On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 5:04 AM, Daniel Drake d...@laptop.org wrote:
I know I myself hacked the image-builder script into this direction,
but in hindsight I feel that it got too hacky and that was the wrong
approach. It presented various surprises along the way and at the very
end left me with
2009/10/15 Martin Langhoff martin.langh...@gmail.com:
Would be interesting to know more on concrete issues (that lead to the
feeling part :-) ).
I guess the turning point in my thinking was when I realised that I
had to update the .contents file inside the image after making
non-activity
On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 11:43, Daniel Drake d...@laptop.org wrote:
Hi,
At OLE Nepal we have difficulties with updating activities because our
main educational activity is so huge. Aayush Poudel implemented an
incremental activity update which I have now merged with the standard
software
2009/10/14 Tomeu Vizoso to...@sugarlabs.org:
Wonder how we could make it easier for other deployments to benefit
from these changes.
Do you have plans to push the changes to the sugar-update-control repo
and spin new F9 rpms?
No - my time is too tight and at least for Paraguay and Nepal it's
On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 1:19 PM, Tomeu Vizoso to...@sugarlabs.org wrote:
Wonder how we could make it easier for other deployments to benefit
from these changes.
For the F9 series (8.2.1) my current plan is to work to polish the
imagecreator scripts so that it is easier for deployents to
-
2009/10/15 Martin Langhoff martin.langh...@gmail.com:
For the F9 series (8.2.1) my current plan is to work to polish the
imagecreator scripts so that it is easier for deployents to
- prepare a custom image (mostly covered)
- base on an existing image (in place, even if the tar isn't
