Re: OLPC upgrades

2009-02-03 Thread Nirbheek Chauhan
On Wed, Feb 4, 2009 at 2:12 AM, S Page wrote:
 Nirbheek Chauhan wrote:

 Since you're looking at making a gentoo-based sugar distro, you might
 find useful :)

 Please update , which
 lists a similar overlay project by Aleksey Lim.
  Maybe you could mention differences or work together.

I've talked with Aleksey, and _some_ code sharing is doable. However,
the approach of the two overlays is completely perpendicular
(automagic ebuilds using jhconvert vs manual ebuilds), and so one
cannot replace the other.

Also, my overlay currently consists of only live git ebuilds (ie, they
fetch and install from git instead of releases), and release ebuilds
are blocking on a number of things including . Once these problems are handled,
I'll update the aforementioned page.

 Sent from my mobile device

 ... with its patented top-post and include the entire message thread with
 no changes so every reader must scroll through it to see if you made other
 comments UI  8-/

Yeah, it sucks. gmail for mobile doesn't show the rest of the thread,
and top-posts without mercy _

~Nirbheek Chauhan
Devel mailing list

Re: OLPC upgrades

2009-02-02 Thread Nirbheek Chauhan
Since you're looking at making a gentoo-based sugar distro, you might
find useful :)

On 2/3/09, Tiago Marques wrote:
 On Mon, Feb 2, 2009 at 11:18 PM, Wade Brainerd wrote:

 2009/2/2 Tiago Marques

 On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 4:03 AM, Mitch Bradley wrote:

 Guess what? The people at OLPC, who aren't stupid, already considered
 every point in the message cited below, a long time ago. So why aren't
 we doing them? ...* *On Wed, Jan 28, 2009 at 9:57 PM, Carlos Nazareno

 Nobody's saying anyone is stupid. It is perfectly natural for people to
 complain about things they don't understand. I also wish I could, from
 to time, to ask this or that, to understand many things I don't
 to know what I can do to help. This without getting into any kind of
 with the people involved with the project, who are the only ones who can
 answer those questions.
 As with any critical comment I may issue in this mailing list,* please
 take it as something constructive*, to help (if it does, in any way) and
 not to criticize the people who are hard at work. That, I think, is what
 Carlos was trying to do.
 I got my XO three weeks ago and there's a lot I was surprised to learn
 that some of the more important features are WIP or simply don't work,
 especially given the news that I've read, already detailing prototypes of
 second version, when there's still a lot to do with the first one.

 Hey Tiago,

 I've been following the project for about 2 years now and the software
 problems you cite (OOM crashing, flaky wireless,  battery life, sluggish
 are pretty much the same ones that existed back when I got involved!  The
 lack of momentum on the software front has been pretty amazing given how
 much the project started with.

 That said, things seem to be picking up speed as more control over the
 software is handed to the community.  I finally feel like there's maybe a
 chance to see some of this stuff get resolved.

 Here's hoping SL's XOOS or SoaS, or else some deployment's distribution
 will take better advantage of the excellent hardware that is the XO-1.
 really like to see someone try to build a tiny LFS based XO specific
 which runs Sugar, and boots in 30sec :)  I've got my personal XO booting
 around 45sec just by hacking around in the initscripts, and I'm sure a lot
 better could be done.

 Hi Wade,
 I use Gentoo for professional and personal use in almost all of my machines
 and will probably install Gentoo in some binary way to dual boot the XO with
 Sugar(it fits the XO too well, in some ways, to simply delete it). This will
 be the most optimized code I can have the compiler generate, which should
 yield some nice improvements, compiled with the smallest feature set needed.
 I have a machine running KDE 3.5 in 80MB with two or three KDE apps loaded,
 but that is still overkill for the XO. XFCE/Fluxbox would be something to
 experiment with.
 I have a server here in college to do a package server, with which other
 users may use, but I still need some free time to finish the basic gentoo
 based distro, which will hardly come with an installer, other than a stage
 package compiled for the Geode.
 I would like to see python less resource bound but I unfortunately have
 neither the time nor the skill to go hacking it.
 Best regards,
   Tiago Marques


Sent from my mobile device

~Nirbheek Chauhan
Devel mailing list

Re: Why not use swfdec-mozilla? (was Re: Installing Flash on the OLPC)

2009-01-03 Thread Nirbheek Chauhan
On Thu, Jan 1, 2009 at 9:14 PM, Brian Pepple wrote:
 Quick clarification.  We discussed making swfdec installed by default
 during the development of Fedora 9, but decided against doing so since
 we felt it wasn't quite ready for that.

Ah, thanks for the clarification, I don't run Fedora so I wouldn't know :)

 I'm not sure if it was considered, but as the maintainer of swfdec in
 Fedora I can state that swfdec is very cpu-intensive, and I have my
 doubts whether the performance on the XO would be comparable to gnash's,
 though it might be worth investigating.

That has been my experience too, but I always thought that the
CPU-intensive stuff was only for complex Flash-9 things, and because
my ATI open source drivers sucked ;p

I guess I should compare gnash/swfdec/adobe flash performance-wise too.

~Nirbheek Chauhan
Devel mailing list

Why not use swfdec-mozilla? (was Re: Installing Flash on the OLPC)

2009-01-01 Thread Nirbheek Chauhan
Hello everyone,
(top-posting due to tangent nature of discussion)

Just a thought here, in my experience, swfdec[1] works far better than
gnash for flash websites; why not use that? There's a Firefox/Gecko
plugin called swfdec-mozilla which works beautifully.

swfdec{,-mozilla} use gstreamer, are LGPLed, and support most of the
Flash 9 features whereas gnash supports only a few of the Flash 9
features. swfdec is also the default Flash player on Fedora, and is
the preferred flash player on Ubuntu.

Were there some specific problems with using swfdec? Or was it not
under consideration due to some factors?

On Wed, Dec 31, 2008 at 5:11 AM, S Page wrote:
 Dear genesee, Carlos Nazareno, Everybody,

 gently Many more people are going to read page than follow this mailing
 list.  Your effect on XO users by only answering problems here is
 limited, you're just making the smart smarter still.

~Nirbheek Chauhan
Devel mailing list