limits on ad-hoc connections
Ad-hoc connections only scale to a limited number of participants before problems begin to occur. What would be the maximum number of participants that an ad-hoc network can reliably handle? Can we impose a hard limit on the number of clients to prevent too many XOs connecting to a single ad-hoc session? Sridhar Sridhar Dhanapalan Engineering Manager One Laptop per Child Australia ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: [OLPC-AU] limits on ad-hoc connections
On Wed, Feb 08, 2012 at 10:16:53PM +1100, Sridhar Dhanapalan wrote: Ad-hoc connections only scale to a limited number of participants before problems begin to occur. What are the problems you observe? It may be that the problems you observe are not due to the ad-hoc network, but due to something else as well. What would be the maximum number of participants that an ad-hoc network can reliably handle? There's no maximum that I know of. A well placed set of laptops that can hear each other, with no outside noise, can operate an ad-hoc network to a quite large size. One node will be the beacon. Once you place traffic on the network, things will slow down. Once the slow down is enough, certain applications may fail. Can we impose a hard limit on the number of clients to prevent too many XOs connecting to a single ad-hoc session? No, there is no control for that as far as I know. -- James Cameron http://quozl.linux.org.au/ ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: limits on ad-hoc connections
On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 6:16 AM, Sridhar Dhanapalan srid...@laptop.org.au wrote: Ad-hoc connections only scale to a limited number of participants before problems begin to occur. The technically correct answer is it depends. And it is true, it depends on a ton of factors. As a rule of thumb, I've seen it work for groups of 5~6 units, physically close and without interference sources or reflective materials. I would not aim higher than that -- 5~6 units in a channel. You have 3 channels, so 3 groups of 5~6 units. To clarify: keep any other laptops and cordless phones in the vicinity _off_, to allow these 18 users to work. In practice, it won't work in a school, but if you invite a few schoolmates home after school, or in the park, you're fine. No warranties expressed or implied. There's a long laundry list of things that can interfere, and make things not fine. For example, professional TV cameras from that friendly news crew transmit in the 2.4GHz band. That battery pack feeds a powerful antenna to get the signal back to the van that has the uplink, and it paves over consumer-grade wifi. So don't count in wifi (of any kind!) to work for a demo or show-and-tell when you get TV coverage at a school :-) Can we impose a hard limit on the number of clients to prevent too many XOs connecting to a single ad-hoc session? As James says... unfortunately no. m -- martin.langh...@gmail.com mar...@laptop.org -- Software Architect - OLPC - 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
Image for XO 1.75 Nicaragua
Hi Martin Right now i'm working on the image for the XO 1.75 to Nicaragua using OS Builder on XO hardware that OLPC send me, i have a few questions for the process. Flash Support: For now this module doesn't work on ARM, there is no flash plugin package for ARM in the adobe repo, so, what i did was to add the Gnash repo at the [repo_section], and install the gnash preview package gnash-0.8.10-0.1.git.master21509.armv7l, i'm going to test it today. Is there any chance to have Adobe flash plugin on 1.75 that we can test and choose which package use in the final build, gnash or adobe-flash-plugin? Relase for 11.3.1: For now i'm using the development version of os-builder from git, when would be the release for 11.3.1, so we can use as base to create the final build? Deadline: The last day to send the final image to you, and what files do you need? Any other suggestion to know for the process Regards -- German R S ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: limits on ad-hoc connections
On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 4:23 AM, Martin Langhoff martin.langh...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 6:16 AM, Sridhar Dhanapalan srid...@laptop.org.au wrote: Ad-hoc connections only scale to a limited number of participants before problems begin to occur. The technically correct answer is it depends. And it is true, it depends on a ton of factors. As a rule of thumb, I've seen it work for groups of 5~6 units, physically close and without interference sources or reflective materials. I would not aim higher than that -- 5~6 units in a channel. You have 3 channels, so 3 groups of 5~6 units. wiki.laptop.org/images/a/a3/Country_Technical_Support.pdf recommends 10 per channel on mesh. Given that 802.11s draft vs ad-hoc is really a layer 2 issue, the numbers should be in that neighborhood? cheers, Sameer To clarify: keep any other laptops and cordless phones in the vicinity _off_, to allow these 18 users to work. In practice, it won't work in a school, but if you invite a few schoolmates home after school, or in the park, you're fine. No warranties expressed or implied. There's a long laundry list of things that can interfere, and make things not fine. For example, professional TV cameras from that friendly news crew transmit in the 2.4GHz band. That battery pack feeds a powerful antenna to get the signal back to the van that has the uplink, and it paves over consumer-grade wifi. So don't count in wifi (of any kind!) to work for a demo or show-and-tell when you get TV coverage at a school :-) Can we impose a hard limit on the number of clients to prevent too many XOs connecting to a single ad-hoc session? As James says... unfortunately no. m -- martin.langh...@gmail.com mar...@laptop.org -- Software Architect - OLPC - 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: limits on ad-hoc connections
On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 2:56 PM, Sameer Verma sve...@sfsu.edu wrote:
wiki.laptop.org/images/a/a3/Country_Technical_Support.pdf recommends
10 per channel on mesh. Given that 802.11s draft vs ad-hoc is really a
layer 2 issue, the numbers should be in that neighborhood?
