Re: XO's cannot use mirror repo's in YUM update or install

2019-11-10 Thread Peter Robinson
On Sun, Nov 10, 2019 at 5:29 AM Carrol Riddle  wrote:
>
> XO's attempting to run YUM update or install are unable to use fedora mirror 
> sites (https://) but able to use primary fedora site (http://).
>
> Is this a matter of https vs http / ca-certificates or changes in mirror 
> structures ?  Ca-certificates update have not been done, but could be done.
>
>  Running OLPC 13.2.10 with current date / time and hwclock -w to sync.
>
> Primaries used by editing /etc/yum.repos.d/fedora.repo and commenting out 
> mirrorlist line and uncommenting baseurl line (and adding "archive" to url 
> path after /pub/).
>
> There are no entries in yum.log and error message is:
> "Cannot retrieve metalink for repository: fedora/18/i386.  Please verify its 
> path and try again."
>
> My specific case is trying to install rpmfusion in preparing to install 
> exfat-utils and fuse-exfat ,  but occurs with other installs that have been 
> done in the past.

I'm guessing you might need to update for content that has been
archived, I thought the mirror manager dealt with redirects
automatically there but I don't know exactly.
___
Devel mailing list
Devel@lists.laptop.org
http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel


Re: [Server-devel] serious Raspbian WiFi flaw discovered: works for 10SEC then cycles OFF/ON

2018-01-01 Thread Peter Robinson
>> We need to report this to the Raspberry Pi Foundation to see if they can
>> fix it -- WiFi connections are repeatedly failing, sometimes even very soon
>> after booting, profoundly affecting Internet-in-a-Box 6.5 !
>>
>> But first a big Thanks In Advance to all who can reproduce this & offer
>> your own experiences/perspectives prior to Thursday's [*] call:
>>
>>http://minutes.iiab.io
>>
>> Here are 2 (known) ways to reproduce the WiFi bug with near certainty:
>>
>>https://github.com/iiab/iiab/issues/638#issuecomment-354639673
>
>
> CLARIF: I do *not* mean to blame Raspbian, as we seek a solution here!!
>
> At this this point it's entirely possible the underlying/root cause is
> dhcpcd...and/or even RPi3 firmware / WiFi module etc?

Is it reproducible with upstream kernel/firmware on something like an
up to date Fedora install, there was some new firmware pushed upstream
that fixed some CVEs in the Broadcom firmware (CVE-2016-0801,
CVE-2017-0561, CVE-2017-9417), I'm not sure which firmware's were
affected/updated but it might be worth checking to see if it's fixed
on other distros that are closer to upstream.

Peter
___
Server-devel mailing list
Server-devel@lists.laptop.org
http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/server-devel


Re: Devel Digest, Vol 132, Issue 2

2017-09-18 Thread Peter Robinson
On Mon, Sep 18, 2017 at 10:57 AM, Tony Anderson <tony_ander...@usa.net> wrote:
> Has anyone tested a current fedora release on an XO model? It would seem
> reasonable to install Fedora with the gnome desktop independent of Sugar as
> a starting point.

Why don't you actually read the thread you're replying to. Userspace
will be fine, needs kernel work as they need a newer kernel.

The ARM XOs could actually as of Fedora 26 run with a completely open
userspace with the entaviv kernel if someone does the work for those
devices to boot on a current kernel. In theory the XO 1.75 would just
need a devicetree plus driver upstreaming. The 1.5 might work OOTB but
there are some drivers that were never upstreamed.

Peter

> Tony
>
> On 09/17/2017 05:00 PM, devel-requ...@lists.laptop.org wrote:
>>
>> Send Devel mailing list submissions to
>> devel@lists.laptop.org
>>
>> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>> http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
>> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>> devel-requ...@lists.laptop.org
>>
>> You can reach the person managing the list at
>> devel-ow...@lists.laptop.org
>>
>> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
>> than "Re: Contents of Devel digest..."
>>
>>
>> Today's Topics:
>>
>> 1. Porting XO laptops to newer Linux kernels (Samuel Greenfeld)
>> 2. Re: Porting XO laptops to newer Linux kernels (Peter Robinson)
>> 3. Re: Porting XO laptops to newer Linux kernels
>>(Arne Babenhauserheide)
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> Message: 1
>> Date: Sat, 16 Sep 2017 23:28:14 -0400
>> From: Samuel Greenfeld <sam...@greenfeld.org>
>> To: OLPC Devel <devel@lists.laptop.org>
>> Subject: Porting XO laptops to newer Linux kernels
>> Message-ID:
>>
>> <ca+caqjpkzng8rhjhzbnezadni2fhwnbohjr5gf9kjw3xkdz...@mail.gmail.com>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>>
>> It has been a few years (Fedora 18) since the original XO Laptop series
>> has
>> had any sort of major Operating System update.
>>
>> In order to support newer versions of Systemd, features found in newer
>> versions of the Linux kernel are required.  And from limited exploratory
>> work done years ago, the XO-1 mesh networking & XO-1.5 Camera drivers may
>> need fixing even though they are in upstream kernels.
>>
>> Are there any low-level kernel developers out there interested in porting
>> XO laptops (both x86 & ARM) to a Linux 4.x kernel or a later 3.x kernel so
>> they can be used with newer Linux distributions?  Or should we presume
>> that
>> all public XO laptop development (apart from minor patching) is officially
>> dead at this point?
>>
>> I presume hardware can be made available provided someone has the
>> interest.
>>
>> ---
>> SJG
>> -- next part --
>> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>> URL:
>> <http://lists.laptop.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20170916/6203a1b6/attachment-0001.html>
>>
>> --
>>
>> Message: 2
>> Date: Sun, 17 Sep 2017 11:14:00 +0100
>> From: Peter Robinson <pbrobin...@gmail.com>
>> To: Samuel Greenfeld <sam...@greenfeld.org>
>> Cc: OLPC Devel <devel@lists.laptop.org>
>> Subject: Re: Porting XO laptops to newer Linux kernels
>> Message-ID:
>>
>> 

Re: Porting XO laptops to newer Linux kernels

2017-09-17 Thread Peter Robinson
On Sun, Sep 17, 2017 at 4:28 AM, Samuel Greenfeld  wrote:
> It has been a few years (Fedora 18) since the original XO Laptop series has
> had any sort of major Operating System update.
>
> In order to support newer versions of Systemd, features found in newer
> versions of the Linux kernel are required.  And from limited exploratory
> work done years ago, the XO-1 mesh networking & XO-1.5 Camera drivers may
> need fixing even though they are in upstream kernels.
>
> Are there any low-level kernel developers out there interested in porting XO
> laptops (both x86 & ARM) to a Linux 4.x kernel or a later 3.x kernel so they
> can be used with newer Linux distributions?  Or should we presume that all
> public XO laptop development (apart from minor patching) is officially dead
> at this point?
>
> I presume hardware can be made available provided someone has the interest.

I would love to see someone get it all upstream so we could just
support them in vanilla Fedora. I can send HW but unfortunately I
don't have much time (or ability) to get these bits upstream.
___
Devel mailing list
Devel@lists.laptop.org
http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel


Re: [Server-devel] Apache 2.4.6 on CentOS and 2.4.10 on Debian/Raspbian

2017-05-26 Thread Peter Robinson
On Fri, May 26, 2017 at 1:37 AM, Adam Holt  wrote:
> Just FYI...
>
> Apache 2.4.6 was released July ~19, 2013 (used by IIAB/XSCE 6.2 on CentOS).
>
> Apache 2.4.10 was released Jule ~19, 2014 (used by IIAB/XSCE 6.2 on
> Debian/Raspbian).
>
> Apache 2.4.25 was release Dec ~19, 2016...if anybody knows any particularly
> important risks above that Internet-in-a-Box may face, please let us know!

This should be completely ignored in regards to, Red Hat in RHEL, and
as a direct result. CentOS manages the patches/CVEs in the version of
apache shipped and the risks are dealt with by the security team.
Details for all CVEs can be seen at
https://access.redhat.com/security/security-updates/
___
Server-devel mailing list
Server-devel@lists.laptop.org
http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/server-devel


Re: [Server-devel] ssh.service error on CentOS 7.3

2017-05-26 Thread Peter Robinson
On Thu, May 25, 2017 at 9:07 PM, Adam Holt  wrote:
> IIAB/XSCE 6.2 is installed on CentOS 7.3 on a NUC, and this error message
> appears whenever I open a Terminal:
>
>Redirecting to /bin/systemctl status  ssh.service
>Unit ssh.service could not be found.
>
> Does anyone know if/where I can fix that to sshd.service instead of
> ssh.service?

It's sshd.service not ssh.server as the error indicates. Make sure you
have openssh-server package installed.

> PS Apache crashed for no obvious reason, in the middle of the night after
> about 24hrs, but this was recitified with "systemctl restart httpd.service"
> so I'll keep an eye on it.  Great to see that IIAB/XSCE 6.2 largely runs on
> CentOS (not just Debian) thanks to George Hunt's extremely hard work!
>
> ___
> Server-devel mailing list
> Server-devel@lists.laptop.org
> http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/server-devel
>
___
Server-devel mailing list
Server-devel@lists.laptop.org
http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/server-devel


Re: [Server-devel] Fedora 24 released / Fedora 22 "end-of-life" July 19 2016

2016-09-22 Thread Peter Robinson
On Wed, Sep 7, 2016 at 5:26 PM, Adam Holt <h...@laptop.org> wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 6:23 AM, Peter Robinson <pbrobin...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 10:36 AM, Adam Holt <h...@laptop.org> wrote:
>> > Congrats to the F24 Team:
>> >
>> > The strategic question from a broad deployment perspective across the
>> > world's lower-middle class is increasingly Raspberry Pi support,
>> > according
>> > to so many grassroots/field groups I'm speaking with in 2016, very
>> > increasingly tempted to dump Fedora/CentOS for Raspbian, no matter what
>> > I
>> > tell them, so that learning technologies are not impeded by traditional
>> > education bureaucracy -- coming into schools thru the front/back and
>> > side
>> > doors.
>> >
>> > I personally hope this "only Raspbian can save us" sentiment is
>> > premature,
>> > in that I don't see the Raspbian ecosystem as being fully
>> > mature+resilient
>> > just yet -- and as such I *hope* CentOS (or Fedora, or Debian, or...)
>> > deliver increasingly competitive offerings on RPi 3, RPi 4, RPi 5 (or
>> > similar) into 2020~
>>
>> I have most of the bits in place for the RPi2/3 in F-24, just ran out
>> of time in the lead up to Beta to land the last bits. We will have
>> F-24 images for them soon and OOTB support in F-25.
>
>
> Thanks Peter!  Is this part of the F25 Alpha released last week and/or the
> F25 Beta expected in a month?

It's landed for Beta. Both the RPi2 and RPi3 both running 32-bit and a
single image for either them or any other device. More details will be
out in the coming days,

Peter
___
Server-devel mailing list
Server-devel@lists.laptop.org
http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/server-devel


Re: [Server-devel] Raspberry Pi 3

2016-09-22 Thread Peter Robinson
On Tue, Apr 5, 2016 at 3:49 PM, Tim Moody  wrote:
> For those who wish to experiment I have added several rpi3 images to
> http://xsce.org/downloads/xsce-release-6.0/rpi-images/

Fedora 25 will have Raspberry Pi support for both the RPi2 and RPi3 as
part of Beta due in a couple of weeks.

> These are based on the rpi2 images, so they are 32 bit, but they are
> configured to use the internal wifi as a hotspot.

In our builds (Fedora Minimal/Server etc editions) you'll be able to
dd the image out and boot it on either device without any changes.

> The Raspberry Pi folks also claim the 3 is 30% faster than the 2, even in 32
> bit mode, and have not yet announced plans for 64 bit support.

Having been testing both the 2 and 3 I can easily see this. It's
fairly basic... the v2 is 900mhz quad core, the v3 is 1.2ghz with 4
cores. So that's instantly 1/3 increase.

In RPi3 news I almost fell over when the firmware made it upstream
into linux-firmware the other day! Not all the drivers are upstream
yet though. I'm going to review how terrible and how many patches are
needed to try and get it landed for F-25 GA. Time will tell

http://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/firmware/linux-firmware.git/commit/?id=c4c07a8d1128d50a5c2885ceea1abbebaa82f820
___
Server-devel mailing list
Server-devel@lists.laptop.org
http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/server-devel


Re: [Server-devel] Fedora 24 released / Fedora 22 "end-of-life" July 19 2016

2016-06-23 Thread Peter Robinson
On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 5:35 PM, George Hunt <georgejh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Peter,
>
> What can you tell me about rpi3 bluetooth support in the F-24 images that
> will be coming out soon?

Haven't looked at it, we can't legally redistribute the firmware for
either the wifi or the BT. The initial release won't have OOTB support
for either (firmware or otherwise).

> By necessity, I've been playing with raspian, because there's been a lot of
> hype/hope for opportunistic device to device file sharing with rpi3.

Meh, it's never really taken off anywhere else

> On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 3:23 AM, Peter Robinson <pbrobin...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 10:36 AM, Adam Holt <h...@laptop.org> wrote:
>> > Congrats to the F24 Team:
>> >
>> > The strategic question from a broad deployment perspective across the
>> > world's lower-middle class is increasingly Raspberry Pi support,
>> > according
>> > to so many grassroots/field groups I'm speaking with in 2016, very
>> > increasingly tempted to dump Fedora/CentOS for Raspbian, no matter what
>> > I
>> > tell them, so that learning technologies are not impeded by traditional
>> > education bureaucracy -- coming into schools thru the front/back and
>> > side
>> > doors.
>> >
>> > I personally hope this "only Raspbian can save us" sentiment is
>> > premature,
>> > in that I don't see the Raspbian ecosystem as being fully
>> > mature+resilient
>> > just yet -- and as such I *hope* CentOS (or Fedora, or Debian, or...)
>> > deliver increasingly competitive offerings on RPi 3, RPi 4, RPi 5 (or
>> > similar) into 2020~
>>
>> I have most of the bits in place for the RPi2/3 in F-24, just ran out
>> of time in the lead up to Beta to land the last bits. We will have
>> F-24 images for them soon and OOTB support in F-25.
>>
>> P
>>
>> >
>> > From: Matthew Miller <mat...@fedoraproject.org>
>> > Date: Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 9:47 AM
>> > Subject: Fedora 24 is here!
>> > To: annou...@lists.fedoraproject.org
>> >
>> > Today the Fedora Project is pleased to announce the general release of
>> > Fedora 24. Download it now from our Get Fedora site:
>> >
>> >  Workstation: https://getfedora.org/workstation/
>> >  Server:  https://getfedora.org/server/
>> >  Cloud:   https://getfedora.org/cloud/
>> >
>> >  Spins:   https://spins.fedoraproject.org/
>> >  Labs:https://labs.fedoraproject.org/
>> >  ARM: https://arm.fedoraproject.org/
>> >
>> >
>> > Another Step in the Fedora Journey
>> > --
>> >
>> > The Fedora Project has embarked on a great journey... redefining what
>> > an operating system should be for users and developers. Such innovation
>> > does not come overnight, and Fedora 24 is one big step on the road to
>> > the next generation of Linux distributions. But that does not mean that
>> > Fedora 24 is some "interim" release; there are great new features for
>> > Fedora users to deploy in their production environments right now!
>> >
>> >
>> > Workstation
>> > ---
>> >
>> > The Fedora 24 Workstation release features GNOME 3.20, with many
>> > usability improvements such as easier input device and printer
>> > settings, a better search interface, shortcut windows for keyboard
>> > commands, and more convenient music controls.
>> >
>> > Flatpak (formerly xdg-app) is another building-block feature, with
>> > Software able to track installed Flatpaks and adding more features in
>> > the future as the technology develops. The Software app has also grown
>> > features to provide a full system upgrade directly from the desktop
>> > from one Fedora release to the next, and the ability to provide
>> > labeling as well as reviews of available software.
>> >
>> > Fedora 24 continues our work on the X replacement, Wayland, a
>> > next-generation graphics stack. Although this release will not default
>> > to Wayland, it includes many improvements and is available as an option
>> > for users to try out, and potentially will be the default stack in
>> > Fedora 25.
>> >
>> >
>> > Server
>> > --
>> >
>> > Fedora 24 Server edition is more streamlined and introduces more
>> > modularity, which will become a major fa

Re: [Server-devel] Fedora 24 released / Fedora 22 "end-of-life" July 19 2016

2016-06-23 Thread Peter Robinson
On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 10:36 AM, Adam Holt  wrote:
> Congrats to the F24 Team:
>
> The strategic question from a broad deployment perspective across the
> world's lower-middle class is increasingly Raspberry Pi support, according
> to so many grassroots/field groups I'm speaking with in 2016, very
> increasingly tempted to dump Fedora/CentOS for Raspbian, no matter what I
> tell them, so that learning technologies are not impeded by traditional
> education bureaucracy -- coming into schools thru the front/back and side
> doors.
>
> I personally hope this "only Raspbian can save us" sentiment is premature,
> in that I don't see the Raspbian ecosystem as being fully mature+resilient
> just yet -- and as such I *hope* CentOS (or Fedora, or Debian, or...)
> deliver increasingly competitive offerings on RPi 3, RPi 4, RPi 5 (or
> similar) into 2020~

I have most of the bits in place for the RPi2/3 in F-24, just ran out
of time in the lead up to Beta to land the last bits. We will have
F-24 images for them soon and OOTB support in F-25.

