Brenda Wallace wrote: I've had more success with wifi by placing the antenna in the roof space. Generally walls go only as far as the ceiling, and ceilings are thinner than walls. Indeed, this is true for certain construction types. A rapidly updating signal strength meter can be very helpful during a site survey. Set up the access point, then wander around with the meter. An XO-based meter program that I wrote last year can be found here: http://quozl.linux.org.au/ssm/ You must associate the XO with an access point before using it. -- James Cameron http://quozl.linux.org.au/ ___ Server-devel mailing list Server-devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/server-devel
Re: [Server-devel] Samoa Deployment - planned hardware for 30 July 2010
I have some experience with networking and wifi links, and what Carlos states is correct Although ubiquity nanostations are used generally to make point-to-point connections over a long distance (long compared to regular wifi connections made in the same frecuency with conventional equipment). There are some models that can be used to connect large areas, but AP coverage isn't your only issue It is true that a number of factors influence the quiality of the wifi coverage, but the general issue is this.. wifi connections are bi-directional.. meaning that if your AP can reach a 1 mile radio, and you computer antenna can connect to only 30 yards.. you need to be 30 yards from the AP. There are a number of other factors that can improve or degrade the signal, but in empiric knoledge, this holds true. When you're thinking about connecting a school, any conventional AP/Router can work as long as you stay withing the 40 meter radio, with 1 or 2 15 cm think wall in between, but laptops should be as close as possible to the AP.. again.. empiric knowledge. This AP close to ceiling hypothesis will be tested next ;-) Cheers.. R 2010/7/20 Brenda Wallace sh...@cpan.org: On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 11:21 AM, James Cameron qu...@laptop.org wrote: On Tue, Jul 20, 2010 at 11:02:47PM +1200, Tom Parker wrote: The 400mW Ubiquiti device seems a good choice for a smaller number of laptops over a wider area, but I'm no expert on these things. How many walls can the TL-WR741ND penetrate? Impossible to predict. It depends on the materials used in the walls, the thickness relative to the wavelength, the humidity, and the structure holding the wall. The floor and ceiling construction also has a significant impact on signal propagation; they are in the Fresnel zone. Is a higher transmit power only really relevant if you're talking to an equally powerful partner? As a general rule yes, but there are a few exceptions. 400mW isn't that much greater than 200mW; radio power doubling does not double the range. I've had more success with wifi by placing the antenna in the roof space. Generally walls go only as far as the ceiling, and ceilings are thinner than walls. ___ Server-devel mailing list Server-devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/server-devel -- Rodolfo D. Arce S. ___ Server-devel mailing list Server-devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/server-devel