I would fix that document instead, to bring it from dreams of happy
fluffy bunnies to the realities of what's been seen to work.
Back in the day, we spent a considerable time at OLPC waiting for mesh
to work, looking at our tests outcomes with optimistic eyes, and the
hope that all we needed was just one more bugfix. So don't trust the
networking performance statements of documents dating back to that
era.
{ Perhaps I wrote that paragraph you refer to. I wrote a few like
that. I am sorry. Mea culpa. }
m
--
martin.langh...@gmail.com
mar...@laptop.org -- Software Architect - OLPC
- 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: Image for XO 1.75 Nicaragua
On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 10:26 AM, German Ruiz germa...@opensuse.org.ni wrote: Right now i'm working on the image for the XO 1.75 to Nicaragua using OS Builder on XO hardware that OLPC send me, i have a few questions for the process. Taking this private for mfg support. m -- martin.langh...@gmail.com mar...@laptop.org -- Software Architect - OLPC - 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: Impacts of disabling Automatic Power Management
On 5 February 2012 10:12, Sridhar Dhanapalan srid...@laptop.org.au wrote: On 5 February 2012 02:35, Martin Langhoff martin.langh...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Feb 4, 2012 at 10:26 AM, Samuel Greenfeld greenf...@laptop.org wrote: Disabling suspend during collaboration was discussed a year ago, but as far as I know this has not made it into any 11.3.x build: http://dev.laptop.org/ticket/10363 Thanks for that! I had forgotten ~ Sridhar, Jerry -- that bug has a patch that implements exactly the Sugar change I was proposing. We later dropped it for a change to powerd that we thought would cover all the bases by relying on using wake-on-LAN on the wlan... which we later learned is somewhat buggy. Please test with this patch and let us know whether it helps. Thanks! We'll add this to our next dev build. In our next build, we will be doing two things [1]: 1. enabling the patch 2. disabling wake-on-LAN It seems to me that this is the preferred solution. I think we only need to inhibit power management when collaboration is active, not for any LAN traffic. Living up to its name, wake-on-LAN keeps the XOs awake whenever a network connection is active, even when you don't really need it to be. Assuming that it always works as intended (which as you have explained, it does not), the patch won't be very testable when it is active. erikos reckons that the patch won't do much [2], but the testing performed so far seems to be small-scale. Hopefully we'll get some feedback on this after we put out our build. Sridhar [1] https://dev.laptop.org.au/issues/1049 [2] http://dev.laptop.org/ticket/10363#comment:21 Sridhar Dhanapalan Engineering Manager One Laptop per Child Australia ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Impacts of disabling Automatic Power Management
sridhar wrote: On 5 February 2012 10:12, Sridhar Dhanapalan srid...@laptop.org.au wrote: On 5 February 2012 02:35, Martin Langhoff martin.langh...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Feb 4, 2012 at 10:26 AM, Samuel Greenfeld greenf...@laptop.org wrote: Disabling suspend during collaboration was discussed a year ago, but as far as I know this has not made it into any 11.3.x build: http://dev.laptop.org/ticket/10363 Thanks for that! I had forgotten ~ Sridhar, Jerry -- that bug has a patch that implements exactly the Sugar change I was proposing. We later dropped it for a change to powerd that we thought would cover all the bases by relying on using wake-on-LAN on the wlan... which we later learned is somewhat buggy. Please test with this patch and let us know whether it helps. Thanks! We'll add this to our next dev build. In our next build, we will be doing two things [1]: 1. enabling the patch 2. disabling wake-on-LAN It seems to me that this is the preferred solution. I think we only need to inhibit power management when collaboration is active, not for any LAN traffic. Living up to its name, wake-on-LAN keeps the XOs awake whenever a network connection is active, even when you don't really need it to be. Assuming that it always works as intended (which as you have explained, it does not), the patch won't be very testable when it is active. i guess you're saying that an active network connection should be keeping the laptop awake, and therefore being able to wake it up after it sleeps is a moot point. that