P

>
> From: Matthew Miller 
> Date: Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 9:47 AM
> Subject: Fedora 24 is here!
> To: annou...@lists.fedoraproject.org
>
> Today the Fedora Project is pleased to announce the general release of
> Fedora 24. Download it now from our Get Fedora site:
>
>  Workstation: https://getfedora.org/workstation/
>  Server:  https://getfedora.org/server/
>  Cloud:   https://getfedora.org/cloud/
>
>  Spins:   https://spins.fedoraproject.org/
>  Labs:https://labs.fedoraproject.org/
>  ARM: https://arm.fedoraproject.org/
>
>
> Another Step in the Fedora Journey
> --
>
> The Fedora Project has embarked on a great journey... redefining what
> an operating system should be for users and developers. Such innovation
> does not come overnight, and Fedora 24 is one big step on the road to
> the next generation of Linux distributions. But that does not mean that
> Fedora 24 is some "interim" release; there are great new features for
> Fedora users to deploy in their production environments right now!
>
>
> Workstation
> ---
>
> The Fedora 24 Workstation release features GNOME 3.20, with many
> usability improvements such as easier input device and printer
> settings, a better search interface, shortcut windows for keyboard
> commands, and more convenient music controls.
>
> Flatpak (formerly xdg-app) is another building-block feature, with
> Software able to track installed Flatpaks and adding more features in
> the future as the technology develops. The Software app has also grown
> features to provide a full system upgrade directly from the desktop
> from one Fedora release to the next, and the ability to provide
> labeling as well as reviews of available software.
>
> Fedora 24 continues our work on the X replacement, Wayland, a
> next-generation graphics stack. Although this release will not default
> to Wayland, it includes many improvements and is available as an option
> for users to try out, and potentially will be the default stack in
> Fedora 25.
>
>
> Server
> --
>
> Fedora 24 Server edition is more streamlined and introduces more
> modularity, which will become a major factor in future Fedora releases,
> even as unnecessary packages were removed and the installer has a
> smaller footprint.
>
> FreeIPA 4.3 is a major feature for Fedora 24 Server.
> FreeIPA is an integrated security information management solution. This
> new version of FreeIPA features simplified replica installation and
> improved replication technology management.
>
>
> Cloud
> -
>
> Fedora is on its way to being the best platform for containerized
> applications, from base Fedora container images to a full-featured
> platform as a service to run and manage them.
>
> As we continue on this part of the journey, we are packaging OpenShift
> Origin so it is easy to deploy. OpenShift Origin is a Platform as a
> Service system based around Kubernetes, a production-grade container
> orchestration project. OpenShift Origin is optimized for application
> development and deployment. Origin makes it easy for developers to get
> started building applications in containers and for operators to manage
> them.
>
> While not shipped in Fedora 24, per se, we have new infrastructure for
> developing container images with applications layered on top of the
> base Fedora Docker image. Fedora Developers will also see a layered
> image build service, which provides tools for Fedora contributors to
> start creating and shipping layered container images in Fedora 25 and
> beyond.
>
>
> Spins and Labs
> --
>
> Fedora Spins and Labs are alternative Fedora versions that offer
> additional desktop environments, or other custom collections of
> software, alongside the three editions that are the primary focus for
> the project.
>
> Our Spins make it easy for people to use other desktop environments.
> 

Re: [Server-devel] Fwd: Announcing the release of Fedora 24 Beta for aarch64!

2016-05-10 Thread Peter Robinson
On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 9:39 PM, Adam Holt <h...@laptop.org> wrote:
> On May 10, 2016 3:21 PM, "Peter Robinson" <pbrobin...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> We do have initial pine64 support, I plan to improve it more for GA and
>> have a disk image for use.
>
> Great News!
>
> Tangentially: are there opinions emerging on the physical ruggedizability of
> 2GB Pine64 v. 1GB RPi3 (incl WiFi) for developing world education, and harsh
> environmental/ergonomic conditions, as more people start banging on both?

I'm sure I've said it before, it's not high quality. My alpha board
arrived bent (still works somehow) but the hackaday review [1] sums up
my opinion quite well. This isn't a robust device, and with up to 2Gb
of RAM there's a lot more ARMv7 devices that offer better value for
money. At a max of 2Gb of RAM a 64 bit chip offers absolutely ZERO
advantage and it's built for a price and I'm sorry but "harsh
environment" is not anywhere in that. Honestly a BeagleBone would do
better and has much better build and likely better performance for not
much more price (yes, I do class double the price in this class as not
much more)

[1] http://hackaday.com/2016/04/21/pine64-the-un-review/

>> Peter
>>
>> On 10 May 2016 18:44, "Adam Holt" <h...@laptop.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> Not sure the 64-bit implications of this for RPi3 and Pine64, but FYI.
>>>
>>> -- Forwarded message --
>>> From: "Peter Robinson" <pbrobin...@gmail.com>
>>> Date: May 10, 2016 1:34 PM
>>> Subject: Announcing the release of Fedora 24 Beta for aarch64!
>>> To: <a...@lists.fedoraproject.org>,
>>> <devel-annou...@lists.fedoraproject.org>,
>>> <annou...@lists.fedoraproject.org>, <second...@lists.fedoraproject.org>
>>> Cc:
>>>
>>>> The Fedora 24 Beta for aarch64 is here, on schedule for our planned June
>>>> final
>>>> release. For Beta we have added Cloud and Docker base images.
>>>> Download the prerelease from our Get Fedora site:
>>>>
>>>> -   Get Fedora 24 Beta Server: make use of the very latest server-based
>>>> technologies available in the open source community
>>>>
>>>> https://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/fedora-secondary/releases/test/24_Beta/Server/aarch64/
>>>>
>>>> -   Get Fedora 24 Beta Cloud: build scale-out computing and utilize the
>>>> next
>>>> generation of container deployment technology
>>>>
>>>> https://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/fedora-secondary/releases/test/24_Beta/CloudImages/aarch64/
>>>>
>>>> https://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/fedora-secondary/releases/test/24_Beta/Docker/aarch64/images/
>>>>
>>>> What is the Beta release?
>>>> -
>>>>
>>>> The Beta release contains all the exciting features of Fedora 24's
>>>> editions in a form that anyone can help test. This testing, guided by
>>>> the Fedora QA team, helps us target and identify bugs from the Alpha
>>>> version. When most of these bugs are fixed, we make a Beta release
>>>> available. A Beta release is code-complete and bears a very strong
>>>> resemblance to the third and final release. The final release of Fedora
>>>> 24 is expected in June. We need your help to make Fedora 24 the best
>>>> yet. Please take some time to download and try out the Beta and make
>>>> sure the things that are important to you are working. If you find a
>>>> bug, please report it – every bug you uncover is a chance to improve the
>>>> experience for millions of Fedora users worldwide. This is a great
>>>> opportunity for non-programmers to contribute back to fedora. Together,
>>>> we can make Fedora rock-solid. We have a culture of adding new features
>>>> to software and pushing fixes to the upstream developers at the same
>>>> time. This means your feedback will help improve not only Fedora but
>>>> Linux and free software on the whole.
>>>>
>>>> -   <https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Releases/24/Schedule>
>>>> -   <https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_file_a_bug_report>
>>>>
>>>> Fedora-Wide Changes
>>>> ---
>>>>
>>>> Under the hood, glibc has moved to 2.23. This update includes better
>>>> performance, increased security, bugfixes, improvements to POSIX
>>>> compliance, and additional locales. The new library is backwards
>>

Re: [Server-devel] Fwd: Announcing the release of Fedora 24 Beta for aarch64!

2016-05-10 Thread Peter Robinson
We do have initial pine64 support, I plan to improve it more for GA and
have a disk image for use.

Peter
On 10 May 2016 18:44, "Adam Holt" <h...@laptop.org> wrote:

> Not sure the 64-bit implications of this for RPi3 and Pine64, but FYI.
> -- Forwarded message ------
> From: "Peter Robinson" <pbrobin...@gmail.com>
> Date: May 10, 2016 1:34 PM
> Subject: Announcing the release of Fedora 24 Beta for aarch64!
> To: <a...@lists.fedoraproject.org>, <devel-annou...@lists.fedoraproject.org>,
> <annou...@lists.fedoraproject.org>, <second...@lists.fedoraproject.org>
> Cc:
>
> The Fedora 24 Beta for aarch64 is here, on schedule for our planned June
> final
> release. For Beta we have added Cloud and Docker base images.
> Download the prerelease from our Get Fedora site:
>
> -   Get Fedora 24 Beta Server: make use of the very latest server-based
> technologies available in the open source community
>
> https://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/fedora-secondary/releases/test/24_Beta/Server/aarch64/
>
> -   Get Fedora 24 Beta Cloud: build scale-out computing and utilize the
> next
> generation of container deployment technology
>
> https://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/fedora-secondary/releases/test/24_Beta/CloudImages/aarch64/
>
> https://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/fedora-secondary/releases/test/24_Beta/Docker/aarch64/images/
>
> What is the Beta release?
> -
>
> The Beta release contains all the exciting features of Fedora 24's
> editions in a form that anyone can help test. This testing, guided by
> the Fedora QA team, helps us target and identify bugs from the Alpha
> version. When most of these bugs are fixed, we make a Beta release
> available. A Beta release is code-complete and bears a very strong
> resemblance to the third and final release. The final release of Fedora
> 24 is expected in June. We need your help to make Fedora 24 the best
> yet. Please take some time to download and try out the Beta and make
> sure the things that are important to you are working. If you find a
> bug, please report it – every bug you uncover is a chance to improve the
> experience for millions of Fedora users worldwide. This is a great
> opportunity for non-programmers to contribute back to fedora. Together,
> we can make Fedora rock-solid. We have a culture of adding new features
> to software and pushing fixes to the upstream developers at the same
> time. This means your feedback will help improve not only Fedora but
> Linux and free software on the whole.
>
> -   <https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Releases/24/Schedule>
> -   <https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_file_a_bug_report>
>
> Fedora-Wide Changes
> ---
>
> Under the hood, glibc has moved to 2.23. This update includes better
> performance, increased security, bugfixes, improvements to POSIX
> compliance, and additional locales. The new library is backwards
> compatible with the version of glibc that was shipped in Fedora 23.
> We've also updated the system compiler to GCC 6 and rebuilt all of our
> packages with it, providing greater code optimization and improved
> program error catching.
>
> Server
> --
>
> Fedora 24 beta server edition has also been more streamlined. Unnecessary
> packages were removed and the installer has a smaller footprint. FreeIPA
> 4.3, an integrated security information management solution is now
> included. The installation of replicas is streamlined by adding a
> replica promotion method for new installs. A new topology plugin has
> also been added to this version of FreeIPA that automatically manages
> new replication segment creation. An effective replica topology
> visualization tool is now available in the webUI.
>
> Cloud
> -
>
> We are working hard to make Fedora the best platform for containerized
> applications, from base Fedora container images to a full-featured
> platform as a service to run and manage them. To meet this goal, we are
> packaging OpenShift Origin so it is easy to deploy. OpenShift Origin is
> a distribution of Kubernetes, a container cluster manager from Google.
> It is optimized for enterprise application development and deployment.
> Origin makes it easy for developers to get started building applications
> in containers and for operators to manage them.
>
> Issues and Details
> --
>
> This is a Beta release. As such, we expect that you may encounter bugs
> or missing features. To report issues encountered during testing,
> contact the Fedora QA team via the mailing list or in #fedora-qa on
> Freenode. As testing progresses, common issues are tracked on the Common
> F24 Bugs page.
>
> -   <h

Re: [Server-devel] [XSCE] Re: [UKids] Raspberri Pi/clone(s) most ruggedizable for OLPC fieldwork?

2016-04-06 Thread Peter Robinson
Not sure how they do that. If it's done with something like ansible it
would be very easy to migrate to new releases.

Peter

On Wed, Apr 6, 2016 at 2:23 PM, Tim Moody <t...@timmoody.com> wrote:
> Jerry and George spent a lot of time migrating legacy XS code from F18 to 
> F22.  There is more work to get to F24.  I agree that we want to get there.
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Peter Robinson [mailto:pbrobin...@gmail.com]
>> Sent: Wednesday, April 06, 2016 6:42 AM
>> To: Tim Moody <t...@timmoody.com>
>> Cc: xsce-de...@googlegroups.com; Adam Holt <h...@laptop.org>; server-
>> devel <server-devel@lists.laptop.org>
>> Subject: Re: [Server-devel] [XSCE] Re: [UKids] Raspberri Pi/clone(s) most
>> ruggedizable for OLPC fieldwork?
>>
>> On Sat, Apr 2, 2016 at 8:15 PM, Tim Moody <t...@timmoody.com> wrote:
>> > For xsce I'd start with f22.  You can look at the rpi images on
>> > xsce.org/downloads
>>
>> They're 32 bit ARMv7 are they not? Personally I'd be starting with Fedora 24
>> as you'll have support until July 2017, instead of the 3 or so months left 
>> for for
>> F-22. Also for an aarch64 device F-23+ is highly recommended.
>>
>> > Sent from my Samsung Galaxy smartphone.
>> >
>> >
>> >  Original message 
>> > From: Alex Perez <ape...@alexperez.com>
>> > Date: 4/2/2016 2:12 PM (GMT-05:00)
>> > To: Adam Holt <h...@laptop.org>
>> > Cc: server-devel <server-devel@lists.laptop.org>,
>> > xsce-de...@googlegroups.com
>> > Subject: [XSCE] Re: [UKids] Raspberri Pi/clone(s) most ruggedizable
>> > for OLPC fieldwork?
>> >
>> >
>> > On Feb 6, 2016, at 1:10 PM, Adam Holt <h...@laptop.org> wrote:
>> >
>> > Will the $15 http://pine64.com (which just raised $1.7M) become
>> > genuinely productizable for truly hassle-free field use with 128GB
>> > MicroSD cards by late 2016?  On the bright side, it accommodates 128GB
>> > maximum, which is exactly what we need on the high end in 2016.
>> >
>> >
>> > Looping back on this...
>> >
>> > My PINE64 arrived in the mail today. Mine is the 2GB RAM variant, with
>> > gigabit ethernet, but no bluetooth or Wi-Fi (which is an add-in
>> > module)
>> >
>> >  I actually have a couple of 200GB microSD cards that I just acquired,
>> > and I’ll be putting it through its paces. The SanDisk
>> > SDSDQUAN-200G-G4A retails for $249, but the actual street prices are
>> > $80 (on Amazon)
>> >
>> > I suspect it will work fine in the PINE64. Does anyone here have any
>> > recommendations for putting XSCE through its paces, or otherwise
>> > stress-testing the install, besides normal benchmarking of static HTTP
>> > page load performance.
>> >
>> > Regards,
>> > Alex Perez
>> >
>> >
>> > ___
>> > Server-devel mailing list
>> > Server-devel@lists.laptop.org
>> > http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/server-devel
>> >
___
Server-devel mailing list
Server-devel@lists.laptop.org
http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/server-devel


Re: [Server-devel] [XSCE] Re: [UKids] Raspberri Pi/clone(s) most ruggedizable for OLPC fieldwork?

2016-04-06 Thread Peter Robinson
On Sat, Apr 2, 2016 at 8:15 PM, Tim Moody  wrote:
> For xsce I'd start with f22.  You can look at the rpi images on
> xsce.org/downloads

They're 32 bit ARMv7 are they not? Personally I'd be starting with
Fedora 24 as you'll have support until July 2017, instead of the 3 or
so months left for for F-22. Also for an aarch64 device F-23+ is
highly recommended.

> Sent from my Samsung Galaxy smartphone.
>
>
>  Original message 
> From: Alex Perez 
> Date: 4/2/2016 2:12 PM (GMT-05:00)
> To: Adam Holt 
> Cc: server-devel ,
> xsce-de...@googlegroups.com
> Subject: [XSCE] Re: [UKids] Raspberri Pi/clone(s) most ruggedizable for OLPC
> fieldwork?
>
>
> On Feb 6, 2016, at 1:10 PM, Adam Holt  wrote:
>
> Will the $15 http://pine64.com (which just raised $1.7M) become genuinely
> productizable for truly hassle-free field use with 128GB MicroSD cards by
> late 2016?  On the bright side, it accommodates 128GB maximum, which is
> exactly what we need on the high end in 2016.
>
>
> Looping back on this...
>
> My PINE64 arrived in the mail today. Mine is the 2GB RAM variant, with
> gigabit ethernet, but no bluetooth or Wi-Fi (which is an add-in module)
>
>  I actually have a couple of 200GB microSD cards that I just acquired, and
> I’ll be putting it through its paces. The SanDisk SDSDQUAN-200G-G4A retails
> for $249, but the actual street prices are $80 (on Amazon)
>
> I suspect it will work fine in the PINE64. Does anyone here have any
> recommendations for putting XSCE through its paces, or otherwise
> stress-testing the install, besides normal benchmarking of static HTTP page
> load performance.
>
> Regards,
> Alex Perez
>
>
> ___
> Server-devel mailing list
> Server-devel@lists.laptop.org
> http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/server-devel
>
___
Server-devel mailing list
Server-devel@lists.laptop.org
http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/server-devel


Re: [Server-devel] [UKids] Raspberri Pi/clone(s) most ruggedizable for OLPC fieldwork?

2016-04-06 Thread Peter Robinson
On Sat, Apr 2, 2016 at 7:23 PM, Adam Holt  wrote:
> Awesome we can start banging on this long-awaited HW!.
>
> Who can recommend the best/emerging/viable Fedora 22 vs. 23 vs. 24 options
> to Alex?

Fedora 24 definitely here, I'll actually be producing aarch64 images
shortly for this which will include a level of support for the PINE64,
we don't get have USB or ethernet sadly, but I hope to have at least
usb soon.

I would note that, at least for the pre prod model I have, this device
is by no means "ruggedized"  the board even has a bend in it from
postage.

