Re: Changing screen resolution XO 1.5
The display resolution of the XO is fixed at 1200 x 900 on XO-1 and XO-1.5. We are considering a change to 1280 x 720 for XO-1.75, but it too would be fixed. Are you interested in a larger or smaller resolution ? Cheers, wad On Jul 30, 2010, at 7:45 AM, Franco Miceli wrote: Sorry, Re: field corrected. Cheers 2010/7/30 Franco Miceli fmic...@plan.ceibal.edu.uy HI, I was wondering if there was a way to have a different resolution on the screen of the XO 1.5. I know that due to the DCON chip the res cannot be changed to other value that 1200x900, and have been told about Xephyr (http://dev.laptop.org/ticket/10210). Does anyone have any thoughts/experiences on this? Thanks. Cheers Franco -- Ing. Franco Miceli CITS - Plan Ceibal - Investigación Desarrollo Av. Italia 6201 - Montevideo, Uruguay CP: 11500 Tel: (598 2) 601 5773 int.: 2227 ___ 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
[ANNOUNCE] Tiny Core Linux for XO-1 and XO-1.5
Announcing a build of Tiny Core Linux for XO-1 and XO-1.5 based on OLPC development build os303 (leading up to release 10.1.2). I've found this useful for testing and diagnosis without touching the internal NAND or SD storage. Features: - based on Tiny Core Linux 3.0 microcore variant, configured for a single root shell in text mode, - uses the OLPC kernel, for hardware support, - includes the wireless firmware shipped with OLPC builds, and binary redistribution of wireless tools from the same builds, Downloads: http://dev.laptop.org/~quozl/tinycore/ d6de16bdc9c51b614bd0e6e686bc2242 microcore-3.0-xo-1-2010-08-02.tar (9.7Mb) e540eb423a7c0b88e7a17a39f9105cef microcore-3.0-xo-1.5-2010-08-02.tar (9.8Mb) Instructions: a. unpack the tar file, b. place the boot directory on an ext2 formatted USB stick or SD card, c. boot from the media. References: 1. Tiny Core Linux http://www.tinycorelinux.com/ 2. mktinycorexo script http://dev.laptop.org/~quozl/mktinycorexo/ 3. mktinycorexo script git repository git clone http://dev.laptop.org/~quozl/mktinycorexo/.git -- James Cameron http://quozl.linux.org.au/ signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Changing screen resolution XO 1.5
Smaller. Actually the reason I want to change it is to test an app that was designed using a lower resolution. It's just for testing, so there's no intention of making the resolution change permanent. i just wanted to know if there was a way to modify it just to test the app. Cheers 2010/8/2 John Watlington w...@laptop.org The display resolution of the XO is fixed at 1200 x 900 on XO-1 and XO-1.5. We are considering a change to 1280 x 720 for XO-1.75, but it too would be fixed. Are you interested in a larger or smaller resolution ? Cheers, wad On Jul 30, 2010, at 7:45 AM, Franco Miceli wrote: Sorry, Re: field corrected. Cheers 2010/7/30 Franco Miceli fmic...@plan.ceibal.edu.uy HI, I was wondering if there was a way to have a different resolution on the screen of the XO 1.5. I know that due to the DCON chip the res cannot be changed to other value that 1200x900, and have been told about Xephyr ( http://dev.laptop.org/ticket/10210). Does anyone have any thoughts/experiences on this? Thanks. Cheers Franco -- Ing. Franco Miceli CITS - Plan Ceibal - Investigación Desarrollo Av. Italia 6201 - Montevideo, Uruguay CP: 11500 Tel: (598 2) 601 5773 int.: 2227 ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel -- Ing. Franco Miceli CITS - Plan Ceibal - Investigación Desarrollo Av. Italia 6201 - Montevideo, Uruguay CP: 11500 Tel: (598 2) 601 5773 int.: 2227 ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
XO 1.75 screen
On 02.08.2010, at 08:28, John Watlington wrote: We are considering a change to 1280 x 720 for XO-1.75, but it too would be fixed. I understand this is about cost and going with the main stream. But IMHO it would be a bad move. Please, if at all possible, stay with a 4:3 ratio. It's easy to scale content, but to redesign it for 16:9 is hard even for professionals (*). Making user-content authored both on wide and regular screens be exchangeable is almost impossible. E.g., currently Etoys projects made by the kids are 4:3. On a wide-screen machine, Etoys by default shows black borders left and right. This can be turned off, but then we would get projects authored in both 16:9 and 4:3, and viewing them on a different screen makes them unusably small. Stretching is not really an option because 5 units should represent the same distance horizontally and vertically. Also, when turned to portrait mode, 3:4 looks much nicer than 9:16. Wide-screens are much too tall when rotated. E.g., Apple Macs use wide screens exclusively, and are not designed to be rotated. But Apple's iPad and iPhone, which are often held in portrait or landscape, have a 4:3 screen. Given that there are thoughts for a future tablet version of the XO, which hopefully would use 4:3, I think a wide-screen interlude should be avoided. - Bert - (*) Some people seem to be fine with stretching. While touring the US last month (which has many more public TVs than Germany) I was amazed how many showed fat people, just stretching the 4:3 broadcast to fill the whole screen. For an educational machine I don't think that's a good idea. ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: [IAEP] Recommend build for XO-1.0 deployment
On Sun, Aug 1, 2010 at 8:59 PM, Tabitha Roder tabi...@tabitha.net.nz wrote: Does anyone have a build they would recommend? I believe the laptops are locked, so it will have to be signed. At this point I would recommend the 10.1.2 development builds -- but as James points out, they are not signed. cheers, m -- martin.langh...@gmail.com mar...@laptop.org -- 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: Suspend: RTC wakeup, sleep
On 07/29/2010 08:56 PM, John Gilmore wrote: With the RTC you have a 1 second ambiguity There is no 1-second ambiguity in the RTC. The CPU can only read out a value accurate to 1 second, but the CPU can tell precisely when the RTC ticks from one second to another, which gives it much higher precision if it's willing to wait. Its precision is greater than its accuracy. But now each resume can have up to 1 second of delay while you wait for the tick to occur. sleeps of under a minute, there isn't much time for the temperature to change while suspended, even if the laptop moves from sun to shade or vice verse during that minute. That would indeed be possible. The actual sync from the EC to the kernel would be tricky since the communication path from the EC to the kernel is variable. You would have to use some sort of NTP type scheme. The kernel in XO-1 has at least two ways to accurately measure the duration of an EC timer based suspend. One is to use the CPU clock to count subseconds since power-up, You will also have to compensate for the time lost until your hardware and software are up enough to count sub-seconds. It may be possible its going to take some effort. and you'll know exactly when the CPU resumed. A second way is to leave an MFGPT timer running during suspend. There are one or two timers that can't wake the system, but which can count while suspended, and at high accuracy. See http://dev.laptop.org/ticket/6053#comment:7 and subsequent comments. That seems more workable... I haven't examined the XO-1.5 timer situation. There are similar timers in XO-1.5 GPT 3 looks like it can count while in suspend. So with the system as it stands there is really no (good) way to accomplish a zero timing impact suspend. There are clever ways to do it despite the limitations of the hardware. Yes. It seems possible but right now none of this is done and there is not currently any plan to make it happen. OLPC is in the market for a dedicated (and local) kernel hacker to work on things like this but right now we don't have one. Until we get one or until someone in the community works on it this will just be ideas. We have also veered off thread...The original questions/responses were on what happens _now_, not what we should be doing. I'd like to understand the existing issues first. -- Richard A. Smith rich...@laptop.org One Laptop per Child ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: [IAEP] Recommend build for XO-1.0 deployment
On Sun, Aug 1, 2010 at 8:59 PM, Tabitha Roder tabi...@tabitha.net.nz wrote: Does anyone have a build they would recommend? I believe the laptops are locked, so it will have to be signed. At this point I would recommend the 10.1.2 development builds -- but as James points out, they are not signed. But it's so easy to unlock locked laptops, and then you can run any build you like. OLPC has for more than a year recommended that everyone run unlocked laptops unless their particular country has a need to lock them. Unlocked OLPC laptops are just like ordinary laptops that you might buy in a store; no more and no less secure. There is no reason to lock a laptop, and no reason to keep laptops locked, unless you have a major theft issue in your country's laptop program. I think the whole reason many early laptops went out locked was that the local projects thought that somehow a locked laptop was more secure or better than an unlocked one. Field experience has proven the opposite. Unlocked laptops give the project more control, easier support, and more options. John ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: [IAEP] Recommend build for XO-1.0 deployment