may be true for chatty collaboration protocols -- it certainly wouldn't be true for TCP sessions (which isn't your use case -- i understand that). but in addition, without wake-on-lan, a sleeping laptop will be invisible to its peers, at least until the user wakes it up. is that okay? paul erikos reckons that the patch won't do much [2], but the testing performed so far seems to be small-scale. Hopefully we'll get some feedback on this after we put out our build. Sridhar [1] https://dev.laptop.org.au/issues/1049 [2] http://dev.laptop.org/ticket/10363#comment:21 Sridhar Dhanapalan Engineering Manager One Laptop per Child Australia ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel =- paul fox, p...@laptop.org ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: limits on ad-hoc connections
On 8 February 2012 23:23, Martin Langhoff martin.langh...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 6:16 AM, Sridhar Dhanapalan srid...@laptop.org.au wrote: Ad-hoc connections only scale to a limited number of participants before problems begin to occur. The technically correct answer is it depends. And it is true, it depends on a ton of factors. As a rule of thumb, I've seen it work for groups of 5~6 units, physically close and without interference sources or reflective materials. I would not aim higher than that -- 5~6 units in a channel. You have 3 channels, so 3 groups of 5~6 units. Great, that's what I was thinking. To clarify: keep any other laptops and cordless phones in the vicinity _off_, to allow these 18 users to work. In practice, it won't work in a school, but if you invite a few schoolmates home after school, or in the park, you're fine. No warranties expressed or implied. There's a long laundry list of things that can interfere, and make things not fine. For example, professional TV cameras from that friendly news crew transmit in the 2.4GHz band. That battery pack feeds a powerful antenna to get the signal back to the van that has the uplink, and it paves over consumer-grade wifi. So don't count in wifi (of any kind!) to work for a demo or show-and-tell when you get TV coverage at a school :-) Interesting - definitely worth knowing! Can we impose a hard limit on the number of clients to prevent too many XOs connecting to a single ad-hoc session? As James says... unfortunately no. This is possible on many wireless access points. Why isn't it possible on the XO's ad-hoc? Is it because WAPs do it by limiting DHCP leases, whereas ad-hoc uses link-local? Sridhar Dhanapalan Engineering Manager One Laptop per Child Australia ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: limits on ad-hoc connections
On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 10:39 PM, Sridhar Dhanapalan srid...@laptop.org.au wrote: Can we impose a hard limit on the number of clients to prevent too many XOs connecting to a single ad-hoc session? As James says... unfortunately no. This is possible on many wireless access points. Why isn't it possible on the XO's ad-hoc? Is it because WAPs do it by limiting DHCP leases, whereas ad-hoc uses link-local? More generally, when you have a central node (the AP) there's a node that can carry the accounting, and has the authority to say who's welcome and who's not. I don't know if 802.11a/b/g/n has a mechanism to reject association, or if it's a dirty hack with only giving a liminted number of DHCP leases. Either way, ad-hoc peer model isn't well equipped for this limitation. cheers, m -- martin.langh...@gmail.com mar...@laptop.org -- Software Architect - OLPC - 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: limits on ad-hoc connections
On 9 February 2012 14:59, Martin Langhoff martin.langh...@gmail.com wrote: More generally, when you have a central node (the AP) there's a node that can carry the accounting, and has the authority to say who's welcome and who's not. I don't know if 802.11a/b/g/n has a mechanism to reject association, or if it's a dirty hack with only giving a liminted number of DHCP leases. Either way, ad-hoc peer model isn't well equipped for this limitation. Hmm I am thinking that my understanding of the ad-hoc implementation might be incorrect. I was under the assumption that one XO acts as the ad-hoc host, and the others connect to it. That made me wonder whether that host could limit how many clients connect to it. What I gather from what you're saying is that there's more of a peer-to-peer connection happening, similar to the old mesh on the XO-1s. Or am I confusing my network layers? Sridhar ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: limits on ad-hoc connections