Peter

> On Sat, Apr 2, 2016 at 2:12 PM, Alex Perez  wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Feb 6, 2016, at 1:10 PM, Adam Holt  wrote:
>>
>> Will the $15 http://pine64.com (which just raised $1.7M) become genuinely
>> productizable for truly hassle-free field use with 128GB MicroSD cards by
>> late 2016?  On the bright side, it accommodates 128GB maximum, which is
>> exactly what we need on the high end in 2016.
>>
>>
>> Looping back on this...
>>
>> My PINE64 arrived in the mail today. Mine is the 2GB RAM variant, with
>> gigabit ethernet, but no bluetooth or Wi-Fi (which is an add-in module)
>>
>>  I actually have a couple of 200GB microSD cards that I just acquired, and
>> I’ll be putting it through its paces. The SanDisk SDSDQUAN-200G-G4A retails
>> for $249, but the actual street prices are $80 (on Amazon)
>>
>> I suspect it will work fine in the PINE64. Does anyone here have any
>> recommendations for putting XSCE through its paces, or otherwise
>> stress-testing the install, besides normal benchmarking of static HTTP page
>> load performance.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Alex Perez
>>
>> --
>> Unsung Heroes of OLPC, interviewed live @ http://unleashkids.org !
>
>
> ___
> Server-devel mailing list
> Server-devel@lists.laptop.org
> http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/server-devel
>
___
Server-devel mailing list
Server-devel@lists.laptop.org
http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/server-devel


Re: [Server-devel] Rapberri Pi/clone(s) most ruggidizable for OLPC fieldwork?

2016-02-07 Thread Peter Robinson
> You are the expert here (on the low end especially, with $5 Raspberri Pi
> Zeros!) leading OLE refugee camp deployments across many countries.  Whereas
> most OLPC-like schools I talk to want to spend $100 (or more) for a
> mini-server that's truly resilient for years in tropical environments,
> against rodents/humidity, untrained-operators especially, and oh yeah kids
> smacking them around, stealing SD cards etc ;)
>
> (Yes some of us proudly confess we use XO-1.5 and similar mini-servers on
> the low end, e.g. in many after-school programs, despite Tony's friendly
> fundamentalism that XO's should not be allowed to serve others nearby,
> recycling these XO-1.5's into family/mentoring learning environments is a
> huge win, but more about that another day :-)
>
> Looking into the future, so many of these community deployment leaders want
> something beefier right now.  Sometimes even a hard disk drive "for just $50
> more" (that's the fantasy anyway!)  Even now that 4 or 8 GB RAM appears
> essentially free--it does not fit on most of these tiny motherboards.  Nor
> does a 1TB hard disk drive fit, that many of these groups dream of (and are
> generally happy to shove in a live/spare HDD inside, when the prior one
> dies!)
>
> So, in conclusion we're exactly 4 years into RPi era (began February 2012)
> and showing a lot of maturity^h^hgrayhair now :)  I assume there are a
> gazillion Raspberry Pi clones -- the central question is which ones we
> should narrow down upon, now that push has come to shove in 2016, serving
> educational microserver applications (school and non-schools) across those
> ~4 billion "offline" people now asking us for that:
>
> Will the $15 http://pine64.com (which just raised $1.7M) become genuinely
> productizable for truly hassle-free field use with 128GB MicroSD cards by
> late 2016?  On the bright side, it accommodates 128GB maximum, which is
> exactly what we need on the high end in 2016.
> Or are traditional RPi 2 clones, such as Banana Pi's and this $40 Korean
> unit more practical in the short-term?
> http://www.computerworld.com/article/3030251/computer-hardware/make-a-40-linux-or-android-pc-with-new-raspberry-pi-2-rival.html
> Understanding full well this is as much a plastics / industrial design
> question / economies-of-scale question first-and-foremost, more than a
> computer specs question per se.  Still today, few people appreciate (or even
> understand) how much OLPC's contribution a decade ago was a revolution in
> plastics/maintainability/droppability.  When Apple/Google are daily throwing
> gigahertz specs at us, that marketing-centric misunderstanding is of course
> only natural :/
>
> Etc, Thanks in advance to those who've done so much more RPi field research
> and can share!!

So having read all of the above I'm not sure what you're asking. Do
you want a device that does end user sugar style interface or do you
want a device for a server?

If the later I suggest two things that should be looked for when
looking for a cheap ARM device to do server:
1) SoC attached network (100Mb or Gb)
2) SoC attached SATA port

Without those two you generally get terrible performance. The
Raspberry Pi is terrible for this as everything is USB attached
through a single (buggy!) USB controller. In the case of things like
the PINE64 above it has a SoC attached network but not storage.

As is stands at the moment some of the best cheap devices for server
style devices is AllWinner A20 devices (CubieTruck, BananaPi and
friends) and i.MX6 devices (Wandboard, CuBox-i and friends)

Peter
___
Server-devel mailing list
Server-devel@lists.laptop.org
http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/server-devel


Re: [Server-devel] Rapberri Pi/clone(s) most ruggidizable for OLPC fieldwork?

2016-02-07 Thread Peter Robinson
> You are the expert here (on the low end especially, with $5 Raspberri Pi
> Zeros!) leading OLE refugee camp deployments across many countries.  Whereas
> most OLPC-like schools I talk to want to spend $100 (or more) for a
> mini-server that's truly resilient for years in tropical environments,
> against rodents/humidity, untrained-operators especially, and oh yeah kids
> smacking them around, stealing SD cards etc ;)
>
> (Yes some of us proudly confess we use XO-1.5 and similar mini-servers on
> the low end, e.g. in many after-school programs, despite Tony's friendly
> fundamentalism that XO's should not be allowed to serve others nearby,
> recycling these XO-1.5's into family/mentoring learning environments is a
> huge win, but more about that another day :-)
>
> Looking into the future, so many of these community deployment leaders want
> something beefier right now.  Sometimes even a hard disk drive "for just $50
> more" (that's the fantasy anyway!)  Even now that 4 or 8 GB RAM appears
> essentially free--it does not fit on most of these tiny motherboards.  Nor
> does a 1TB hard disk drive fit, that many of these groups dream of (and are
> generally happy to shove in a live/spare HDD inside, when the prior one
> dies!)
>
> So, in conclusion we're exactly 4 years into RPi era (began February 2012)
> and showing a lot of maturity^h^hgrayhair now :)  I assume there are a
> gazillion Raspberry Pi clones -- the central question is which ones we
> should narrow down upon, now that push has come to shove in 2016, serving
> educational microserver applications (school and non-schools) across those
> ~4 billion "offline" people now asking us for that:
>
> Will the $15 http://pine64.com (which just raised $1.7M) become genuinely
> productizable for truly hassle-free field use with 128GB MicroSD cards by
> late 2016?  On the bright side, it accommodates 128GB maximum, which is
> exactly what we need on the high end in 2016.
> Or are traditional RPi 2 clones, such as Banana Pi's and this $40 Korean
> unit more practical in the short-term?
> http://www.computerworld.com/article/3030251/computer-hardware/make-a-40-linux-or-android-pc-with-new-raspberry-pi-2-rival.html
> Understanding full well this is as much a plastics / industrial design
> question / economies-of-scale question first-and-foremost, more than a
> computer specs question per se.  Still today, few people appreciate (or even
> understand) how much OLPC's contribution a decade ago was a revolution in
> plastics/maintainability/droppability.  When Apple/Google are daily throwing
> gigahertz specs at us, that marketing-centric misunderstanding is of course
> only natural :/
>
> Etc, Thanks in advance to those who've done so much more RPi field research
> and can share!!

So having read all of the above I'm not sure what you're asking. Do
you want a device that does end user sugar style interface or do you
want a device for a server?

If the later I suggest two things that should be looked for when
looking for a cheap ARM device to do server:
1) SoC attached network (100Mb or Gb)
2) SoC attached SATA port

Without those two you generally get terrible performance. The
Raspberry Pi is terrible for this as everything is USB attached
through a single (buggy!) USB controller. In the case of things like
the PINE64 above it has a SoC attached network but not storage.

As is stands at the moment some of the best cheap devices for server
style devices is AllWinner A20 devices (CubieTruck, BananaPi and
friends) and i.MX6 devices (Wandboard, CuBox-i and friends)

Peter
___
Devel mailing list
Devel@lists.laptop.org
http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel


Re: [Server-devel] Raspberry Pi/clone(s) most ruggedizable for OLPC fieldwork?

2016-02-07 Thread Peter Robinson
On Sun, Feb 7, 2016 at 2:07 PM, Adam Holt <h...@laptop.org> wrote:
> On Feb 7, 2016 3:22 AM, "Peter Robinson" <pbrobin...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> things like
>> the PINE64 above it has a SoC attached network but not storage.
>
> Both SATA (real TB+ disks) and Ethernet (external Wi-Fi AP antennae) are
> icing-on-the-cake we will both strongly consider.
>
>> As is stands at the moment some of the best cheap devices for server
>> style devices is AllWinner A20 devices (CubieTruck, BananaPi and
>> friends) and i.MX6 devices (Wandboard, CuBox-i and friends)
>
> Hugely helpful.
>
> Key criterion for offline/remote deployments: does this accept 128GB MicroSD
> cards, so 2016's developing world $50-100 "knowledge hotspots" increasingly
> now become very real?  (Aside: 256GB MicroSD cards will be part of this well
> before 2020, apparently beyond the capability of most of these SoC's.)
>
> Peter, does Fedora 24 have a shot to one day run on the "$19" Pine64 Plus?!
> Even if it's ambiguous whether it can truly contain 2GB RAM as advertised,
> Pine64 claims to run up to 70C which is very promising if true.  ($15 Pine64
> contains 512MB, and $19 "Pine64 Plus" contains 1GB RAM.  Their 2GB RAM story
> is very attractive, but may be marketing vaporware for now?)

Yes, I've got one awaiting for me on my return to London. Kernel isn't
upstream, nor is u-boot, I'm not sure how big the patches are, I'm
hoping it'll all be landable in F-24.

> Or...would you recommend other ruggedized platforms to run Fedora, for
> schools/libraries/clinics needing this in place by January 1st 2017?
> (Thankfully size does not matter.  Cubox is very cute, and we will use it if
> it's the most rugged, but physically larger units are also fine too.
> Certainly Fedora remains a priority for now, given schoolserver.org's
> obvious OLPC legacy +)

Basically I'd want a specs set, I'm not sure why you'd want to use a
128Gb SD card over an actual SSD or HDD, the later are a lot more
robust. There's literally 100s of possible devices that would possibly
meet your needs, what would be great is a list of must haves and a
list of nice to haves and from that I could give a list of possible
options.
___
Server-devel mailing list
Server-devel@lists.laptop.org
http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/server-devel


Re: Raspberry Pi/clone(s) most ruggedizable for OLPC fieldwork?

2016-02-07 Thread Peter Robinson
On Sun, Feb 7, 2016 at 2:07 PM, Adam Holt <h...@laptop.org> wrote:
> On Feb 7, 2016 3:22 AM, "Peter Robinson" <pbrobin...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> things like
>> the PINE64 above it has a SoC attached network but not storage.
>
> Both SATA (real TB+ disks) and Ethernet (external Wi-Fi AP antennae) are
> icing-on-the-cake we will both strongly consider.
>
>> As is stands at the moment some of the best cheap devices for server
>> style devices is AllWinner A20 devices (CubieTruck, BananaPi and
>> friends) and i.MX6 devices (Wandboard, CuBox-i and friends)
>
> Hugely helpful.
>
> Key criterion for offline/remote deployments: does this accept 128GB MicroSD
> cards, so 2016's developing world $50-100 "knowledge hotspots" increasingly
> now become very real?  (Aside: 256GB MicroSD cards will be part of this well
> before 2020, apparently beyond the capability of most of these SoC's.)
>
> Peter, does Fedora 24 have a shot to one day run on the "$19" Pine64 Plus?!
> Even if it's ambiguous whether it can truly contain 2GB RAM as advertised,
> Pine64 claims to run up to 70C which is very promising if true.  ($15 Pine64
> contains 512MB, and $19 "Pine64 Plus" contains 1GB RAM.  Their 2GB RAM story
> is very attractive, but may be marketing vaporware for now?)

Yes, I've got one awaiting for me on my return to London. Kernel isn't
upstream, nor is u-boot, I'm not sure how big the patches are, I'm
hoping it'll all be landable in F-24.

> Or...would you recommend other ruggedized platforms to run Fedora, for
> schools/libraries/clinics needing this in place by January 1st 2017?
> (Thankfully size does not matter.  Cubox is very cute, and we will use it if
> it's the most rugged, but physically larger units are also fine too.
> Certainly Fedora remains a priority for now, given schoolserver.org's
> obvious OLPC legacy +)

Basically I'd want a specs set, I'm not sure why you'd want to use a
128Gb SD card over an actual SSD or HDD, the later are a lot more
robust. There's literally 100s of possible devices that would possibly
meet your needs, what would be great is a list of must haves and a
list of nice to haves and from that I could give a list of possible
options.
___
Devel mailing list
Devel@lists.laptop.org
http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel


Re: [Server-devel] Two (minimal) goals for a kernel for XO1.5 based upon fc22?

2015-05-28 Thread Peter Robinson
On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 4:17 AM, Samuel Greenfeld sam...@greenfeld.org wrote:
 Given I looked into this before with F22 Beta(*), I ran OLPC OS Builder
 tonight, excluding nothing from all repositories, and let it loose.

Funny! I was doing exactly the same yesterday for the 1.5!

 There were a few more minor issues found with the build process.  But I
 managed to build an image with the stock Fedora 4.x kernel, and primarily
 F22 parts.

Can we create a f22 branch on the o-o-b git repo so we can all
collaborate on this from one central place?

 However the stock Fedora kernel does not have a hardcoded kernel command
 line like OLPC kernels do, and trying to manually provide the command line
 to boot a Fedora kernel still hung for me after OFW stated the ramdisk was
 being loaded.

OK, got the command line or overview of what's required here? I have a
branch of a multi platform MMP2 (1.75) kernel I was trying to get to
boot on the 1.75 and having similar issues.

 I may look into this a bit more before resorting back to OLPC's 3.10 kernel
 and seeing what works with that.

 (*) http://lists.sugarlabs.org/archive/sugar-devel/2015-April/050035.html

 On Wed, May 27, 2015 at 6:28 PM, James Cameron qu...@laptop.org wrote:

 On Wed, May 27, 2015 at 06:31:28AM -0700, George Hunt wrote:
  If I set just the goals of getting keyboard input, and display output,
  what
  problems will I face trying to use defconfig_xo1.5 from
  [1]dev.laptop.org
  (x86-3.3 branch)?
 
  Does anyone have a config file that works on the XO1.5 on a Fedora
  release
  later than FC18 that I might springboard from?

 We used the olpc-3.10 branch to generate kernels for systems later
 than Fedora 18.

 --
 James Cameron
 http://quozl.linux.org.au/
 ___
 Devel mailing list
 de...@lists.laptop.org
 http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel



 ___
 Server-devel mailing list
 Server-devel@lists.laptop.org
 http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/server-devel

___
Server-devel mailing list
Server-devel@lists.laptop.org
http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/server-devel


Re: [Server-devel] Two (minimal) goals for a kernel for XO1.5 based upon fc22?

2015-05-28 Thread Peter Robinson
On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 4:17 AM, Samuel Greenfeld sam...@greenfeld.org wrote:
 Given I looked into this before with F22 Beta(*), I ran OLPC OS Builder
 tonight, excluding nothing from all repositories, and let it loose.

Funny! I was doing exactly the same yesterday for the 1.5!

 There were a few more minor issues found with the build process.  But I
 managed to build an image with the stock Fedora 4.x kernel, and primarily
 F22 parts.

Can we create a f22 branch on the o-o-b git repo so we can all
collaborate on this from one central place?

 However the stock Fedora kernel does not have a hardcoded kernel command
 line like OLPC kernels do, and trying to manually provide the command line
 to boot a Fedora kernel still hung for me after OFW stated the ramdisk was
 being loaded.

OK, got the command line or overview of what's required here? I have a
branch of a multi platform MMP2 (1.75) kernel I was trying to get to
boot on the 1.75 and having similar issues.

 I may look into this a bit more before resorting back to OLPC's 3.10 kernel
 and seeing what works with that.

 (*) http://lists.sugarlabs.org/archive/sugar-devel/2015-April/050035.html

 On Wed, May 27, 2015 at 6:28 PM, James Cameron qu...@laptop.org wrote:

 On Wed, May 27, 2015 at 06:31:28AM -0700, George Hunt wrote:
  If I set just the goals of getting keyboard input, and display output,
  what
  problems will I face trying to use defconfig_xo1.5 from
  [1]dev.laptop.org
  (x86-3.3 branch)?
 
  Does anyone have a config file that works on the XO1.5 on a Fedora
  release
  later than FC18 that I might springboard from?

 We used the olpc-3.10 branch to generate kernels for systems later
 than Fedora 18.

 --
 James Cameron
 http://quozl.linux.org.au/
 ___
 Devel mailing list
 Devel@lists.laptop.org
 http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel



 ___
 Server-devel mailing list
 server-de...@lists.laptop.org
 http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/server-devel

___
Devel mailing list
Devel@lists.laptop.org
http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel


Re: [Server-devel] Two (minimal) goals for a kernel for XO1.5 based upon fc22?

2015-05-28 Thread Peter Robinson
On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 9:05 AM, James Cameron qu...@laptop.org wrote:
 The v4.1-rc5 kernel boots fine on XO-1.5, though there are a few
 things to be fixed; screen blanks on boot, camera LED stays on and
 camera doesn't work, temperature of CPU is not accessible, and suspend
 fails to complete.  Some of these probably my haste.

Even more awesome, some of these are probably missing or changed
kernel options. Some of those kernel bits have changed a lot upstream.

 This meets George's requirements.

 The patch relative to v4.1-rc5:
 http://dev.laptop.org/~quozl/y/1YxsfX.txt

Do we have a 4.1 branch in the olpc-kernel git repo yet? Is it worth
it or would it be worthwhile me setting up one against the Fedora
upstream to allow us to more easily work there, rebase etc?

 The boot dmesg:
 http://dev.laptop.org/~quozl/z/1Yxsg9.txt

 You might take your favourite Fedora 22 kernel, apply that patch,
 fixing any conflicts, reconfigure the kernel, and build.

