Re: [Testing] Software update problems in OLPC 10.1.3
Admittedly, the XO-1 system I tested with is customized. And I
installed build os860 on it from scratch with 'copy-nand'.
I install Activities manually, rather than with software install. With
Help-12 (from 'help-12.xo' gotten via activities.sugarlabs.org) on that
system, My Settings -> Software Update tells me all my software is
up-to-date (and does NOT get errors checking installed activities).
[File 'Help-12.xo' gotten via
http://wiki.laptop.org/go/Activities/G1G1Lite/10.1.3 is functionally
identical to (it only differs in a few comments from) the sugarlabs file
'help-12.xo'.]
mikus
p.s. On the XO-1, the log output of Help-12 is not clean (attached).
/usr/lib/python2.6/site-packages/sugar/util.py:25: DeprecationWarning: the sha module is deprecated; use the hashlib module instead
import sha
DEBUG:xpcom:Python Factory creating ModuleLoader
1294534394.104052 DEBUG xpcom: Python Factory creating ModuleLoader
/usr/lib/xulrunner-1.9.1/python/xpcom/__init__.py:54: DeprecationWarning: BaseException.message has been deprecated as of Python 2.6
self.message = message
/usr/lib/xulrunner-1.9.1/python/xpcom/__init__.py:62: DeprecationWarning: BaseException.message has been deprecated as of Python 2.6
message = self.message
DEBUG:xpcom:'int8 loadModule(in nsISomething, out retval nsISomething);' raised COM Exception -2147024809 (-2147024809)
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "/usr/lib/xulrunner-1.9.1/python/xpcom/server/policy.py", line 277, in _CallMethod_
return 0, func(*params)
File "/usr/lib/xulrunner-1.9.1/python/xpcom/server/loader.py", line 92, in loadModule
return self._getCOMModuleForLocation(aFile)
File "/usr/lib/xulrunner-1.9.1/python/xpcom/server/loader.py", line 97, in _getCOMModuleForLocation
raise xpcom.ServerException(nsError.NS_ERROR_INVALID_ARG)
ServerException: -2147024809 (-2147024809)
1294534394.298688 DEBUG xpcom: 'int8 loadModule(in nsISomething, out retval nsISomething);' raised COM Exception -2147024809 (-2147024809)
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "/usr/lib/xulrunner-1.9.1/python/xpcom/server/policy.py", line 277, in _CallMethod_
return 0, func(*params)
File "/usr/lib/xulrunner-1.9.1/python/xpcom/server/loader.py", line 92, in loadModule
return self._getCOMModuleForLocation(aFile)
File "/usr/lib/xulrunner-1.9.1/python/xpcom/server/loader.py", line 97, in _getCOMModuleForLocation
raise xpcom.ServerException(nsError.NS_ERROR_INVALID_ARG)
ServerException: -2147024809 (-2147024809)
Registering '@mozilla.org/module-loader/python;1' (libpyloader.so)
Registering '@mozilla.org/network/protocol/about;1?what=python' (pyabout.py)
returning /home/olpc/.sugar/default/org.laptop.HelpActivity/data/gecko/prefs.js for key NS_APP_PREFS_50_FILE