sridhar wrote: On 9 February 2012 14:59, Martin Langhoff martin.langh...@gmail.com wrote: More generally, when you have a central node (the AP) there's a node that can carry the accounting, and has the authority to say who's welcome and who's not. I don't know if 802.11a/b/g/n has a mechanism to reject association, or if it's a dirty hack with only giving a liminted number of DHCP leases. Either way, ad-hoc peer model isn't well equipped for this limitation. Hmm I am thinking that my understanding of the ad-hoc implementation might be incorrect. I was under the assumption that one XO acts as the ad-hoc host, and the others connect to it. That made me wonder whether that host could limit how many clients connect to it. What I gather from what you're saying is that there's more of a peer-to-peer connection happening, similar to the old mesh on the XO-1s. Or am I confusing my network layers? think of it as all the XOs plugging into the same ethernet hub. no router needed, and they all see each other's traffic. you just plug in and start talking (of course to really do that, you'll need a link-local address, or a static address, since there's probably no DHCP). it's quite similar to the mesh -- what the mesh adds is some topology awareness and routing, so if A can see B and B can see C, then B will forward packets from A to C. that can't happen with ad-hoc. paul Sridhar ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel =- paul fox, p...@laptop.org ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: [OLPC-AU] limits on ad-hoc connections
On Thu, Feb 09, 2012 at 03:11:42PM +1100, Sridhar Dhanapalan wrote: Hmm I am thinking that my understanding of the ad-hoc implementation might be incorrect. I was under the assumption that one XO acts as the ad-hoc host, and the others connect to it. That made me wonder whether that host could limit how many clients connect to it. No, that's not how ad-hoc works. I'll simplify and translate for you. In an 802.11 wireless ad-hoc network, each node has the duty and right to be the beacon, especially if there is no other beacon heard. The beacon is used for timing the transmissions, so that they occur in empty time. Transmissions that occur simultaneously would interfere with each other, and the receivers would be more likely to miss them. Always, the first node to begin an ad-hoc network begins by being the beacon. If a node cannot hear a beacon, then after a very short while it will try to become the beacon. In effect, they compete for the job, in a psuedo-random fashion. This is implemented in the wireless device firmware, not in the host, not in the CPU, not in the kernel, not in the user-space networking tools. If a cluster of XOs that have formed an ad-hoc network, are slowly spread out physically, then eventually the responsibility for beacon should tend to be in the centre of the cluster. If a cluster of XOs is split in two, and the two groups slowly moved apart from each other, then eventually two beacons will be active and there will be two networks. References: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timing_Synchronization_Function_%28TSF%29 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beacon_frame http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traffic_indication_map (ad-hoc is IBSS) -- James Cameron http://quozl.linux.org.au/ ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: [OLPC-AU] limits on ad-hoc connections
To expand on James' excellent notes... On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 11:59 PM, James Cameron qu...@laptop.org wrote: The beacon is used for timing the transmissions, so that they occur in And that is _all_ it can do. It just broadcasts a beacon, like a metronome for a band recording in a studio. This is implemented in the wireless device firmware, not in the host, not in the CPU, not in the kernel, not in the user-space networking tools. In other words, in practice we can't patch it to be smarter. m -- martin.langh...@gmail.com mar...@laptop.org -- Software Architect - OLPC - 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: [Server-devel] XS rebase review