 Or you might compare the xo_1.5_defconfig against the Fedora 22 kernel
 .config.

I'm happy to help there.

 If you guys can help test and fix these apparently minor problems,
 then I can pull upstream into olpc-kernel repository and make a later
 branch.

Can we setup a git branch sooner rather than later as a central place
to pull the latest and greatest from.

 Chances are it would work fine with XO-1 too, with a bit of
 configuration merging.

Happy to help there. We likely need to rebase a few patches for camera
modules etc from the older branches, happy to help there where
possible.

 However, this doesn't help with XO-1.75 and XO-4, which are still just
 as large a job as they ever were.  ;-{  x86 is so easy.

I've got a possible route for the 1.75 as mentioned above, once we get
a 4.1 branch I can add that and see how much further on we can get
with that. XO-4 on the other hand, as you mention, is a massive job!
:-(

Peter

 On Wed, May 27, 2015 at 11:17:26PM -0400, Samuel Greenfeld wrote:
 Given I looked into this before with F22 Beta(*), I ran OLPC OS
 Builder tonight, excluding nothing from all repositories, and let it
 loose.

 There were a few more minor issues found with the build process.
 But I managed to build an image with the stock Fedora 4.x kernel,
 and primarily F22 parts.

 However the stock Fedora kernel does not have a hardcoded kernel
 command line like OLPC kernels do, and trying to manually provide
 the command line to boot a Fedora kernel still hung for me after OFW
 stated the ramdisk was being loaded.

 I may look into this a bit more before resorting back to OLPC's 3.10
 kernel and seeing what works with that.

 (*) [1]http://lists.sugarlabs.org/archive/sugar-devel/2015-April/050035.html

 On Wed, May 27, 2015 at 6:28 PM, James Cameron [2]qu...@laptop.org wrote:

 On Wed, May 27, 2015 at 06:31:28AM -0700, George Hunt wrote:
  If I set just the goals of getting keyboard input, and display output,
 what
  problems will I face trying to use defconfig_xo1.5 from [1][3]
 dev.laptop.org
  (x86-3.3 branch)?
 
  Does anyone have a config file that works on the XO1.5 on a Fedora
 release
  later than FC18 that I might springboard from?

 We used the olpc-3.10 branch to generate kernels for systems later
 than Fedora 18.

 --
 James Cameron
 [4]http://quozl.linux.org.au/
 ___
 Devel mailing list
 [5]de...@lists.laptop.org
 [6]http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel

 References:

 [1] http://lists.sugarlabs.org/archive/sugar-devel/2015-April/050035.html
 [2] mailto:qu...@laptop.org
 [3] http://dev.laptop.org/
 [4] http://quozl.linux.org.au/
 [5] mailto:de...@lists.laptop.org
 [6] http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel

 ___
 Server-devel mailing list
 Server-devel@lists.laptop.org
 http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/server-devel


 --
 James Cameron
 http://quozl.linux.org.au/
 ___
 Devel mailing list
 de...@lists.laptop.org
 http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
___
Server-devel mailing list
Server-devel@lists.laptop.org
http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/server-devel


Re: [Server-devel] Two (minimal) goals for a kernel for XO1.5 based upon fc22?

2015-05-28 Thread Peter Robinson
BTW is the F-22 + 4.1rc5 kernel image somewhere to pull and test with?

On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 12:01 PM, Peter Robinson pbrobin...@gmail.com wrote:
 On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 9:05 AM, James Cameron qu...@laptop.org wrote:
 The v4.1-rc5 kernel boots fine on XO-1.5, though there are a few
 things to be fixed; screen blanks on boot, camera LED stays on and
 camera doesn't work, temperature of CPU is not accessible, and suspend
 fails to complete.  Some of these probably my haste.

 Even more awesome, some of these are probably missing or changed
 kernel options. Some of those kernel bits have changed a lot upstream.

 This meets George's requirements.

 The patch relative to v4.1-rc5:
 http://dev.laptop.org/~quozl/y/1YxsfX.txt

 Do we have a 4.1 branch in the olpc-kernel git repo yet? Is it worth
 it or would it be worthwhile me setting up one against the Fedora
 upstream to allow us to more easily work there, rebase etc?

 The boot dmesg:
 http://dev.laptop.org/~quozl/z/1Yxsg9.txt

 You might take your favourite Fedora 22 kernel, apply that patch,
 fixing any conflicts, reconfigure the kernel, and build.

 Or you might compare the xo_1.5_defconfig against the Fedora 22 kernel
 .config.

 I'm happy to help there.

 If you guys can help test and fix these apparently minor problems,
 then I can pull upstream into olpc-kernel repository and make a later
 branch.

 Can we setup a git branch sooner rather than later as a central place
 to pull the latest and greatest from.

 Chances are it would work fine with XO-1 too, with a bit of
 configuration merging.

 Happy to help there. We likely need to rebase a few patches for camera
 modules etc from the older branches, happy to help there where
 possible.

 However, this doesn't help with XO-1.75 and XO-4, which are still just
 as large a job as they ever were.  ;-{  x86 is so easy.

 I've got a possible route for the 1.75 as mentioned above, once we get
 a 4.1 branch I can add that and see how much further on we can get
 with that. XO-4 on the other hand, as you mention, is a massive job!
 :-(

 Peter

 On Wed, May 27, 2015 at 11:17:26PM -0400, Samuel Greenfeld wrote:
 Given I looked into this before with F22 Beta(*), I ran OLPC OS
 Builder tonight, excluding nothing from all repositories, and let it
 loose.

 There were a few more minor issues found with the build process.
 But I managed to build an image with the stock Fedora 4.x kernel,
 and primarily F22 parts.

 However the stock Fedora kernel does not have a hardcoded kernel
 command line like OLPC kernels do, and trying to manually provide
 the command line to boot a Fedora kernel still hung for me after OFW
 stated the ramdisk was being loaded.

 I may look into this a bit more before resorting back to OLPC's 3.10
 kernel and seeing what works with that.

 (*) [1]http://lists.sugarlabs.org/archive/sugar-devel/2015-April/050035.html

 On Wed, May 27, 2015 at 6:28 PM, James Cameron [2]qu...@laptop.org wrote:

 On Wed, May 27, 2015 at 06:31:28AM -0700, George Hunt wrote:
  If I set just the goals of getting keyboard input, and display output,
 what
  problems will I face trying to use defconfig_xo1.5 from [1][3]
 dev.laptop.org
  (x86-3.3 branch)?
 
  Does anyone have a config file that works on the XO1.5 on a Fedora
 release
  later than FC18 that I might springboard from?

 We used the olpc-3.10 branch to generate kernels for systems later
 than Fedora 18.

 --
 James Cameron
 [4]http://quozl.linux.org.au/
 ___
 Devel mailing list
 [5]Devel@lists.laptop.org
 [6]http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel

 References:

 [1] http://lists.sugarlabs.org/archive/sugar-devel/2015-April/050035.html
 [2] mailto:qu...@laptop.org
 [3] http://dev.laptop.org/
 [4] http://quozl.linux.org.au/
 [5] mailto:Devel@lists.laptop.org
 [6] http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel

 ___
 Server-devel mailing list
 server-de...@lists.laptop.org
 http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/server-devel


 --
 James Cameron
 http://quozl.linux.org.au/
 ___
 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


Re: [Server-devel] Two (minimal) goals for a kernel for XO1.5 based upon fc22?

2015-05-28 Thread Peter Robinson
On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 9:05 AM, James Cameron qu...@laptop.org wrote:
 The v4.1-rc5 kernel boots fine on XO-1.5, though there are a few
 things to be fixed; screen blanks on boot, camera LED stays on and
 camera doesn't work, temperature of CPU is not accessible, and suspend
 fails to complete.  Some of these probably my haste.

Even more awesome, some of these are probably missing or changed
kernel options. Some of those kernel bits have changed a lot upstream.

 This meets George's requirements.

 The patch relative to v4.1-rc5:
 http://dev.laptop.org/~quozl/y/1YxsfX.txt

Do we have a 4.1 branch in the olpc-kernel git repo yet? Is it worth
it or would it be worthwhile me setting up one against the Fedora
upstream to allow us to more easily work there, rebase etc?

 The boot dmesg:
 http://dev.laptop.org/~quozl/z/1Yxsg9.txt

 You might take your favourite Fedora 22 kernel, apply that patch,
 fixing any conflicts, reconfigure the kernel, and build.

 Or you might compare the xo_1.5_defconfig against the Fedora 22 kernel
 .config.

I'm happy to help there.

 If you guys can help test and fix these apparently minor problems,
 then I can pull upstream into olpc-kernel repository and make a later
 branch.

Can we setup a git branch sooner rather than later as a central place
to pull the latest and greatest from.

 Chances are it would work fine with XO-1 too, with a bit of
 configuration merging.

Happy to help there. We likely need to rebase a few patches for camera
modules etc from the older branches, happy to help there where
possible.

 However, this doesn't help with XO-1.75 and XO-4, which are still just
 as large a job as they ever were.  ;-{  x86 is so easy.

I've got a possible route for the 1.75 as mentioned above, once we get
a 4.1 branch I can add that and see how much further on we can get
with that. XO-4 on the other hand, as you mention, is a massive job!
:-(

Peter

 On Wed, May 27, 2015 at 11:17:26PM -0400, Samuel Greenfeld wrote:
 Given I looked into this before with F22 Beta(*), I ran OLPC OS
 Builder tonight, excluding nothing from all repositories, and let it
 loose.

 There were a few more minor issues found with the build process.
 But I managed to build an image with the stock Fedora 4.x kernel,
 and primarily F22 parts.

 However the stock Fedora kernel does not have a hardcoded kernel
 command line like OLPC kernels do, and trying to manually provide
 the command line to boot a Fedora kernel still hung for me after OFW
 stated the ramdisk was being loaded.

 I may look into this a bit more before resorting back to OLPC's 3.10
 kernel and seeing what works with that.

 (*) [1]http://lists.sugarlabs.org/archive/sugar-devel/2015-April/050035.html

 On Wed, May 27, 2015 at 6:28 PM, James Cameron [2]qu...@laptop.org wrote:

 On Wed, May 27, 2015 at 06:31:28AM -0700, George Hunt wrote:
  If I set just the goals of getting keyboard input, and display output,
 what
  problems will I face trying to use defconfig_xo1.5 from [1][3]
 dev.laptop.org
  (x86-3.3 branch)?
 
  Does anyone have a config file that works on the XO1.5 on a Fedora
 release
  later than FC18 that I might springboard from?

 We used the olpc-3.10 branch to generate kernels for systems later
 than Fedora 18.

 --
 James Cameron
 [4]http://quozl.linux.org.au/
 ___
 Devel mailing list
 [5]Devel@lists.laptop.org
 [6]http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel

 References:

 [1] http://lists.sugarlabs.org/archive/sugar-devel/2015-April/050035.html
 [2] mailto:qu...@laptop.org
 [3] http://dev.laptop.org/
 [4] http://quozl.linux.org.au/
 [5] mailto:Devel@lists.laptop.org
 [6] http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel

 ___
 Server-devel mailing list
 server-de...@lists.laptop.org
 http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/server-devel


 --
 James Cameron
 http://quozl.linux.org.au/
 ___
 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


Re: [Server-devel] Two (minimal) goals for a kernel for XO1.5 based upon fc22?

2015-05-28 Thread Peter Robinson
  Given I looked into this before with F22 Beta(*), I ran OLPC OS Builder
  tonight, excluding nothing from all repositories, and let it loose.

 Funny! I was doing exactly the same yesterday for the 1.5!

  There were a few more minor issues found with the build process.  But I
  managed to build an image with the stock Fedora 4.x kernel, and primarily
  F22 parts.

 Can we create a f22 branch on the o-o-b git repo so we can all
 collaborate on this from one central place?

 Use the master branch, please.  I've moved the Fedora 20 development
 to a v8.0 branch.  So we stick to our existing branch habits.

 http://dev.laptop.org/git/projects/olpc-os-builder

Works for me, just didn't want to step on existing work
___
Devel mailing list
Devel@lists.laptop.org
http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel


Re: [Server-devel] Two (minimal) goals for a kernel for XO1.5 based upon fc22?

2015-05-28 Thread Peter Robinson
  Given I looked into this before with F22 Beta(*), I ran OLPC OS Builder
  tonight, excluding nothing from all repositories, and let it loose.

 Funny! I was doing exactly the same yesterday for the 1.5!

  There were a few more minor issues found with the build process.  But I
  managed to build an image with the stock Fedora 4.x kernel, and primarily
  F22 parts.

 Can we create a f22 branch on the o-o-b git repo so we can all
 collaborate on this from one central place?

 Use the master branch, please.  I've moved the Fedora 20 development
 to a v8.0 branch.  So we stick to our existing branch habits.

 http://dev.laptop.org/git/projects/olpc-os-builder

Works for me, just didn't want to step on existing work
___
Server-devel mailing list
Server-devel@lists.laptop.org
http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/server-devel


Re: [Sugar-devel] Community XO software builds

2015-05-08 Thread Peter Robinson
On Fri, May 8, 2015 at 12:04 AM, James Cameron qu...@laptop.org wrote:
 On Thu, May 07, 2015 at 10:28:06AM +0100, Peter Robinson wrote:
 On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 4:21 AM, Samuel Greenfeld sam...@greenfeld.org 
 wrote:
  The obvious counterargument would be that a deployment might want
  to deploy your XO-Next (whatever it is) alongside existing XO
  laptops, allowing all of them to have the same configuration.

 From my memory of olpc-os-builder it was very modular and wouldn't be
 hard to add dozens of different devices support to it.

 Yes, it would be straightforward to add commodity hardware support to
 olpc-os-builder.  Add kernel and boot loader.  Add some sort of
 installer.

 But we have SoaS, and SoaS works fine on commodity hardware, so why
 bother with olpc-os-builder?

Because same process for any and every device. A single process is a
good thing, it makes it easier to understand and get a consistent
configuration everywhere.

 Because olpc-update?  Nobody uses it.

The interesting thing here is that Atomic on Fedora would provide
everything that olpc-update was designed to do and it could make
upgrades between Fedora releases much easier and less of an issue with
regards to TLS. Plus probably a bunch of things that it currently
doesn't and it's upstream being actively developed, instead of home
brew, would likely ease the security updates issues mentioned
previously and easy pushing out of updates, caching updates for
bandwidth etc.

 Because preinstalled activities?  SoaS can do that too.

  There's plenty of blame to go around in terms of re-inventing the wheel and
  lack of communication.

 Yep!

  There simply (and correct me if I'm wrong) are not the resources inside of
  OLPC, outside, or combined at this time to maintain and update two separate
  builds  build systems.
 
  It amazes me how far we bend over backwards to avoid saying end of life
  and end of support.
 
 
  I have seen a fair amount of interest, both publicly and privately, for
  newer XO laptop builds.  But I don't think the requesters realize how much
  work it takes to make one.

 The big one here is kernel kernel kernel.

 Yes.

  And I do not forsee anyone stepping up to get the XO-1.75 and XO-4 kernel 
  drivers into a state they can be upstreamed or upgraded for newer Fedoras
  unless a deployment really wants this instead of newer equipment.

 Or even the 1.5, I believe most of the XO-1 support is upsteream.

  Newer operating systems tend to require more disk space and RAM than the
  predecessors.  We have seen this even within Fedora's lineage.

 Yes, and no. I mean 1Gb of the original XO-1 is tight, but SoaS still
 happily fits in 4Gb with a bunch of space to spare. Looking at my
 current SoaS VM the used space is around 1.9Gb. Amusingly the various
 cloud/container enterprise initiatives actively help us here because
 for once they care about dependency bloat too :-)

 The two things that add bloat to the current SoaS image are:
 * Browse needs to be converted to the new WebKitGtk APIs so we don't
 ship two copies of WebKitGtk.
 * Conversion of remaining gstreamer 0.10 to 1.0 to allow us not to ship that.

 Ultimately I think you could with a little development effort get it
 down to 1.5Gb used space which would make a 2Gb filesystem quite
 usable.

  Since OLPC already appears to be going the Ubuntu LTS route, I would argue
  it would be easiest to take everything that way, porting utilities as
  required, and make that the final image  build system for XOs.

 Personally I have no interest in that. I wish you luck.

 --
 James Cameron
 http://quozl.linux.org.au/
___
Devel mailing list
Devel@lists.laptop.org
http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel


Re: [Sugar-devel] Community XO software builds

2015-05-07 Thread Peter Robinson
On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 12:10 AM, James Cameron qu...@laptop.org wrote:
 On Wed, May 06, 2015 at 09:19:45AM -0300, Gonzalo Odiard wrote:
 I think we should try make a build using CentOS. I don't know if
 have all the packages we need, but the rate of change in Fedora was
 difficult to follow when OLPC had a team dedicated and now is almost
 impossible. The true is we didn't finished to solve the problems we
 found in F20, and Fedora is working in F22.

 I do not think we should switch from Fedora to CentOS, because;

 1.  our installed base express interest in Fedora or Ubuntu,

Daniel Drake, myself and others put in a lot of effort back in the
F-14/15 days to get everything upstream into Fedora. I continue to
maintain that and produce a Sugar on a Stick release with every Fedora
release.

In the last release Daniel and I was involved in the delta between
Fedora and the OLPC release was very minimal. Basically kernel,
firmware, and some minor changes to a couple of Sugar packages for XO
HW and patches that weren't yet upstream.

 2.  there are missing desktop packages, which means we are taking on
 maintenance of those packages on CentOS,

Having tried and failed to do this back when EL6 was new I believe
this is a dead end. It turned out to be _WAY_ more effort than
actually keeping Fedora up to date. The upstream RHEL releases are
every 6 months but if you need a fix for a package in the core 2500
odd packages and it's not easy you might be waiting a lot longer for a
fix.