1294534395.595726 DEBUG root: *** Act cb40acc99c3c48e3bdba5f3392adf2a9d0d95734, mesh instance None, scope private
1294534395.597564 DEBUG root: Creating a jobject.
1294534395.605308 DEBUG root: datastore.write
1294534395.680119 DEBUG root: dbus_helpers.create: 091586a4-73f6-41c6-a501-02c2a096104a
1294534395.692720 DEBUG root: Written object 091586a4-73f6-41c6-a501-02c2a096104a to the datastore.
1294534396.374995 DEBUG root: ('Setup widget', None)
1294534396.383179 WARNING root: No gtk.AccelGroup in the top level window.
1294534396.404433 DEBUG root: ('Setup widget', None)
1294534396.426905 WARNING root: No gtk.AccelGroup in the top level window.
1294534396.473334 DEBUG root: ('Setup widget', )
1294534396.497428 DEBUG root: ('Setup widget', )
1294534396.542730 DEBUG root: ('Setup widget', )
1294534396.584004 DEBUG root: ('Setup widget', )
1294534396.607480 DEBUG root: ('Setup widget', )
1294534396.653273 DEBUG root: ('Setup widget', )
1294534397.881703 DEBUG root: nsIEmbeddingSiteWindow.get_visibility: False
1294534397.887640 DEBUG root: nsIEmbeddingSiteWindow.get_visibility: False
1294534398.025050 DEBUG root: nsIEmbeddingSiteWindow.set_visibility: True
1294534398.027536 DEBUG root: Activity.__canvas_map_cb
1294534398.134800 DEBUG root: ActivityService.set_active: 1.
1294534398.143248 DEBUG root: nsIEmbeddingSiteWindow.get_visibility: False
** (sugar-activity:2544): DEBUG: Got client ID "10d573dd9cb1c2b28112945343982702460022010001"
** (sugar-activity:2544): DEBUG: Setting initial properties
** (sugar-activity:2544): DEBUG: Received SaveYourself(SmSaveLocal, !Shutdown, SmInteractStyleNone, !Fast) in state idle
** (sugar-activity:2544): DEBUG: Sending SaveYourselfDone(True) for initial SaveYourself
** (sugar-activity:2544): DEBUG: Received SaveComplete message in state save-yourself-done
1294534398.392388 DEBUG root: nsIEmbeddingSiteWindow.get_visibility: False
1294534398.624309 DEBUG root: nsIEmbeddingSiteWindow.set_title: u''
1294534406.189454 DEBUG root: nsIEmbeddingSiteWindow.get_visibility: False
1294534406.191710 DEBUG root: nsIEmbeddingSiteWindow.set_visibility: True
1294534406.198467 DEBUG root: nsIEmbeddingSiteWindow.setFocus
1294534406.215065 DEBUG root: nsIEmbeddingSiteWindow.get_visibility
Re: 2g, 4g, 8g
On Sat, Jan 8, 2011 at 5:53 AM, John Watlington wrote: > > The images are matched to the size of the SD card they are > to be installed onto. (Well, actually they represent the smallest > card we've encountered in that size, as all SD card models > vary slightly in size.) > > There has been a recurring thread about always installing > the 2GB image, and then resizing the filesystem on first > boot to fill the SD card ( http://dev.laptop.org/ticket/10040 ). > > You can always use a smaller image on a larger SD card, > but until you resize the filesystem, you will be wasting part > of the SD card. > > Cheers, > wad > Thanks. -- Sameer > On Jan 8, 2011, at 4:34 AM, Sameer Verma wrote: > >> What's the difference between 2g, 4g, and 8g images in >> http://build.laptop.org/10.1.3/xo-1.5/os860/ >> >> cheers, >> Sameer >> ___ >> 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
New Dextrose 2 build: os438dx
This release of Dextrose 2 is intended for beta testing. Images for the XO-1 and XO-1.5 can be downloaded here: http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Dextrose I've not bothered uploading GNOME-enabled images, since Paraguay does not use it. I could be convinced to generate them if it's needed by a deployment for evaluation purposes only. The major highlight in this release is a simple automated updater based on yum which will hopefully enable us to deploy small updates effortlessly. The final release should be ready by Feb 22, when schools reopen in Paraguay, and if the updater works well we'll be able to fix any remaining bugs post-release. This build also includes a refresh of the new activity updater which supports the "OLPC microformat" protocol. Please test both these features vigorously. This release is missing several Sugar fixes that went into OLPC 