On 8 February 2012 11:58, Daniel Drake d...@laptop.org wrote: Moodle - seemed to fail on first boot, worked on second. Using moodle-xs-1.9.5.xs2-1.xs11.noarch. Need to dig further. Which moodle branch should I be working with? Hi Martin I have likely missed some previous discussions, but are we moving to Moodle 2.x or staying with Moodle 1.9.x on XS? How important is it to stay current with moodle.org releases? The oldest option is 1.9.11 on http://tracker.moodle.org when we report any bugs with Moodle 1.9.x. I did have a quick look at http://wiki.laptop.org/go/School_server and the pages linked from there. Also, looks like the PaintWeb project not quite made it into Moodle 2 yet. I looked in moodle.org discussions, tracker, and database of modules and plugins, and most up-to-date information was on http://tracker.moodle.org/browse/MDL-20124 as far as I could see. Always thought this would be a great addition for young children. Thanks Tabitha ___ Server-devel mailing list Server-devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/server-devel
Re: [Server-devel] XS rebase review
On Tue, Feb 7, 2012 at 5:58 PM, Daniel Drake d...@laptop.org wrote: Ready for the next round of reviews for the XS work. I've now performed basic testing of all aspects of the system, so I feel this is ready for merging and wider testing. Thanks! xs-config: pu branch recreated. Changes since yesterday: I think that the new pu branch you pushed out is incomplete. It has a very short run of patches, a massive diff from the pu I reviewed, and it ends at 11bdbdb Add setup.d hooks Maybe a git push is needed :-) ds-backup: pu branch ready for review Looks good. We'll make a server client release together. I have a buglet to fix client-side. idmgr: pu branch ready for review Much nicer layout, thanks! In fact, if you want to move it to /var/lib, or /library... you got my nod as well. Request: list_registration is a command for sysadmins; - rename it (xs-list-registration?), put it on the path - maybe make it root-only? xs-activation: pu branch ready for review xs-activity-server: pu branch ready for review Looking good! xs-rsync: pu branch ready for review Nice detail on the xz support! xs-tools: pu branch ready for review Looks good. Remaining bits from the core packages: Moodle - seemed to fail on first boot, worked on second. Using moodle-xs-1.9.5.xs2-1.xs11.noarch. Need to dig further. I'll look into merging w 1.9.x latest, for security and stable goodies. How much time have we got? ejabberd - runs, accepts connection, but shows no presence info. Need to look into this. Hmmm, perhaps it's not getting the automagic Online group created? Look in the ejabberd-xs.init script, run the commands from setup_online_srg() by hand. The change in the ejabberd control module changed the syntax of commands slightly. Which moodle branch should I be working with? Branch mdl19-xs from git+ssh://dev.laptop.org/git/users/martin/moodle.git cheers, m -- mar...@laptop.org -- Software Architect - OLPC - 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
Re: [Server-devel] XS rebase review
On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 2:23 AM, rihowa...@gmail.com rihowa...@gmail.com wrote: Which releases of erlang and ejabbered are you using? I unfortunately don't have the version number handy, but this should help: this coming XS release only ships a configuration and init scripts for ejabberd -- it's based on RHEL6.2/CentOS6.2, using the ejabberd versions included in the OS. Current ejabberd does not need any changes -- only configuration -- to do what we need :-) cheers, m -- mar...@laptop.org -- Software Architect - OLPC - 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
Re: [Server-devel] XS rebase review
On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 5:55 AM, Tabitha Roder tabi...@tabitha.net.nz wrote:
I have likely missed some previous discussions, but are we moving to Moodle
2.x or staying with Moodle 1.9.x on XS?
Daniel is doing a very focused update of the XS, to run on a more
current Linux base (CentOS6.x/RHEL6.x). So no major component overhaul
is happening in this fast and furious dev cycle...
How important is it to stay current with moodle.org releases?
No need to rub it in :-{ -- we're woefully out of date.
Here's the good news:
- dsd is taking on a significant overhaul that gets us on current
long-term-support RHEL/CentOS
- it's likely that Jerry will take on some maintenance, to take the job further
- this means that when I set some time aside for the XS, most
components are well cared for, and I can focus on Moodle!
- we're well over the hump w XO-1.75! so that time aside for the XS
is closer to reality...
now, all we need is a weekend to recharge the batteries, and we're sorted.