In Fedora if you know the right people (like me) you can get a fix
into update-testing in a day. Also there's a much much wider QA group
across the packages we use and care about.

I can go on and on about the details required for this but basically I
suspect eyes have glazed over already.

 3.  we would delay necessary work until the next release of CentOS, or
 if the work is too large we may never upgrade.

I suspect it would be never.

 Let me explain that last point.

 There is a continuous flow of changes into Fedora.  These changes
 eventually flow into Red Hat Enterprise Linux, and thus into CentOS.

 The most cost effective way to handle this flow was for developers to
 test changes on our builds, every week.  This gaves us awareness of
 the change and kept us involved to resist changes that cause damage.
 We were there once.  It required a low but continuous engineering
 effort.

It use to take around an hour to cut a release from Fedora/Sugar
repos. Quite often the delta from a patch for a fix being created and
a new OS was in the hours timeframe. It's the usual story of a little
bit of effort regularly stops it from being a major issue.

Kernel and olpc-os-builder aside I think you could probably produce a
working image of Fedora 22 now. I think all the userspace bits are
likely there and working due to my SoaS work.

It's actually the thing that annoys me most about the sugar community.
IMO we have a great working Sugar release that works pretty much
everywhere plus is a great proven base for XO releases yet so many
core developers have told me if only you'd focus on Ubuntu we'd use
it yet Ubuntu for _YEARS_ have shown that they couldn't given a shit
and even actively remove core bits needed (remember the Browse on
Mozilla years anyone??) to make it even harder.

 The next most cost effective way is to do this work only when a new
 release of Fedora occurs.  This results in lots of head scratching and
 bug fixing, and new builds, until the bugs are mostly gone.  We are
 here now.  It requires bursts of engineering effort.

Actually it needs work _BEFORE_ a new release happens, any work now
IMO should be focused on Fedora 23. That way you have everything in
place in time for Fedora 23 GA in October and you get the longest
value out of the release.

 The least cost effective way is to hold off doing that work for three
 years until the next CentOS release.  This would be a lot more work in
 a much shorter burst.

And you'll likely end up in a very disparate stability across devices.
Both ARMv7 and i686 is community supported in CentOS which means you
get likely dubious quality of work and I suspect due to toolchain
config choices for i686 it won't even run on the XO-1. Has anyone
actually tried booting CentOS-7 on a XO1? From what I've seen of the
ARMv7 efforts I see it as half arsed at best.

People ask me if I can help with CentOS. The answer is no. I have no
personal interest in CentOS. I have enough to do with personal
projects on Fedora.

 Delaying effort until a future time hasn't worked, and I don't think
 it will.  Meanwhile, I'm trying as hard as I can with what I'm doing.

And I've been trying as hard with Fedora as possible. The core Sugar
stack is in pretty good shape. There's some work needed on some
Activies but most of the work it to update them to the latest upstream
bits.

Peter

https://alt.fedoraproject.org/pub/alt/stage/22_TC2/Images/armhfp/Fedora-SoaS-armhfp-22-TC2-sda.raw.xz

Re: [Sugar-devel] Community XO software builds

2015-05-07 Thread Peter Robinson
On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 4:21 AM, Samuel Greenfeld sam...@greenfeld.org wrote:
 The obvious counterargument would be that a deployment might want to deploy
 your XO-Next (whatever it is) alongside existing XO laptops, allowing all of
 them to have the same configuration.

From my memory of olpc-os-builder it was very modular and wouldn't be
hard to add dozens of different devices support to it.

 There's plenty of blame to go around in terms of re-inventing the wheel and
 lack of communication.

Yep!

 There simply (and correct me if I'm wrong) are not the resources inside of
 OLPC, outside, or combined at this time to maintain and update two separate
 builds  build systems.

 It amazes me how far we bend over backwards to avoid saying end of life
 and end of support.


 I have seen a fair amount of interest, both publicly and privately, for
 newer XO laptop builds.  But I don't think the requesters realize how much
 work it takes to make one.

The big one here is kernel kernel kernel.

 And I do not forsee anyone stepping up to get the XO-1.75 and XO-4 kernel 
 drivers into a state they can be upstreamed or upgraded for newer Fedoras
 unless a deployment really wants this instead of newer equipment.

Or even the 1.5, I believe most of the XO-1 support is upsteream.

 Newer operating systems tend to require more disk space and RAM than the
 predecessors.  We have seen this even within Fedora's lineage.

Yes, and no. I mean 1Gb of the original XO-1 is tight, but SoaS still
happily fits in 4Gb with a bunch of space to spare. Looking at my
current SoaS VM the used space is around 1.9Gb. Amusingly the various
cloud/container enterprise initiatives actively help us here because
for once they care about dependency bloat too :-)

The two things that add bloat to the current SoaS image are:
* Browse needs to be converted to the new WebKitGtk APIs so we don't
ship two copies of WebKitGtk.
* Conversion of remaining gstreamer 0.10 to 1.0 to allow us not to ship that.

Ultimately I think you could with a little development effort get it
down to 1.5Gb used space which would make a 2Gb filesystem quite
usable.

 Since OLPC already appears to be going the Ubuntu LTS route, I would argue
 it would be easiest to take everything that way, porting utilities as
 required, and make that the final image  build system for XOs.

Personally I have no interest in that. I wish you luck.

 I only have a limited number of hours per week I can look into OLPC things,
 but I'm tempted to take a look.






 On Wed, May 6, 2015 at 10:50 PM, James Cameron qu...@laptop.org wrote:

 On Wed, May 06, 2015 at 09:29:46PM -0400, Samuel Greenfeld wrote:
  It might be possible for this new builder to be eventually taught to
  handle XOs.

 There was no significant interest in my previous builder uxo, which
 already knows how to handle XOs.  The recent posts on devel@ of people
 trying something similar without looking at uxo is further evidence of
 that.

 So for the moment, there seems to be no need for my new builder to
 handle XO-1, XO-1.5, XO-1.75 or XO-4 laptops.  The Fedora based
 builder is working fine for those laptops.

 --
 James Cameron
 http://quozl.linux.org.au/



 ___
 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


Re: [Sugar-devel] Community XO software builds

2015-05-07 Thread Peter Robinson
 Ok. I didn't know that.

 When I talked with deployments and they ask for Ubuntu,
 and I ask why, what they really want is Long Time Support.
 No deployment change their image more than once a year.
 In fact, change a image is a logistic challenge for most of
 the big/middle size deployments.

Yes, but in the Ubuntu case it's a one way street, there's never been
any love from Ubuntu. You could get it from Canonical if someone put
up a large amount of cash. They don't support gnome in the core so
even then I suspect you'll have similar issues.

 Then, I was thinking in CentOS as a LTS version of Fedora.

Nope, never has been never will be. It's a _DOWNSTREAM_ of RHEL, and
in v7 RHEL only supports 64 bit architectures. The i686 support is
community driven as is the ARMv7 support. No guarantee either will
ever be in sync.

Has anyone actually booted the latest Ubuntu LTS on any/all the XOs?

 In Fedora if you know the right people (like me) you can get a fix
 into update-testing in a day. Also there's a much much wider QA group
 across the packages we use and care about.

 I can go on and on about the details required for this but basically I
 suspect eyes have glazed over already.


 This is true, and I know that.
 But also is true, that keep the pace of changes in Fedora is not easy.
 In fact, is not Fedora fault, mostly is Gtk ([1], [2], [3]) or libraries
 (the last was vte [4],
 but I can find more).

Yes, I'm aware of that. There's a number of other bits I'm aware of.
Be aware it's not all rosy in the LTS world either.

  3.  we would delay necessary work until the next release of CentOS, or
  if the work is too large we may never upgrade.

 I suspect it would be never.


 Ok. But Let me explain my reasons.

 Right now, the only stable images are based on F18.
 We don't have images in a good shape for the deployments for F20,
 we missed F21 (where Gtk theme change in a subtle way again,
 and toggle toolbar buttons don't change the background color),
 and we should start to work in F22. With the hands we have today,
 I am sure we will not solve all the problems we already have before F23 is
 released.

Yes, but then there will be a bunch of issues with the CentOS 7
release, or even the Ubuntu 14.04 LTS release which would require a
bunch of work ongoing and a MASSIVE effort to begin with to get it to
the point you can even start to look at stabilising. It too and will
be ongoing and you get to the end of it and you've got a bunch of
awesome support for an ancient release and by then you're basically
screwed.

Ultimately no one will put up that time either. Someone needs to pay
some how whether it be in development or money.

The fact is we are in this situation because OLPC the organisation has
zero interest in the project now and the organisations around the
globe want everything provided to them on a plate with everything the
want provided for free with the click of a finger.

The fact if they all provided a little bit of development resources to
the upstream project there wouldn't be this problem. Many hands and
all that...

 That is my concern. If we would had one dsd involved,
 the conversation would be completely different,
 But as Samuel said in a previous mail in this thread I have seen a fair
 amount of interest,
 both publicly and privately, for newer XO laptop builds.  But I don't think
 the requesters
 realize how much work it takes to make one.

Exactly! Nor do they want to pay for the effort.

There's is a HUGE amount of initial work to get everything moved to a
LTS platform. CentOS would be easier in that in a lot of cases it
would be recompiling packages. But there would also need to be kernel
and other work which ever route you go.

It would be months of work to get a distro working then you need
to QA etc. Who is going to do the work, who is going to pay. No one
will come out publicly and say it but they all want a polished LTS
release without having to contribute any resources themselves. Please
may I have a rainbow pooing unicorn

In Fedora there is work but it's small work packages on going. I'll
send a different email outlining the work I think there is there.

  Let me explain that last point.
 
  There is a continuous flow of changes into Fedora.  These changes
  eventually flow into Red Hat Enterprise Linux, and thus into CentOS.
 
  The most cost effective way to handle this flow was for developers to
  test changes on our builds, every week.  This gaves us awareness of
  the change and kept us involved to resist changes that cause damage.
  We were there once.  It required a low but continuous engineering
  effort.

 It use to take around an hour to cut a release from Fedora/Sugar
 repos. Quite often the delta from a patch for a fix being created and
 a new OS was in the hours timeframe. It's the usual story of a little
 bit of effort regularly stops it from being a major issue.

 Kernel and olpc-os-builder aside I think you could probably produce a
 working image of 

Re: XO Fedora 22 Beta work

2015-04-25 Thread Peter Robinson
On Sat, Apr 25, 2015 at 5:10 AM, Samuel Greenfeld sam...@greenfeld.org wrote:
 At James' suggestion I looked a bit into a Fedora 22 beta build.  I have
 found the following problems so far getting the RPM dependencies worked out:

 olpc-library needs to depend on python-jinja2, not python-jinja.  The
 olpc-library RPM also was removed from Fedora, perhaps due to lack of
 changes  abandonment.

Likely, I didn't even know it existed.

 totem-mozplugin no longer exists and was intentionally removed.  Given
 Firefox supports various media codecs internally this might not be a problem
 for it (apart for vmeta?); but I don't know what webkit-based Browse uses
 for media players.

Gstreamer based as well so I don't see any major issue there except if
vmeta doesn't support gstreamer 1.0

 xorg-x11-drv-keyboard and -mouse have been replaced by
 xorg-x11-drv-libinput.  See
 https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/LibinputForXorg

Works fine on SoaS, although I think there might be a need to migrate
Control Panel bits, I did send an email about it some time ago to
devel@

 14.1.0 has custom F20 systemd binaries, but I am having trouble finding
 information as to why.  If they have relevant changes they need to be ported
 to F22 if not already present because using the F20 systemd binaries breaks
 all sorts of library dependencies.

The reason is due to changes in firmware loading changes in the kernel
and the fact the XO kernels haven't been rebased to something more
modern than 3.0+

 Patches have been written for the first three that I could submit.

 We need to come up with a clear direction as to what volunteers and/or OLPC
 want  would actually use for updated XO builds.  I only have the time to
 focus on one set of images.

I can help on anything needed that's in Fedora in terms of adding
patches there so you don't need to fork but similarly I don't have
much time.
___
Devel mailing list
Devel@lists.laptop.org
http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel


Re: [Sugar-devel] XO Fedora 22 Beta work

2015-04-25 Thread Peter Robinson
On Sat, Apr 25, 2015 at 8:50 PM, Adam Holt h...@laptop.org wrote:
 On Sat, Apr 25, 2015 at 3:42 PM, Gonzalo Odiard godi...@sugarlabs.org
 wrote:

 On Sat, Apr 25, 2015 at 1:10 AM, Samuel Greenfeld sam...@greenfeld.org
 wrote:

 At James' suggestion I looked a bit into a Fedora 22 beta build.  I have
 found the following problems so far getting the RPM dependencies worked out:

 olpc-library needs to depend on python-jinja2, not python-jinja.  The
 olpc-library RPM also was removed from Fedora, perhaps due to lack of
 changes  abandonment.
 totem-mozplugin no longer exists and was intentionally removed.  Given
 Firefox supports various media codecs internally this might not be a problem
 for it (apart for vmeta?); but I don't know what webkit-based Browse uses
 for media players.
 xorg-x11-drv-keyboard and -mouse have been replaced by
 xorg-x11-drv-libinput.  See
 https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/LibinputForXorg
 14.1.0 has custom F20 systemd binaries, but I am having trouble finding
 information as to why.  If they have relevant changes they need to be ported
 to F22 if not already present because using the F20 systemd binaries breaks
 all sorts of library dependencies.

 Patches have been written for the first three that I could submit.

 We need to come up with a clear direction as to what volunteers and/or
 OLPC want  would actually use for updated XO builds.  I only have the time
 to focus on one set of images.


 True. I am not sure what is best option here.
 We still didn't solved all the issues in F20, but is already a old
 release.
 I wonder if we can try make images based in CentOS.


 George Hunt is having surprisingly rapid success with CentOS 7 for XSCE.
 Its new release (equivalent to RHEL 7.1) is now out...

 Wishful Thinking hopes that similar progress might be possible on various XO
 laptops?

Very wishful, most of the server stuff would already be in
CentOS/EPEL, to get the the sugar stack and dependencies in would be a
reasonable chunk of work. The standard packages in Fedora could easily
be branched for EPEL7 and would all be compatible but someone would
need to step up to do the work as I certainly don't have the time or
really interest.

Peter
___
Devel mailing list
Devel@lists.laptop.org
http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel


Re: [Sugar-devel] XO-1 vs Sugar 0.104 performance, and swap to NAND Flash

2015-04-08 Thread Peter Robinson
 On 07/04/15 22:47, James Cameron wrote:
  The testing scripts can be made available if anybody else would
  like to replicate the results.

 I'd be curious to look at your scripts and try to replicate some
 results with our builds.

 git clone git://dev.laptop.org/users/quozl/test-startup-time.git

 Look at the file HOWTO.

 Somewhat unfinished work.  Do ask any questions you may have.

 Thanks a lot for your detailed tests!

 No worries.

Interesting details! I'd be interested to see if porting Browse to the
newer webkit 2 and what effect the perf improvements there would offer
___
Devel mailing list
Devel@lists.laptop.org
http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel


Re: Infrequent heap corruption, XO-4, Fedora 20

2015-02-04 Thread Peter Robinson
On Wed, Feb 4, 2015 at 8:10 AM, James Cameron qu...@laptop.org wrote:
 Following up a thread from last September.

 This problem has just become more interesting, because it hit during
 an activity startup.

 I'm quite used to seeing it with yum.  But seeing it without yum now
 points us at kernel, glibc or python.

We've not seen this in the wider F-20 Fedora ARM distro so my bet
would be on the kernel.

Peter

 http://dev.laptop.org/ticket/12837#comment:4 has the details of the
 most recent event.

 On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 01:56:27PM +1000, James Cameron wrote:
 G'day Peter,

 Thanks for any ideas you may have.

 The problem also reproduces on OLPC Fedora 20 image for XO-4:

 http://build.laptop.org/14.1.0/os1/xo-4/41001o4.zd (552 MB)

 *** Error in `/usr/bin/python': free(): invalid pointer: 0x047c79ae ***
 === Backtrace: =
 /lib/libc.so.6(+0x6c8b4)[0xb6c828b4]
 /lib/libc.so.6(+0x754e8)[0xb6c8b4e8]
 === Memory map: 
 [...]

 The error varies in detail, but always suggests corruption of heap or
 pointers to heap.

 The triggering conditions are interactive use of yum, yum update, or
 yum used by olpc-os-builder.  The latter is a simple reproducer for me.

 I'm reproducing it on an XO-4, with 2GB of RAM, no swap, 8 GB eMMC, 8
 GB USB flash drive.

 While memory demand by yum is large by comparison to other programs,
 the available memory at the time of failure is ample.  There are no
 kernel out of memory (OOM) events.  It seems more likely to occur when
 the filesystem cache is under heavy demand.

 The method to recreate the problem was:

 1.  install the system image 41001o4.zd using fs-update and then boot,

 2.  configure wireless network,

 3.  yum install -y git olpc-os-builder

 4.  clone the master branch of
 git://dev.laptop.org/projects/olpc-os-builder
 (last verified with b87e6ee)

 5.  run ./osbuilder.py examples/olpc-os-14.1.0-xo4.ini repeatedly
 until the error occurs (usually within about five attempts),


 I've also tried running under valgrind, but that causes illegal
 instruction.  It is quite likely I'm not using valgrind correctly.
 http://dev.laptop.org/~quozl/z/1XRYtO.txt

 The workaround at the moment is to build our Fedora 20 images on
 Fedora 18.  Fedora 18 shows no sign of the problem.  I'm worried that
 a low probability heap corruptor may cause instability of applications
 in the field.

 The exact same kernel is being used for Fedora 18 and Fedora 20.

 On Tue, Sep 09, 2014 at 03:55:24PM +0100, Peter Robinson wrote:
  What version of OOB are you using, and what config files? I can try
  and recreate the problem here on other devices.