10.1.3 over the last weeks. The queue of patches waiting to be merged in Dextrose is quite long and new features have to take precedence so they can get tested early on. We also have some small features that we hope to merge in time for this release. Consult the todo list for more information. === Changes === * Yum updater (alsroot, m_anish) * Notification system (tch) * Refresh activity updater (m_anish) * Revert to old build naming scheme, to avoid confusing users (bernie) === Updated activities === * Abacus-19 * Arithmetic-2 * Calculate-35 * Chat-69 * Distance-21 * Edit-8 * FotoToon-5 * Implode-10 * IRC-8 * Jukebox-20 * Labyrinth-11 * Maze-6 * Measure-32 * Memorize-36 * Paint-30 * Physics-8 * Pippy-38 * Record-87 * Speak-19 * TurtleArt-105 * VisualMatch-27 * Write-72 === Updated OS packages === * bitfrost-1.0.10-3.fc11.i586 * bootfw-q3a62-1.unsigned.i386 * etoys-4.0.2340-2.noarch * kernel-2.6.31_xo1.5-20101222.1243.1.olpc.7b21b8f27f2887b.i586 * kernel-firmware-2.6.31_xo1.5-20101222.1243.1.olpc.7b21b8f27f2887b.i586 * olpc-bootanim-2.12-5.dxo4.fc11.i586 * olpc-contents-2.6-1.fc11.i586 * olpc-kbdshim-16-1.fc11.i586 * olpc-powerd-32-1.fc11.i586 * olpc-powerd-dbus-32-1.fc11.i586 * olpc-runin-tests-0.9.43-1.noarch * olpc-update-2.23-1.fc11.noarch * olpc-utils-1.0.37-1.fc11.i586 * squeak-vm-3.10.5-4.fc11.i586 * xorg-x11-drv-openchrome-0.2.990-2.fc11.i586 * xorg-x11-drv-sisusb-0.9.1-2.fc11.i586 * xulrunner-1.9.1.9-2.fc11.i586 -- // 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: OLPC on Slashdot again
On Jan 8, 2011, at 12:40 PM, Carlos Nazareno wrote: > Comments are a little more sane and less FUD-y now on Slashdot: > > http://hardware.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=11/01/08/0229206 > > This would be a good time for people here to hop on and comment on the > Slashdot thread to help educate/evangelize to the geek world more on > what OLPC's been doing (and stop FUD from resurfacing again). My comment is at: http://hardware.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1941464&cid=34810832 Unfortunately, since I never bother commenting on Slashdot, my karma is neutral. Your recommendations in order to bring this comment above the noise level are kindly requested. Cheers, wad ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
OLPC on Slashdot again
Congrats guys! Kudos on the work on switching to ARM. Comments are a little more sane and less FUD-y now on Slashdot: http://hardware.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=11/01/08/0229206 This would be a good time for people here to hop on and comment on the Slashdot thread to help educate/evangelize to the geek world more on what OLPC's been doing (and stop FUD from resurfacing again). FUD has really generated a lot of badwill for OLPC, this'd be a good opportunity to help rectify that. Have a great weekend! -Naz -- carlos nazareno http://twitter.com/object404 http://www.object404.com -- core team member phlashers: philippine flash actionscripters http://www.phlashers.com -- poverty is violence ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: 2g, 4g, 8g
The images are matched to the size of the SD card they are to be installed onto. (Well, actually they represent the smallest card we've encountered in that size, as all SD card models vary slightly in size.) There has been a recurring thread about always installing the 2GB image, and then resizing the filesystem on first boot to fill the SD card ( http://dev.laptop.org/ticket/10040 ). You can always use a smaller image on a larger SD card, but until you resize the filesystem, you will be wasting part of the SD card. Cheers, wad On Jan 8, 2011, at 4:34 AM, Sameer Verma wrote: > What's the difference between 2g, 4g, and 8g images in > http://build.laptop.org/10.1.3/xo-1.5/os860/ > > cheers, > Sameer > ___ > 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
2g, 4g, 8g
What's the difference between 2g, 4g, and 8g images in http://build.laptop.org/10.1.3/xo-1.5/os860/ cheers, Sameer ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