m
--
mar...@laptop.org -- Software Architect - OLPC
- 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
Re: [Server-devel] XS rebase review
On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 5:32 AM, Martin Langhoff mar...@laptop.org wrote: xs-config: pu branch recreated. Changes since yesterday: I think that the new pu branch you pushed out is incomplete. It has a very short run of patches, a massive diff from the pu I reviewed, and it ends at 11bdbdb Add setup.d hooks Pushed an old branch - please look again now. ds-backup: pu branch ready for review Looks good. We'll make a server client release together. I have a buglet to fix client-side. OK, hopefully this will be ready today or tomorrow? :) idmgr: pu branch ready for review Much nicer layout, thanks! In fact, if you want to move it to /var/lib, or /library... you got my nod as well. Request: list_registration is a command for sysadmins; - rename it (xs-list-registration?), put it on the path - maybe make it root-only? I'll do that, I assume this gets your approval once those changes are put in place so that I can push today? Remaining bits from the core packages: Moodle - seemed to fail on first boot, worked on second. Using moodle-xs-1.9.5.xs2-1.xs11.noarch. Need to dig further. I'll look into merging w 1.9.x latest, for security and stable goodies. How much time have we got? Need to get it done this week really - latest on Monday. Hoping to be able to release this on Wednesday 15th for deployment at test schools in Managua on Thursday 16th. ejabberd - runs, accepts connection, but shows no presence info. Need to look into this. Hmmm, perhaps it's not getting the automagic Online group created? Look in the ejabberd-xs.init script, run the commands from setup_online_srg() by hand. The change in the ejabberd control module changed the syntax of commands slightly. The online group is created. Any further debugging hints appreciated, I'm not exactly sure where to start. Thanks, Daniel ___ Server-devel mailing list Server-devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/server-devel
Re: [Server-devel] New XS release very soon
On Tue, Feb 7, 2012 at 3:16 PM, Daniel Drake d...@laptop.org wrote: On Tue, Feb 7, 2012 at 2:07 PM, Sameer Verma sve...@sfsu.edu wrote: How will this play with XS on ARM? It won't at all, yet. However, the liberation of the packages from the base install is the first step in this direction. Yep - we plan to continue this work to make available packages for F17 on ARM. The work that Daniel's doing makes our packages suitable for inclusion in Fedora proper. m -- martin.langh...@gmail.com mar...@laptop.org -- Software Architect - OLPC - 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
Re: [Server-devel] New XS release very soon
On Tue, Feb 7, 2012 at 11:59 AM, Daniel Drake d...@laptop.org wrote: As agreed and directed by Martin this will become the next OLPC XS release. And you can't imagine how pleased I am with this! Here in Nicaragua, the Zamora Teran Foundation has the task *this month* of deploying One Laptop per Child to every child on the mythical and beautiful island of Ometepe These guys are fantastically crazy, in the best of ways. m -- martin.langh...@gmail.com mar...@laptop.org -- Software Architect - OLPC - 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
Re: [Server-devel] XS rebase review
On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 8:59 AM, Daniel Drake d...@laptop.org wrote: Pushed an old branch - please look again now. Looks great. The only problem is the name - rename pu to master. ds-backup: pu branch ready for review Looks good. We'll make a server client release together. I have a buglet to fix client-side. OK, hopefully this will be ready today or tomorrow? :) Heh, I'll try. It's trivial though -- the client code is reading from /ofw idmgr: pu branch ready for review Much nicer layout, thanks! In fact, if you want to move it to /var/lib, or /library... you got my nod as well. Request: list_registration is a command for sysadmins; - rename it (xs-list-registration?), put it on the path - maybe make it root-only? I'll do that, I assume this gets your approval once those changes are put in place so that I can push today? Yep - agreed, approved. Remaining bits from the core packages: Moodle - seemed to fail on first boot, worked on second. Using moodle-xs-1.9.5.xs2-1.xs11.noarch. Need to dig further. I'll look into merging w 1.9.x latest, for security and stable goodies. How much time have we got? Need to get it done this week really - latest on Monday. Hoping to be able to release this on Wednesday 15th for deployment at test schools in Managua on Thursday 16th. Damned tight. I have a ramp process to see through to completion, and it's been rather busy. Will give it a shot tomorrow. ejabberd - runs, accepts connection, but shows no presence info. Need to look into this. Hmmm, perhaps it's not getting the automagic Online group created? Look in the ejabberd-xs.init script, run the commands from setup_online_srg() by hand. The change in the ejabberd control module changed the syntax of commands slightly. The online group is created. Any further debugging hints appreciated, I'm not exactly sure where to start. [ we're debugging this on irc right now ] m -- mar...@laptop.org -- Software Architect - OLPC - 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
Re: [Server-devel] XS rebase review