 --
 James Cameron
 http://quozl.linux.org.au/

 --
 James Cameron
 http://quozl.linux.org.au/
___
Devel mailing list
Devel@lists.laptop.org
http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel


Re: [Server-devel] UEFI workaround?

2014-10-31 Thread Peter Robinson
On Fri, Oct 31, 2014 at 4:50 PM, Adam Holt h...@laptop.org wrote:
 Tony Anderson’s is leaving to Africa in 6 days, assisting many different
 school server deployments, and needs help getting around secure
 BIOS/firmware UEFI on the following platforms:


 - NUC 34010 - BIOS upgrade solves this, by moving jumper and inserting USB
 memory stick containing newer Intel BIOS

 - NUC 2820 - installs but doesn't boot

 - Gigabyte Brix GB-BXBT-2807

 - Zotac nano CI320

 - Zotac ID81 Atom system but UEFI not Bios


 Just in case you have any similar experience, please drop some hints, and
 he'll happily reply here with Tons of more details he's tried :)

Fedora/CentOS should work fine with Secure Boot enabled uEFI devices

Peter
___
Server-devel mailing list
Server-devel@lists.laptop.org
http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/server-devel


Re: [Server-devel] Fwd: [XSCE] UEFI workaround?

2014-10-31 Thread Peter Robinson
So to confirm there is no support for Secure Boot in RHEL-6 and hence
CentOS-6. For this to work you'll definitely need CentOS7.

If the NUC devices are baytrail the issue might not actually be
SecureBoot at all but rather that they have a 32 bit uEFI
implementation and that's not currently supported. Either in 32 bit
CentOS-6 (32 bit doesn't support uEFI at all) and you currently can't
boot a 64 bit OS from a 32 bit uEFI implementation even if the chip is
64 bit.

Peter

 Hi,

 My head is still bloody banging against the brick wall.

 I shipped the NUC 3401 to Nick, he should receive it today. (4gb memory, 1TB
 drive)

 I can reliably create a usb stick from BERNIE to install XS (NEXS v31) on
 systems which have a traditional bios. This scheme does not work on systems
 with UEFI firmware. Microsoft requires
 UEFI firmware for systems certified for Windows 8, so solving this problem
 is unavoidable.

 The Zotac uses AMI firmware while the NUC 2820 and Gigabyte apparently use
 the Intel firmware.
 With the Intel firmware, there is a legacy mode. It also allows the hard
 drive to be installed from the
 usb stick. However, the system will not boot to the hard drive. So the next
 step is to try the boot
 in legacy mode. Another option is to upgrade the bootloader to Grub2 which
 supports uefi. The
 third step is to build an iso which installs a Grub2 bootloader. In the
 longer run, NEXS needs to be
 upgraded to CentOS 6.6 (32-bit) or, more ambitiously, to CentOS 7 (64-bit).

 The Zotac symptom I have also seen with bios systems and I think is really a
 kickstart issue. If
 the install is to a new drive, the usb stick is /dev/sda and the hard drive
 is /dev/sdb. However, if the
 drive has been partitioned (e.g. when I am installing a new version over an
 old one), the hard drive
 is /dev/sda and the usb stick is /dev/sdb. I have created two versions of
 ks.cfg, one for each case.
 However, this is not working for the Zotac which reports that there is not
 enough space on the hard drive instead of re-partitioning.

 Any help will be greatly appreciated.

 Tony



 On 10/31/2014 12:50 PM, Adam Holt wrote:

 Tony Anderson’s is leaving to Africa in 6 days, assisting many different
 school server deployments, and needs help getting around secure
 BIOS/firmware UEFI on the following platforms:


 - NUC 34010 - BIOS upgrade solves this, by moving jumper and inserting USB
 memory stick containing newer Intel BIOS

 - NUC 2820 - installs but doesn't boot

 - Gigabyte Brix GB-BXBT-2807

 - Zotac nano CI320

 - Zotac ID81 Atom system but UEFI not Bios


 Just in case you have any similar experience, please drop some hints, and
 he'll happily reply here with Tons of more details he's tried :)

 --
 Unsung Heroes of OLPC, interviewed live @ http://unleashkids.org !

 --
 Unsung Heroes of OLPC, interviewed live @ http://unleashkids.org !


 ___
 Server-devel mailing list
 Server-devel@lists.laptop.org
 http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/server-devel

___
Server-devel mailing list
Server-devel@lists.laptop.org
http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/server-devel


Re: [Server-devel] raspi project

2014-10-16 Thread Peter Robinson
On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 2:11 PM, Tim Moody t...@timmoody.com wrote:
 I personally have not had much luck with Indiegogo as far as actually
 getting stuff is concerned, but an interesting project if rather expensive.

 https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/pi-top-a-raspberry-pi-laptop-you-build-yourself

It would be even more interesting if it could be coupled with a more
capable Pi compatible device such as the BananaPi or Hummingboard.

Peter
___
Server-devel mailing list
Server-devel@lists.laptop.org
http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/server-devel


Re: [Server-devel] raspi project

2014-10-16 Thread Peter Robinson
 Or something even more powerful, like the iMX6 dual/quad-core EDM module!
 They could at least choose an SoC with published data sheets :-)

That's what the hummingboard is based on I mentioned :
http://www.solid-run.com/products/hummingboard/

 I also love the complete lack of any mechanical testing/specs — I guess nobody
 will ever drop it…

And kids aren't rough wit things at all... ever ;-)

 On Oct 16, 2014, at 9:27 AM, Peter Robinson pbrobin...@gmail.com wrote:

 On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 2:11 PM, Tim Moody t...@timmoody.com wrote:
 I personally have not had much luck with Indiegogo as far as actually
 getting stuff is concerned, but an interesting project if rather expensive.

 https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/pi-top-a-raspberry-pi-laptop-you-build-yourself

 It would be even more interesting if it could be coupled with a more
 capable Pi compatible device such as the BananaPi or Hummingboard.

 Peter
 ___
 Server-devel mailing list
 Server-devel@lists.laptop.org
 http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/server-devel

___
Server-devel mailing list
Server-devel@lists.laptop.org
http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/server-devel


Re: Yum random crashes in XO4 f20 images

2014-09-09 Thread Peter Robinson
Hi Martin,

 I am have been building a Fedora 20 image for the XO4, and I am seeing
 memory corruption problems while running yum in these images (please check
 the logs [1,2]).

The logs don't mean anything to me. What device are you running it on,
how much memory, do you have swap enabled?

 To give you some context, we are using olpc-os-builder (master [3]) with
 fc20 repositories plus a few hand-crafted packages such as the kernel,
 systemd and xorg, taken from previous Daniel Narvaez efforts [4,5].

 These crashes happens randomly when yum is running, by calling yum update or
 when olpc-os-build is installing system packages.

Yum isn't the most memory friendly, and some of the post update
scripts aren't either, you need to make sure there's enough
memory/swap.

 James Cameron, who spent some time researching about this issue, speculates
 that this problem could be caused by: (a) using older kernel that was
 compiled (possibly) with different options compared to f20's, or (b) a
 faulty glibc library.

 I was wondering if this could be related to something else, something more
 specific to  yum or python arm binaries (?).

Unlikely, I've not seen issues elsewhere. But I need more details.

 I would sincerely appreciate any guidance you can provide to start
 discarding possibilities and try to debug this issue.

 Thanks in advance for any help you can provide!

What version of OOB are you using, and what config files? I can try
and recreate the problem here on other devices.

Peter
___
Devel mailing list
Devel@lists.laptop.org
http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel


Re: WebKit uses SSE XMM and breaks on XO-1

2014-08-25 Thread Peter Robinson
Hi James,

On Sat, Aug 23, 2014 at 7:05 AM, James Cameron qu...@laptop.org wrote:
 With recent changes to Google Search JavaScript, searching terminates
 Browse with a SIGSEGV, in WTF::dtoa.

 http://bugs.sugarlabs.org/ticket/4785

 This is only seen on an XO-1, in 13.2.1, 13.2.0, all the way back to
 12.1.0.  It is not seen on more recent XO laptops.

 On Fedora 20, with Sugar 0.102, and Browse-156, on kernel 3.10, does
 similar, but the failure is SIGILL.  Using gdb we find the failing
 instructions are references to XMM registers:

0xabeda509:  mov0x4(%eax),%ebx
0xabeda50c:  cmp-0x8(%ebx),%ecx
0xabeda50f:  jae0xabedbcde
 = 0xabeda515:  movsd  (%ebx,%ecx,8),%xmm0=
0xabeda51a:  ucomisd %xmm0,%xmm0
0xabeda51e:  jp 0xabedbcde
0xabeda524:  movd   %xmm0,%eax

 The XO-1 with AMD Geode processor does not have these registers, so
 the SIGILL is valid.

 So it would seem one way to fix this may be to rebuild WebKit without
 this instruction stream.

 But first, I want to make sure I can rebuild WebKit.  I've tried on a
 Fedora 20 system to do this:

 yumdownloader --source webkitgtk3
 rpmrebuild --rebuild webkitgtk3-1.10.2-3.fc18.src.rpm

 But it fails with this:

 libtool: link: gcc -o 
 /root/rpmbuild/BUILD/webkitgtk-1.10.2/tmp-introspectHnbXap/.libs/WebKit-3.0 
 -O2 -g1 -pipe -Wall -Wp,-D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 -fexceptions -fstack-protector 
 --param=ssp-buffer-size=4 -m32 -march=i686 -mtune=atom 
 -fasynchronous-unwind-tables 
 -DLIBSOUP_I_HAVE_READ_BUG_594377_AND_KNOW_SOUP_PASSWORD_MANAGER_MIGHT_GO_AWAY 
 -O2 -Wl,-z -Wl,relro 
 /root/rpmbuild/BUILD/webkitgtk-1.10.2/tmp-introspectHnbXap/WebKit-3.0.o 
 -Wl,--export-dynamic -pthread -Wl,--export-dynamic  -L. 
 /root/rpmbuild/BUILD/webkitgtk-1.10.2/.libs/libwebkitgtk-3.0.so 
 /root/rpmbuild/BUILD/webkitgtk-1.10.2/.libs/libjavascriptcoregtk-3.0.so 
 -lgmodule-2.0 -lrt -lgtk-3 -lgdk-3 -latk-1.0 -lpangocairo-1.0 
 -lgdk_pixbuf-2.0 -lcairo-gobject -lpango-1.0 -lcairo -lsoup-2.4 -lgio-2.0 
 -lgobject-2.0 -lglib-2.0 -pthread
 /lib/libGL.so.1: undefined reference to `_glapi_tls_Dispatch'
 /lib/libEGL.so.1: undefined reference to `wl_display_dispatch_queue_pending'
 collect2: error: ld returned 1 exit status
 linking of temporary binary failed: Command '['./doltlibtool', '--mode=link', 
 '--tag=CC', 'gcc', '-o', 
 '/root/rpmbuild/BUILD/webkitgtk-1.10.2/tmp-introspectHnbXap/WebKit-3.0', 
 '-export-dynamic', '-O2', '-g1', '-pipe', '-Wall', '-Wp,-D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2', 
 '-fexceptions', '-fstack-protector', '--param=ssp-buffer-size=4', '-m32', 
 '-march=i686', '-mtune=atom', '-fasynchronous-unwind-tables', 
 '-DLIBSOUP_I_HAVE_READ_BUG_594377_AND_KNOW_SOUP_PASSWORD_MANAGER_MIGHT_GO_AWAY',
  '-O2', '-Wl,-z,relro', 
 '/root/rpmbuild/BUILD/webkitgtk-1.10.2/tmp-introspectHnbXap/WebKit-3.0.o', 
 '-L.', '-lwebkitgtk-3.0', '-ljavascriptcoregtk-3.0', '-Wl,--export-dynamic', 
 '-pthread', '-lgmodule-2.0', '-lrt', '-lgtk-3', '-lgdk-3', '-latk-1.0', 
 '-lpangocairo-1.0', '-lgdk_pixbuf-2.0', '-lcairo-gobject', '-lpango-1.0', 
 '-lcairo', '-lsoup-2.4', '-lgio-2.0', '-lgobject-2.0', '-lglib-2.0']' 
 returned non-zero exit status 1
 make[1]: *** [WebKit-3.0.gir] Error 1
 make[1]: Leaving directory `/root/rpmbuild/BUILD/webkitgtk-1.10.2'
 make: *** [all] Error 2
 error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.vGFtGZ (%build)

I wonder if that's due to a newer mesa, I can have a look, or
review/push any package updates needed to Fedora to fix this. Let me
know how I can help fix this.

Peter
___
Devel mailing list
Devel@lists.laptop.org
http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel


Re: [Sugar-devel] XO on Fedora 20 (was Re: [GSoC] Porting To Python3)

2014-05-16 Thread Peter Robinson
 to  be honest I haven't even evaluated alternative distributions because I
 don't think we would have enough resources to do it anyway. We are making
 minor changes to olpc-os-builder, rewriting it for another distribution
 would be a lot of work.

Sorry to be late in replying to this thread but it's been a week of travel.

So I've had a number of people ping me about bringing support for the
XO-* devices into Fedora as a supported platform. I think it's
reasonably achievable but will likely need some assistance. I think
it's probably worth starting a separate thread but I'll put some quick
points here, if people generally think it's worthwhile I'll kick off a
more detailed thread.

The new Fedora structure for F-21 and moving forward is likely a
better candidate for longer term support for things like a XO-*
distro. There is planned a number of improvements from both a
technical and procedural PoV but it's still a little in flux.

From a tech PoV specifically discussing the various XO-* as a HW
platform here's some bullet points:
- Need to rebase to a newer kernel from a supportability PoV (wifi
stability etc)
- ARM wise there's people working to upstream the MMP2/3 platforms the
ARM XOs are based on.
- The etna_viv is likely the best driver for the ARM devices and in
the F-21 timeframe should support even gnome3/mesa

Not sure of the x86 kernel staus, I seem to remember dsd had kernel
status documented on the wiki.

OOB should be relatively easy to support moving forward, not sure
about olpc-update but I suspect that with decent OOB support most
deployments actually spin their own custom releases so I'm unconvinced
of it's importance.

  things are looking good so far, we already have all the models booting
  into
  sugar 0.101 with wif apparentlyi working. I would like to take a step
  back
  and understand a bit better where we want to go with this. Some random
  thoughts and questions.
 
  * To really understand how much work is left I think we need some good
  testing, especially on the hardware related bits. I expect there will be
  lots of small things to fix, but it would be good to understand as early
  as
  possible if there are roadblocks. I'm a bad tester and I've never used
  the
  XO much, so I'm often not sure what is a regression and what is not...
  thus
  helping with this would be particularly appreciated.
  * Which deployments are planning to ship 0.102 soon and hence are
  interested
  in this work? I know of AU. Maybe Uruguay?
  * Do we need to support all the XO models?
  * Should we contribute the olpc-os-builder changes back to OLPC or fork
  it?
  I don't know if OLPC will do any active development on the linux side of
  things, if not maybe better to turn this into a sugarlabs thing.
  * Are interested deployments using olpc-update? If I'm not mistake AU is
  not.
  * Do we care about maintaining the GNOME dual boot? I'm afraid we do,
  but
  I want to make sure.
  * As I mentioned in some other thread I'm interested in setting up
  automated
  builds from sugar master. I have some vague plan of what it would look
  like
  and wrote bits of it. The basic idea is that you would push changes to
  github and get images automatically built. I think this is good for
  upstream
  testing but the same infrastructure could be used by deployments. Are
  people
  interested in using this?

 Why is all this work being put into Fedora 20?  The maintenance window
 is limited and as of the next release they won't even support non-KMS
 drivers by default.  Wouldn't make sense to look into a distribution
 that provides and LTS release?  Resources already seem to be limited
 so having to chase after Fedora every 6 months to a year seems like a
 waste of resources.  The GTK3 and GNOME teams obviously have their
 eyes on a different class of hardware than what is being used by
 deployments.

Well F-20 will be supported for quite some time due to the extended
release cycle of F-21 so I suspect it'll be supported until the end of
2015 given that F-21 isn't due until October and most of the work will
translate directly into F-21 with little effort.

The thing to remember is that Sugar and the userspace in Fedora is in
good shape for Sugar which means that it's really only HW support and
specific use cases that needs to be dealt with. I'm not sure what the
state of Sugar is in other distros.

Peter
___
Devel mailing list
Devel@lists.laptop.org
http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel


Re: Minor changes to olpc-kbdshim and olpc-powerd

2014-05-14 Thread Peter Robinson
On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 2:20 PM, Martin Langhoff
martin.langh...@gmail.com wrote:
 From bz traffic, I think these packages are in the process of changing
 to no longer auto-activate systemd services. Not sure which Fedora
 versions these updates will land in.

It's part of Fedora policy, will only be in F-20+

 olpc-os-builder should learn to activate them. I don't think F20
 images work completely these days, I just wanted to mention this as
 I'm sure it'll help.

That is in fact true of all services we depend on actually. The
standard Fedora policy now is to not activate installed services by
default.

 The changed packages are in QA, so they'll land in a few days in... F20? F21?

Already in F-21 but I'm happy the leave them languish in
updates-testing for as long as needed.

Just to reiterate this won't just be a problem with those two services.

Peter




 m
 --
  martin.langh...@gmail.com
  -  ask interesting questions
  - don't get distracted with shiny stuff  - working code first
  ~ http://docs.moodle.org/en/User:Martin_Langhoff
___
Devel mailing list
Devel@lists.laptop.org
http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel


Re: [Sugar-devel] XO on Fedora 20 (was Re: [GSoC] Porting To Python3)

2014-05-12 Thread Peter Robinson
I suspect the Xorg ABI has changed from F-18 - F-20 so I suspect
someone with access to the appropriate driver source will need to
rebuild the rpm for the new Xorg ABI.

