Hi all,
I have been wondering for some time how are you controlling the frequency of
the C7 processor in Fedora. Is this being done in the background by
openfirmware or some other place where it is not visible. I would like to
test it's effect on battery life and to know if power management needs
http://wiki.laptop.org/go/F11_for_1.5
http://build.laptop.org/10.1.1/os202
Compressed image size: 691.40mb (+13.72mb since build 122)
Hi everyone,
We're closing in on our next release for manufacturing, which will be
called "10.1.1". Please test this XO-1.5 release and report back any
bugs usin
On 30 April 2010 19:39, Martin Langhoff wrote:
> Fair enough. One of the problems is that normally the expiry check is
> done inside bitfrost lib and the code there only respects the system
> clock.
>
> So it's a bit messy. Rework bitfrost libs (with impact on users if the
> lib) or implement a bi
>
> I had at some point code to do this but it was some years ago and
> would take a bit finding it. I remember I was calling some of these
> calls through ctypes: http://linux.die.net/man/3/xcomposite Maybe just
> XCompositeRedirectSubwindows and XCompositeUnredirectSubwindows.
That could definit
On Mon, May 3, 2010 at 15:34, Jon Nettleton wrote:
>>> We could reuse the work done in Sugar 0.86 when we moved to metacity
>>> from matchbox. Or just use metacity which is also a compositing
>>> windowm manager.
>>
>> Or mutter which is the replacement to metacity for gnome 3 so should
>> be a re
>> We could reuse the work done in Sugar 0.86 when we moved to metacity
>> from matchbox. Or just use metacity which is also a compositing
>> windowm manager.
>
> Or mutter which is the replacement to metacity for gnome 3 so should
> be a reasonably easy swap from metacity and is used by gnome-shel
On Mon, May 3, 2010 at 8:17 AM, Tomeu Vizoso wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 30, 2010 at 22:35, Jon Nettleton wrote:
>>> I think our next steps should be to:
>>>
>>> * quantify the memory difference (both total and per-window) against
>>> not running xcompmgr. We were already running with the composite
On Fri, Apr 30, 2010 at 22:35, Jon Nettleton wrote:
>> I think our next steps should be to:
>>
>> * quantify the memory difference (both total and per-window) against
>> not running xcompmgr. We were already running with the composite X
>> extension on, so I think the increase may be small.