Tabitha, check to see if the deployment can use unlocked laptops; and if the policy is acceptable, we can assist with use of Collection stick and unlocking. (The laptops can be unlocked by the user within 24 hours by following the processes that OLPC made available ... so the only way the locking mechanism could be used to exert control by the school is if the users weren't allowed to use them without supervision ... and use without supervision is one of the whole points of One Laptop per Child. And given that the locking mechanism is so weak, and the benefits of unlocking are so strong, I presume that the reason they remain locked is through ignorance of the processes. Basing a control on ignorance is unsustainable.) -- James Cameron http://quozl.linux.org.au/ ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Exiting Activity started from Home returns to Journal view or another Activity view
Sugar 0.84.x seems to have a regression in behavior from 0.82 See http://dev.laptop.org/ticket/10264 http://dev.laptop.org/ticket/10264Perhaps someone knows of a quick fix for this. Efforts to pin the cause have not been fruitful so far. An Activity launched from the Home view, when exited, returned focus to the Journal view. This was an unexpected change of context not experienced on build 802. Testing with SoaS-Strawberry (Sugar 0.84.2) revealed that if the Activity had no previous entry in the Journal the focus would return to Home view on exit. else the focus would return to the Journal or another running Activity, if present. On Sugar 0.88.1 (Xephyr window in Fedora) the focus returns to the Home view if launched from there or to the Journal if launched from there. The 0.88 0.82 behavior seem correct (as there is no surprise about where you end up on leaving an Activity). --Fred ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: [Server-devel] XO Registration Failed with XS
On Sun, Aug 1, 2010 at 8:58 PM, James Cameron qu...@laptop.org wrote: Fixed, please upgrade. So this is in for 10.1.2 - bravo! m -- martin.langh...@gmail.com mar...@laptop.org -- 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
Re: [Server-devel] Server performance feedback and testing suggestions
On Sun, Aug 1, 2010 at 6:20 PM, David Leeming da...@leeming-consulting.com wrote: OK, well we have set it up to run 24/7 with the timer override, allowing teachers to set the timer to auto if need be (but then they will have the daily task of manually switching it on, that can get neglected in my experience, especially as the servers are in locked rooms, with the daily hassle of finding keys etc. Sounds a minor issue but in practice it is best to have the system as automated as possible). As Tabitha (Tom?) mentions, some of these machines have a setting in the BIOS that will auto-switch-on whenever it has electrical power. Worth a try. We also added a line to the cron table (crontab -e) to have a daily reboot just because we have been brought up to think that is a good thing!!! Two strong recommendations: - Daily flossing good, daily reboots bad ;-) - Don't use crontab -e! Write a file in /etc/cron.d/ -- much better! You need to add the user it runs as, like */5 * * * * root /my/command We reconfigured with smaller groups (less than 35 per group) and it tested OK - 6 class groups all independently collaborating and isolated from each other. Ok. That makes me feel much better. How large were the groups before? cheers, m -- martin.langh...@gmail.com mar...@laptop.org -- 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] Upstream Proxy
I just spent some time getting the XS squid proxy to us a peer cache (inside the ministry you mut use a proxy for http access). The instructions at http://wiki.laptop.org/go/XS_Techniques_and_Configuration#HTTP_proxies didn't work so well -- I could access the internet, but not the school server. The offending line appears to be the to_schoolserver acl is an ip address only. I adjusted the instructions here: http://wiki.laptop.org/index.php?title=XS_Techniques_and_Configurationdiff=242446oldid=241898 I really don't know what I'm doing with squi, so please correct if I'm doing it wrong. ___ Server-devel mailing list Server-devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/server-devel