Peter

On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 3:16 PM, Gonzalo Odiard godi...@sugarlabs.org wrote:
 bash-4.2# cat  /var/log/Xorg.0.log
 [32.666]
 X.Org X Server 1.14.4
 Release Date: 2013-10-31
 [32.666] X Protocol Version 11, Revision 0
 [32.666] Build Operating System:  3.12.8-300.fc20.x86_64
 [32.666] Current Operating System: Linux xo-a7-32-6d.localdomain
 3.3.8_xo1.5-20140212.1212.olpc.e98f01a #1 PREEMPT Wed Feb 12 12:22:19 EST
 2014 i686
 [32.666] Kernel command line: console=ttyS0,115200 console=tty0
 fbcon=font:SUN12x22 no_console_suspend selinux=0
 [32.666] Build Date: 28 February 2014  03:35:45AM
 [32.666] Build ID: xorg-x11-server 1.14.4-7.fc20
 [32.666] Current version of pixman: 0.30.0
 [32.666] Before reporting problems, check http://wiki.x.org
 to make sure that you have the latest version.
 [32.666] Markers: (--) probed, (**) from config file, (==) default
 setting,
 (++) from command line, (!!) notice, (II) informational,
 (WW) warning, (EE) error, (NI) not implemented, (??) unknown.
 [32.666] (==) Log file: /var/log/Xorg.0.log, Time: Mon May 12 14:23:38
 2014
 [32.667] (==) Using config directory: /etc/X11/xorg.conf.d
 [32.667] (==) Using system config directory /usr/share/X11/xorg.conf.d
 [32.668] (==) No Layout section.  Using the first Screen section.
 [32.668] (==) No screen section available. Using defaults.
 [32.668] (**) |--Screen Default Screen Section (0)
 [32.668] (**) |   |--Monitor default monitor
 [32.668] (==) No device specified for screen Default Screen Section.
 Using the first device section listed.
 [32.668] (**) |   |--Device Configured Video Device
 [32.668] (==) No monitor specified for screen Default Screen Section.
 Using a default monitor configuration.
 [32.668] (**) Option DontZap true
 [32.669] (**) Option BlankTime 0
 [32.669] (**) Option StandbyTime 0
 [32.669] (**) Option SuspendTime 0
 [32.669] (**) Option OffTime 0
 [32.669] (==) Automatically adding devices
 [32.669] (==) Automatically enabling devices
 [32.669] (==) Automatically adding GPU devices
 [32.669] (==) FontPath set to:
 catalogue:/etc/X11/fontpath.d,
 built-ins
 [32.669] (==) ModulePath set to /usr/lib/xorg/modules
 [32.669] (**) Extension DPMS is disabled
 [32.669] (II) The server relies on udev to provide the list of input
 devices.
 If no devices become available, reconfigure udev or disable AutoAddDevices.
 [32.669] (II) Loader magic: 0x826b6a0
 [32.669] (II) Module ABI versions:
 [32.669] X.Org ANSI C Emulation: 0.4
 [32.669] X.Org Video Driver: 14.1
 [32.669] X.Org XInput driver : 19.2
 [32.669] X.Org Server Extension : 7.0
 [32.672] (--) PCI:*(0:0:1:0) 1106:5122:152d:0833 rev 0, Mem @
 0xd000/67108864, 0xf000/16777216, BIOS @ 0x/65536
 [32.672] Initializing built-in extension Generic Event Extension
 [32.672] Initializing built-in extension SHAPE
 [32.672] Initializing built-in extension MIT-SHM
 [32.672] Initializing built-in extension XInputExtension
 [32.673] Initializing built-in extension XTEST
 [32.673] Initializing built-in extension BIG-REQUESTS
 [32.673] Initializing built-in extension SYNC
 [32.673] Initializing built-in extension XKEYBOARD
 [32.673] Initializing built-in extension XC-MISC
 [32.673] Initializing built-in extension XINERAMA
 [32.673] Initializing built-in extension XFIXES
 [32.673] Initializing built-in extension RENDER
 [32.673] Initializing built-in extension RANDR
 [32.673] Initializing built-in extension COMPOSITE
 [32.673] Initializing built-in extension DAMAGE
 [32.673] Initializing built-in extension MIT-SCREEN-SAVER
 [32.673] Initializing built-in extension DOUBLE-BUFFER
 [32.673] Initializing built-in extension RECORD
 [32.673] Initializing built-in extension DPMS
 [32.673] Initializing built-in extension X-Resource
 [32.673] Initializing built-in extension XVideo
 [32.673] Initializing built-in extension XVideo-MotionCompensation
 [32.673] Initializing built-in extension SELinux
 [32.673] Initializing built-in extension XFree86-VidModeExtension
 [32.673] Initializing built-in extension XFree86-DGA
 [32.673] Initializing built-in extension XFree86-DRI
 [32.673] Initializing built-in extension DRI2
 [32.673] (II) LoadModule: glx
 [32.674] (II) Loading /usr/lib/xorg/modules/extensions/libglx.so
 [32.674] (II) Module glx: vendor=X.Org Foundation
 [32.674] compiled for 1.14.4, module version = 1.0.0
 [32.674] ABI class: X.Org Server Extension, version 7.0
 [32.674] (==) AIGLX enabled
 [32.674] Loading extension GLX
 [32.674] (II) LoadModule: chrome
 [32.675] (II) Loading 

Re: gnome applet can't initialize Clutter

2014-05-10 Thread Peter Robinson
most of the gnome3 stack won't currently run on any of the XOs

Peter

On Sat, May 10, 2014 at 7:42 PM, Scott Chapman sc...@mischko.com wrote:
 This affects other gnome commands such as gnome-control-panel as well.


 On Sat, May 10, 2014 at 12:40 AM, Scott Chapman sc...@mischko.com wrote:

 Hi!

 I just got an XO-4 and working to get some things working - bluetooth in
 this case.

 I installed the latest OLPC distro to the internal storage as follows from
 the ok prompt:
 fs-update u:\32013o4.zd

 booted to sugar - switched to Gnome

 Bluetooth applet won't show a screen when you right-click on the icon in
 upper right and select Bluetooth Settings.

 So, I killed the existing bluetooth-applet and ran another one from the
 command line in a terminal:

 [olpc@xo-d2-7f-9f ~]$ bluetooth-applet

 # Here I selected Bluetooth Settings in the new icon and got this:

 (gnome-control-center:1100): GModule-CRITICAL **: g_module_close:
 assertion `module-ref_count  0' failed

 (gnome-control-center:1100): Clutter-CRITICAL **: Unable to initialize
 Clutter: Failed to connected to any renderer due to constraints

 How do I get this working?

 Thanks,
 Scott



 ___
 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


Re: gnome applet can't initialize Clutter

2014-05-10 Thread Peter Robinson
I don't remember the details of the 13.2.0 build, I seem to remember
that it was the last release to include fall back mode. The gnome3
fallback mode had issues in that anything that was linked against
clutter fails because of the lack of opengl support in all of the X
drivers.

Peter

On Sat, May 10, 2014 at 7:50 PM, Scott Chapman sc...@mischko.com wrote:
 That appears to be the version included with the 13.2.0 build?

 What build should I downgrade to that will run Gnome correctly? Or is there
 an easy way to get a non-sugar GUI working on one of these?


 On Sat, May 10, 2014 at 11:48 AM, Peter Robinson pbrobin...@gmail.com
 wrote:

 most of the gnome3 stack won't currently run on any of the XOs

 Peter

 On Sat, May 10, 2014 at 7:42 PM, Scott Chapman sc...@mischko.com wrote:
  This affects other gnome commands such as gnome-control-panel as well.
 
 
  On Sat, May 10, 2014 at 12:40 AM, Scott Chapman sc...@mischko.com
  wrote:
 
  Hi!
 
  I just got an XO-4 and working to get some things working - bluetooth
  in
  this case.
 
  I installed the latest OLPC distro to the internal storage as follows
  from
  the ok prompt:
  fs-update u:\32013o4.zd
 
  booted to sugar - switched to Gnome
 
  Bluetooth applet won't show a screen when you right-click on the icon
  in
  upper right and select Bluetooth Settings.
 
  So, I killed the existing bluetooth-applet and ran another one from the
  command line in a terminal:
 
  [olpc@xo-d2-7f-9f ~]$ bluetooth-applet
 
  # Here I selected Bluetooth Settings in the new icon and got this:
 
  (gnome-control-center:1100): GModule-CRITICAL **: g_module_close:
  assertion `module-ref_count  0' failed
 
  (gnome-control-center:1100): Clutter-CRITICAL **: Unable to initialize
  Clutter: Failed to connected to any renderer due to constraints
 
  How do I get this working?
 
  Thanks,
  Scott
 
 
 
  ___
  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


Re: gnome applet can't initialize Clutter

2014-05-10 Thread Peter Robinson
On Sat, May 10, 2014 at 7:55 PM, Scott Chapman sc...@mischko.com wrote:
 I'm new to the XO-4.  So it appears that nobody is running a GUI besides
 Sugar on these?

No idea, I have a bunch of XO-4s and other XO devices as I was
involved in the bring up of the ARM platforms and devices.

 We don't have opengl support in the X drivers because of the video type on
 these?

Nope, welcome to closed drivers... The reverse engineered etna_viv
driver will one day be usable with luck but it will depend on a newer
upstream kernel.

 I wonder why OLPC published a build with Gnome if it is this broken?

It's not completely broken, just some components.

Peter



 On Sat, May 10, 2014 at 11:53 AM, Peter Robinson pbrobin...@gmail.com
 wrote:

 I don't remember the details of the 13.2.0 build, I seem to remember
 that it was the last release to include fall back mode. The gnome3
 fallback mode had issues in that anything that was linked against
 clutter fails because of the lack of opengl support in all of the X
 drivers.

 Peter

 On Sat, May 10, 2014 at 7:50 PM, Scott Chapman sc...@mischko.com wrote:
  That appears to be the version included with the 13.2.0 build?
 
  What build should I downgrade to that will run Gnome correctly? Or is
  there
  an easy way to get a non-sugar GUI working on one of these?
 
 
  On Sat, May 10, 2014 at 11:48 AM, Peter Robinson pbrobin...@gmail.com
  wrote:
 
  most of the gnome3 stack won't currently run on any of the XOs
 
  Peter
 
  On Sat, May 10, 2014 at 7:42 PM, Scott Chapman sc...@mischko.com
  wrote:
   This affects other gnome commands such as gnome-control-panel as
   well.
  
  
   On Sat, May 10, 2014 at 12:40 AM, Scott Chapman sc...@mischko.com
   wrote:
  
   Hi!
  
   I just got an XO-4 and working to get some things working -
   bluetooth
   in
   this case.
  
   I installed the latest OLPC distro to the internal storage as
   follows
   from
   the ok prompt:
   fs-update u:\32013o4.zd
  
   booted to sugar - switched to Gnome
  
   Bluetooth applet won't show a screen when you right-click on the
   icon
   in
   upper right and select Bluetooth Settings.
  
   So, I killed the existing bluetooth-applet and ran another one from
   the
   command line in a terminal:
  
   [olpc@xo-d2-7f-9f ~]$ bluetooth-applet
  
   # Here I selected Bluetooth Settings in the new icon and got this:
  
   (gnome-control-center:1100): GModule-CRITICAL **: g_module_close:
   assertion `module-ref_count  0' failed
  
   (gnome-control-center:1100): Clutter-CRITICAL **: Unable to
   initialize
   Clutter: Failed to connected to any renderer due to constraints
  
   How do I get this working?
  
   Thanks,
   Scott
  
  
  
   ___
   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


Re: gnome applet can't initialize Clutter

2014-05-10 Thread Peter Robinson
On Sat, May 10, 2014 at 8:04 PM, Scott Chapman sc...@mischko.com wrote:
 I'm not very savvy about video drivers but looking here:

 http://www.vivantecorp.com/technology/3d.html

 It shows the GC2000 series (which I find is in the XO-4 here:
 http://wiki.laptop.org/go/XO-4_Touch) supports a bunch of OpenGL API's.

It's not the version that's shipped.

 /me confused


 On Sat, May 10, 2014 at 12:01 PM, Peter Robinson pbrobin...@gmail.com
 wrote:

 On Sat, May 10, 2014 at 7:55 PM, Scott Chapman sc...@mischko.com wrote:
  I'm new to the XO-4.  So it appears that nobody is running a GUI besides
  Sugar on these?

 No idea, I have a bunch of XO-4s and other XO devices as I was
 involved in the bring up of the ARM platforms and devices.

  We don't have opengl support in the X drivers because of the video type
  on
  these?

 Nope, welcome to closed drivers... The reverse engineered etna_viv
 driver will one day be usable with luck but it will depend on a newer
 upstream kernel.

  I wonder why OLPC published a build with Gnome if it is this broken?

 It's not completely broken, just some components.

 Peter

 
 
  On Sat, May 10, 2014 at 11:53 AM, Peter Robinson pbrobin...@gmail.com
  wrote:
 
  I don't remember the details of the 13.2.0 build, I seem to remember
  that it was the last release to include fall back mode. The gnome3
  fallback mode had issues in that anything that was linked against
  clutter fails because of the lack of opengl support in all of the X
  drivers.
 
  Peter
 
  On Sat, May 10, 2014 at 7:50 PM, Scott Chapman sc...@mischko.com
  wrote:
   That appears to be the version included with the 13.2.0 build?
  
   What build should I downgrade to that will run Gnome correctly? Or is
   there
   an easy way to get a non-sugar GUI working on one of these?
  
  
   On Sat, May 10, 2014 at 11:48 AM, Peter Robinson
   pbrobin...@gmail.com
   wrote:
  
   most of the gnome3 stack won't currently run on any of the XOs
  
   Peter
  
   On Sat, May 10, 2014 at 7:42 PM, Scott Chapman sc...@mischko.com
   wrote:
This affects other gnome commands such as gnome-control-panel as
well.
   
   
On Sat, May 10, 2014 at 12:40 AM, Scott Chapman
sc...@mischko.com
wrote:
   
Hi!
   
I just got an XO-4 and working to get some things working -
bluetooth
in
this case.
   
I installed the latest OLPC distro to the internal storage as
follows
from
the ok prompt:
fs-update u:\32013o4.zd
   
booted to sugar - switched to Gnome
   
Bluetooth applet won't show a screen when you right-click on the
icon
in
upper right and select Bluetooth Settings.
   
So, I killed the existing bluetooth-applet and ran another one
from
the
command line in a terminal:
   
[olpc@xo-d2-7f-9f ~]$ bluetooth-applet
   
# Here I selected Bluetooth Settings in the new icon and got
this:
   
(gnome-control-center:1100): GModule-CRITICAL **: g_module_close:
assertion `module-ref_count  0' failed
   
(gnome-control-center:1100): Clutter-CRITICAL **: Unable to
initialize
Clutter: Failed to connected to any renderer due to constraints
   
How do I get this working?
   
Thanks,
Scott
   
   
   
___
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


Re: gnome applet can't initialize Clutter

2014-05-10 Thread Peter Robinson
On Sat, May 10, 2014 at 8:06 PM, Scott Chapman sc...@mischko.com wrote:
 How do we find that version?

It's not that simple. The GC2000 is a design that's sold and is made
up of a number of components (2D, 3D, video decoding etc) which
vendors can chose which they pay for. You then have to adjust the
drivers to work with the SoC you purchase (Marvell MMP3 in the case of
the XO-4, MMP2 in the case of the XO-1.75) and in some cases there is
or isn't external video RAM and other things that need to be taken
into account too. You then have to taylor the video drivers for the
platform configuration and build them and ship them if you're lucky
enough to have access to the source or deal with the upstream SoC
manufacturer if your not, the code is closed so it's not something
anyone can do.

From memory we only shipped the 2D drivers, I don't remember the
reasoning. You'd have to ask OLPC the reasons or if the 3D components
exist.

You could possibly do mesa based CPU rendering to make it work but it
wouldn't be fast. I know there's work upstream to offload some of the
CPU SW based rendering to the NEON extensions for ARMv7 that would
work for for the XO-4 but not the 1.75 (it doesn't have a NEON engine)

Peter

 On Sat, May 10, 2014 at 12:06 PM, Peter Robinson pbrobin...@gmail.com
 wrote:

 On Sat, May 10, 2014 at 8:04 PM, Scott Chapman sc...@mischko.com wrote:
  I'm not very savvy about video drivers but looking here:
 
  http://www.vivantecorp.com/technology/3d.html
 
  It shows the GC2000 series (which I find is in the XO-4 here:
  http://wiki.laptop.org/go/XO-4_Touch) supports a bunch of OpenGL API's.

 It's not the version that's shipped.

  /me confused
 
 
  On Sat, May 10, 2014 at 12:01 PM, Peter Robinson pbrobin...@gmail.com
  wrote:
 
  On Sat, May 10, 2014 at 7:55 PM, Scott Chapman sc...@mischko.com
  wrote:
   I'm new to the XO-4.  So it appears that nobody is running a GUI
   besides
   Sugar on these?
 
  No idea, I have a bunch of XO-4s and other XO devices as I was
  involved in the bring up of the ARM platforms and devices.
 
   We don't have opengl support in the X drivers because of the video
   type
   on
   these?
 
  Nope, welcome to closed drivers... The reverse engineered etna_viv
  driver will one day be usable with luck but it will depend on a newer
  upstream kernel.
 
   I wonder why OLPC published a build with Gnome if it is this broken?
 
  It's not completely broken, just some components.
 
  Peter
 
  
  
   On Sat, May 10, 2014 at 11:53 AM, Peter Robinson
   pbrobin...@gmail.com
   wrote:
  
   I don't remember the details of the 13.2.0 build, I seem to remember
   that it was the last release to include fall back mode. The gnome3
   fallback mode had issues in that anything that was linked against
   clutter fails because of the lack of opengl support in all of the X
   drivers.
  
   Peter
  
   On Sat, May 10, 2014 at 7:50 PM, Scott Chapman sc...@mischko.com
   wrote:
That appears to be the version included with the 13.2.0 build?
   