On Feb 8, 2012, at 3:35 AM, Martin Langhoff wrote: On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 2:23 AM, rihowa...@gmail.com rihowa...@gmail.com wrote: Which releases of erlang and ejabbered are you using? I unfortunately don't have the version number handy, but this should help: this coming XS release only ships a configuration and init scripts for ejabberd -- it's based on RHEL6.2/CentOS6.2, using the ejabberd versions included in the OS. I took a look at the CentOS6.2 source repository at http://vault.centos.org/6.2/ and could not find Erlang or ejabberd there. Current ejabberd does not need any changes -- only configuration -- to do what we need :-) cheers, m -- mar...@laptop.org -- Software Architect - OLPC - 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
Re: [Server-devel] XS rebase review
On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 4:27 PM, rihowa...@gmail.com rihowa...@gmail.com wrote: On Feb 8, 2012, at 3:35 AM, Martin Langhoff wrote: On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 2:23 AM, rihowa...@gmail.com rihowa...@gmail.com wrote: Which releases of erlang and ejabbered are you using? I unfortunately don't have the version number handy, but this should help: this coming XS release only ships a configuration and init scripts for ejabberd -- it's based on RHEL6.2/CentOS6.2, using the ejabberd versions included in the OS. I took a look at the CentOS6.2 source repository at http://vault.centos.org/6.2/ and could not find Erlang or ejabberd there. It's in EPEL https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL Peter ___ Server-devel mailing list Server-devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/server-devel
Re: [Server-devel] New XS release very soon
On Tue, Feb 7, 2012 at 8:59 AM, Daniel Drake d...@laptop.org wrote: Hi, To avoid leaving the other threads dangling: I have been working on a new XS release in collaboration with the Zamora Teran Foundation (http://www.fundacionzt.org/). The underlying goal here is to move the XS to a new OS base, which supports new hardware. The foundation has recently had a fair amount of trouble finding hardware that is compatible with the dated Fedora 9 release. As agreed and directed by Martin this will become the next OLPC XS release. There are 3 major changes compared to XS-0.6: 1. CentOS 6.2 is the base (which is equivalent to Fedora 13/14), but we have included Linux 3.2 from Fedora 15 for maximum hardware compatibility. 2. It will be released as both a traditional install CD only requiring a couple of commands after the install to get up and running, but also as a set of packages that can be added to an existing CentOS installation (which probably also works with RHEL/Scientific Linux/etc). Some steps have been taken for these packages to be easier to install and run on existing networks (e.g. you can now run parts of the XS without the requirement that you surrender your networking setup and layout to the strange configuration that the XS ships). The usual take over my network option will still be there though. 3. If you choose to let the XS take over your network: Networking setup is reworked and greatly simplified. No more bonding, no more mesh support. eth0 is now the LAN, and eth1 is now the WAN (based on the thinking that if you only have 1 interface, you're going to want LAN, not WAN). eth0 runs on a single subnet (not 3) and all the services bind to 0.0.0.0, and we rely on iptables to drop traffic from the WAN to the school-internal services. Here in Nicaragua, the Zamora Teran Foundation has the task *this month* of deploying One Laptop per Child to every child on the mythical and beautiful island of Ometepe (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ometepe). Unfortunately the hardware received for these 32 school servers is not compatible with XS-0.6, so we are under pressure to deploy this very very soon. This means the plan is to release this as an official XS release *next week* to be installed on servers immediately shipped to the island. Any help testing this before we ship it off will be greatly appreciated. I'll post installation instructions and some test media within a day or two - there are just a couple of obvious bugs remaining that need to be washed out first. cheers Daniel ___ Server-devel mailing list Server-devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/server-devel We have a OLPC SF meeting coming up on the 11th (Saturday). If you have an image ready for testing, we can roll up our sleeves and text it on a few boxes. I have a OLPCorps style SolidLogic box, a FitPC2, a FitPC, and a Fujitsu LifeBook P2120. I'm sure others have other boxes. cheers, Sameer -- Sameer Verma, Ph.D. Professor, Information Systems San Francisco State University http://verma.sfsu.edu/ http://commons.sfsu.edu/ http://olpcsf.org/ ___ Server-devel mailing list Server-devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/server-devel
[Server-devel] Sources for XS RPM's need a consistent home and/or definitive script
Hi Daniel, et al, Perhaps, after the push is over, I'd like to see posted in some public place, a script to fetch all of the sources for the RPM's that make up the new XS. I say this because as I was trying to recreate XS-0.6, i became confused whether sources were at git/ssh:git/ssh://dev.laptop.org/packages/ git://dev.laptop.org/packages/xs-rsync, git/ssh://dev.laptop.org/projects/, orgit://dev.laptop.org/packages/xs-rsync git/ssh://dev.laptop.org/users/martingit://dev.laptop.org/packages/xs-rsync. Most recent changes showed up in all three locations -- with some clones of each other. Or perhaps I just didn't find the actual sources -- (I found the wiki somewhat daunting and out of date). I think such a script would facilitate the effort to migrate the new XS to ARM, and perhaps even X64. George git://dev.laptop.org/packages/xs-rsync ___ Server-devel mailing list Server-devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/server-devel