What build should I downgrade to that will run Gnome correctly? Or
is
there
an easy way to get a non-sugar GUI working on one of these?
   
   
On Sat, May 10, 2014 at 11:48 AM, Peter Robinson
pbrobin...@gmail.com
wrote:
   
most of the gnome3 stack won't currently run on any of the XOs
   
Peter
   
On Sat, May 10, 2014 at 7:42 PM, Scott Chapman
sc...@mischko.com
wrote:
 This affects other gnome commands such as gnome-control-panel
 as
 well.


 On Sat, May 10, 2014 at 12:40 AM, Scott Chapman
 sc...@mischko.com
 wrote:

 Hi!

 I just got an XO-4 and working to get some things working -
 bluetooth
 in
 this case.

 I installed the latest OLPC distro to the internal storage as
 follows
 from
 the ok prompt:
 fs-update u:\32013o4.zd

 booted to sugar - switched to Gnome

 Bluetooth applet won't show a screen when you right-click on
 the
 icon
 in
 upper right and select Bluetooth Settings.

 So, I killed the existing bluetooth-applet and ran another one
 from
 the
 command line in a terminal:

 [olpc@xo-d2-7f-9f ~]$ bluetooth-applet

 # Here I selected Bluetooth Settings in the new icon and got
 this:

 (gnome-control-center:1100): GModule-CRITICAL **:
 g_module_close:
 assertion `module-ref_count  0' failed

 (gnome-control-center:1100): Clutter-CRITICAL **: Unable to
 initialize
 Clutter: Failed to connected to any renderer due to
 constraints

 How do I get this working?

 Thanks,
 Scott



 ___
 Devel mailing list
 Devel@lists.laptop.org
 http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel

   
   
  
  
 
 


___
Devel mailing list
Devel@lists.laptop.org
http://lists.laptop.org

Re: [Sugar-devel] XO on Fedora 20 (was Re: [GSoC] Porting To Python3)

2014-05-09 Thread Peter Robinson
 On Tue, May 06, 2014 at 04:24:39PM +0200, Daniel Narvaez wrote:
  [...] And with the XO stuck on Fedora 18 we might not have good
  enough introspection to make the port compatible with it.

 If anybody would like to work on moving olpc-os-builder to something
 more recent, feel free.  It isn't something OLPC is looking at right
 now, but it would be helpful to the users.

 Not the die hard 0.98 users, of course.  ;-)


 I'm giving that a try. I was able to build a Fedora 20 image for XO 1.5

 https://github.com/dnarvaez/olpc-os-builder

 olpc-os-builder git master also has F20 support, as of a few months
 ago. Can't remember how good the result was.

I suspect wifi and anything that needed firmware will fail to work
because of changes in the firmware loading interface needs newer
kernels (3.4 is too old for example)

Support of the XOs in Fedora upstream is something I've been asked
about a number of times of late by varying different people.

Peter
___
Devel mailing list
Devel@lists.laptop.org
http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel


Re: Rhel

2013-12-18 Thread Peter Robinson
On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 3:23 PM, Kevin Gordon Gmail
kgordon...@gmail.com wrote:

 I have a lead on someone to help in testing and building. However, he's an
 rhel dude.

 Does anyone have experience in doing oob, and/or loading sugar on this o/s?
 If so, any hints, pitfalls, or should the usual yum installs be happy?

 Supposedly the release of rhel he's using now is public beta of v7 and based
 on fc19, kernel 3.1, which might or might not be problematic.

kernel is 3.10 and the process should mostly be the same as Fedora but
it's likely that it won't actually have all the needed dependencies.
If he's a RHEL dude he should be able to get his head around using
Fedora given RHEL-7 beta is derived from Fedora 19.

Peter
___
Devel mailing list
Devel@lists.laptop.org
http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel


Re: Rhel

2013-12-18 Thread Peter Robinson
On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 3:55 PM, Gonzalo Odiard gonz...@laptop.org wrote:
 oob works with F18, then I don't know why would have missing dependencies...

Because RHEL doesn't ship with all the packages that Fedora does. We
might be OK, I've not checked.

Peter

 On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 12:45 PM, Peter Robinson pbrobin...@gmail.com
 wrote:

 On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 3:23 PM, Kevin Gordon Gmail
 kgordon...@gmail.com wrote:
 
  I have a lead on someone to help in testing and building. However, he's
  an
  rhel dude.
 
  Does anyone have experience in doing oob, and/or loading sugar on this
  o/s?
  If so, any hints, pitfalls, or should the usual yum installs be happy?
 
  Supposedly the release of rhel he's using now is public beta of v7 and
  based
  on fc19, kernel 3.1, which might or might not be problematic.

 kernel is 3.10 and the process should mostly be the same as Fedora but
 it's likely that it won't actually have all the needed dependencies.
 If he's a RHEL dude he should be able to get his head around using
 Fedora given RHEL-7 beta is derived from Fedora 19.

 Peter
 ___
 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


Re: Rhel

2013-12-18 Thread Peter Robinson
On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 5:34 PM, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com wrote:
 oob = ? :)

olpc-os-builder


 On 18 December 2013 16:55, Gonzalo Odiard gonz...@laptop.org wrote:

 oob works with F18, then I don't know why would have missing
 dependencies...

 Gonzalo


 On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 12:45 PM, Peter Robinson pbrobin...@gmail.com
 wrote:

 On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 3:23 PM, Kevin Gordon Gmail
 kgordon...@gmail.com wrote:
 
  I have a lead on someone to help in testing and building. However, he's
  an
  rhel dude.
 
  Does anyone have experience in doing oob, and/or loading sugar on this
  o/s?
  If so, any hints, pitfalls, or should the usual yum installs be happy?
 
  Supposedly the release of rhel he's using now is public beta of v7 and
  based
  on fc19, kernel 3.1, which might or might not be problematic.

 kernel is 3.10 and the process should mostly be the same as Fedora but
 it's likely that it won't actually have all the needed dependencies.
 If he's a RHEL dude he should be able to get his head around using
 Fedora given RHEL-7 beta is derived from Fedora 19.

 Peter
 ___
 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




 --
 Daniel Narvaez
___
Devel mailing list
Devel@lists.laptop.org
http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel


Re: [Sugar-devel] Sugar 0.100.0 (stable)

2013-11-05 Thread Peter Robinson
On Mon, Nov 4, 2013 at 11:13 PM, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com wrote:
 On 5 November 2013 00:07, Peter Robinson pbrobin...@gmail.com wrote:

 On Mon, Nov 4, 2013 at 10:59 PM, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com
 wrote:
  Broken annotation in abiword. Trying to figure out the correct one then
  I'll
  open a bug + patch.

 Thanks! Let me know when you've got a patch and I'll test it.


 Here it is

 http://bugzilla.abisource.com/show_bug.cgi?id=13572

Thanks, that's fixed the running issue for me on Fedora 20, I've
pushed the patch to the Fedora abiword 3 and will do more testing
later. Thanks for your quick assistance with this.

Peter
___
Devel mailing list
Devel@lists.laptop.org
http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel


Re: [Server-devel] mesh potato

2013-11-05 Thread Peter Robinson
On Tue, Oct 29, 2013 at 6:30 PM, Tony Anderson tony_ander...@usa.net wrote:
 Hi,

 There was discussion of this at the SF sprint.

 As I understand it, openWRT (from the Shuttleworth project) can be installed
 on
 a TP-Link router. It can be configured to serve connected XOs (such as in a
 classroom)
 on a mesh. It could also serve as a gateway to the school server's LAN.

 If this could work, then the schoolserver would not provide DHCP (since the
 mesh potato routers would
 have fixed addresses on the schoolserver LAN) and would not provide ejabberd
 (since that function is
 served by the classroom-level mesh).

 Presumably each classroom mesh would be a subnet of the LAN so that openWRT
 would act as a gateway
 for messages directed at the schoolserver.

 Is my understanding in the ballpark?

I'm not sure why you would use a mesh in a classroom if it was
connected to a LAN like this. If you were planning a single AP/router
per classroom and you have a school server (likely even if you didn't
have a SS) you'd be better of running the AP/router in AP mode then as
a mesh as it offers much better performance and management, I'm not
sure what a mesh would offer in this configurations.

Peter
___
Server-devel mailing list
Server-devel@lists.laptop.org
http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/server-devel


Re: [Sugar-devel] Sugar 0.100.0 (stable)

2013-11-04 Thread Peter Robinson
On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 12:45 AM, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com wrote:
 Hello,

 we are proud to announce the release of Sugar 0.100.0. A lot is new for both
 users and developers, see the release notes

 http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/0.100/Notes

 Sources:

 http://download.sugarlabs.org/sources/sucrose/glucose/sugar-datastore/sugar-datastore-0.100.0.tar.xz
 http://download.sugarlabs.org/sources/sucrose/glucose/sugar-artwork/sugar-artwork-0.100.0.tar.xz
 http://download.sugarlabs.org/sources/sucrose/glucose/sugar-runner/sugar-runner-0.100.0.tar.xz
 http://download.sugarlabs.org/sources/sucrose/glucose/sugar/sugar-0.100.1.tar.xz
 http://download.sugarlabs.org/sources/sucrose/glucose/sugar-toolkit-gtk3/sugar-toolkit-gtk3-0.100.0.tar.xz

 Thanks to everyone that contributed with code, translations and testing!

These are now in updates-testing in Fedora 20. They're not yet in the
Fedora 20 stable channel because they're locked down for Beta but will
land in stable shortly after Beta. It would be good to get some wider
testing and feedback. The big issue at the moment is Write failing to
run and I would love some assistance in debugging and fixing that soon
so we can ship it in SoaS 10.

The latest Beta RC2 images can be found here:

x86 (32 and 64 bit) http://alt.fedoraproject.org/pub/alt/stage/20-Beta-RC2/Live/
ARM http://alt.fedoraproject.org/pub/alt/stage/20-Beta-RC2/Images/armhfp/

Peter
___
Devel mailing list
Devel@lists.laptop.org
http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel


Re: [Sugar-devel] Sugar 0.100.0 (stable)

2013-11-04 Thread Peter Robinson
On Mon, Nov 4, 2013 at 8:13 PM, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com wrote:
 I don't have much of a clue about Write but... can you send the activity
 log?

It unfortunately only contains a single line:

Terminated by signal 11, pid 14089 data (None, open file 'fdopen',
mode 'w' at 0x2e13540,
dbus.ByteArray('ef47d2e4dc6551ba96f6ceded9023243ea4ee519
', variant_level=1))


 On 4 November 2013 16:14, Peter Robinson pbrobin...@gmail.com wrote:

 On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 12:45 AM, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com
 wrote:
  Hello,
 
  we are proud to announce the release of Sugar 0.100.0. A lot is new for
  both
  users and developers, see the release notes
 
  http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/0.100/Notes
 
  Sources:
 
 
  http://download.sugarlabs.org/sources/sucrose/glucose/sugar-datastore/sugar-datastore-0.100.0.tar.xz
 
  http://download.sugarlabs.org/sources/sucrose/glucose/sugar-artwork/sugar-artwork-0.100.0.tar.xz
 
  http://download.sugarlabs.org/sources/sucrose/glucose/sugar-runner/sugar-runner-0.100.0.tar.xz
 
  http://download.sugarlabs.org/sources/sucrose/glucose/sugar/sugar-0.100.1.tar.xz
 
  http://download.sugarlabs.org/sources/sucrose/glucose/sugar-toolkit-gtk3/sugar-toolkit-gtk3-0.100.0.tar.xz
 
  Thanks to everyone that contributed with code, translations and testing!

 These are now in updates-testing in Fedora 20. They're not yet in the
 Fedora 20 stable channel because they're locked down for Beta but will
 land in stable shortly after Beta. It would be good to get some wider
 testing and feedback. The big issue at the moment is Write failing to
 run and I would love some assistance in debugging and fixing that soon
 so we can ship it in SoaS 10.

 The latest Beta RC2 images can be found here:

 x86 (32 and 64 bit)
 http://alt.fedoraproject.org/pub/alt/stage/20-Beta-RC2/Live/
 ARM http://alt.fedoraproject.org/pub/alt/stage/20-Beta-RC2/Images/armhfp/

 Peter




 --
 Daniel Narvaez
___
Devel mailing list
Devel@lists.laptop.org
http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel


Re: [Sugar-devel] Sugar 0.100.0 (stable)

2013-11-04 Thread Peter Robinson
On Mon, Nov 4, 2013 at 8:30 PM, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com wrote:
 That's a segmentation fault I think. It would be good if you could launch it
 with sugar-launch -d and post the backtrace., possibly after having
 installed debug packages.

2Gb of debuginfo later I have the following:

http://paste.fedoraproject.org/51575/38360107/

Thanks,
Peter

 On 4 November 2013 21:25, Peter Robinson pbrobin...@gmail.com wrote:

 On Mon, Nov 4, 2013 at 8:13 PM, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com
 wrote:
  I don't have much of a clue about Write but... can you send the activity
  log?

 It unfortunately only contains a single line:

 Terminated by signal 11, pid 14089 data (None, open file 'fdopen',
 mode 'w' at 0x2e13540,
 dbus.ByteArray('ef47d2e4dc6551ba96f6ceded9023243ea4ee519
 ', variant_level=1))


  On 4 November 2013 16:14, Peter Robinson pbrobin...@gmail.com wrote:
 
  On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 12:45 AM, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com
  wrote:
   Hello,
  
   we are proud to announce the release of Sugar 0.100.0. A lot is new
   for
   both
   users and developers, see the release notes
  
   http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/0.100/Notes
  
   Sources:
  
  
  
   http://download.sugarlabs.org/sources/sucrose/glucose/sugar-datastore/sugar-datastore-0.100.0.tar.xz
  
  
   http://download.sugarlabs.org/sources/sucrose/glucose/sugar-artwork/sugar-artwork-0.100.0.tar.xz
  
  
   http://download.sugarlabs.org/sources/sucrose/glucose/sugar-runner/sugar-runner-0.100.0.tar.xz
  
  
   http://download.sugarlabs.org/sources/sucrose/glucose/sugar/sugar-0.100.1.tar.xz
  
  
   http://download.sugarlabs.org/sources/sucrose/glucose/sugar-toolkit-gtk3/sugar-toolkit-gtk3-0.100.0.tar.xz
  
   Thanks to everyone that contributed with code, translations and
   testing!
 
  These are now in updates-testing in Fedora 20. They're not yet in the
  Fedora 20 stable channel because they're locked down for Beta but will
  land in stable shortly after Beta. It would be good to get some wider
  testing and feedback. The big issue at the moment is Write failing to
  run and I would love some assistance in debugging and fixing that soon
  so we can ship it in SoaS 10.
 
  The latest Beta RC2 images can be found here:
 
  x86 (32 and 64 bit)
  http://alt.fedoraproject.org/pub/alt/stage/20-Beta-RC2/Live/
  ARM
  http://alt.fedoraproject.org/pub/alt/stage/20-Beta-RC2/Images/armhfp/
 
  Peter
 
 
 
 
  --
  Daniel Narvaez




 --
 Daniel Narvaez
___
Devel mailing list
Devel@lists.laptop.org
http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel


Re: [Sugar-devel] Sugar 0.100.0 (stable)

2013-11-04 Thread Peter Robinson
On Mon, Nov 4, 2013 at 10:59 PM, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com wrote:
 Broken annotation in abiword. Trying to figure out the correct one then I'll
 open a bug + patch.

Thanks! Let me know when you've got a patch and I'll test it.

Peter

 On 4 November 2013 22:40, Peter Robinson pbrobin...@gmail.com wrote:

 On Mon, Nov 4, 2013 at 8:30 PM, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com
 wrote:
  That's a segmentation fault I think. It would be good if you could
  launch it
  with sugar-launch -d and post the backtrace., possibly after having
  installed debug packages.

 2Gb of debuginfo later I have the following:

 http://paste.fedoraproject.org/51575/38360107/

 Thanks,
 Peter

  On 4 November 2013 21:25, Peter Robinson pbrobin...@gmail.com wrote:
 
  On Mon, Nov 4, 2013 at 8:13 PM, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com
  wrote:
   I don't have much of a clue about Write but... can you send the
   activity
   log?
 
  It unfortunately only contains a single line:
 
  Terminated by signal 11, pid 14089 data (None, open file 'fdopen',
  mode 'w' at 0x2e13540,
  dbus.ByteArray('ef47d2e4dc6551ba96f6ceded9023243ea4ee519
  ', variant_level=1))
 
 
   On 4 November 2013 16:14, Peter Robinson pbrobin...@gmail.com
   wrote:
  
   On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 12:45 AM, Daniel Narvaez
   dwnarv...@gmail.com
   wrote:
Hello,
   
we are proud to announce the release of Sugar 0.100.0. A lot is
new
for
both
users and developers, see the release notes
   
http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/0.100/Notes
   
Sources:
   
   
   
   
http://download.sugarlabs.org/sources/sucrose/glucose/sugar-datastore/sugar-datastore-0.100.0.tar.xz
   
   
   
http://download.sugarlabs.org/sources/sucrose/glucose/sugar-artwork/sugar-artwork-0.100.0.tar.xz
   
   
   
http://download.sugarlabs.org/sources/sucrose/glucose/sugar-runner/sugar-runner-0.100.0.tar.xz
   
   
   
http://download.sugarlabs.org/sources/sucrose/glucose/sugar/sugar-0.100.1.tar.xz
   
   
   
http://download.sugarlabs.org/sources/sucrose/glucose/sugar-toolkit-gtk3/sugar-toolkit-gtk3-0.100.0.tar.xz
   
Thanks to everyone that contributed with code, translations and
testing!
  
   These are now in updates-testing in Fedora 20. They're not yet in
   the
   Fedora 20 stable channel because they're locked down for Beta but
   will
   land in stable shortly after Beta. It would be good to get some
   wider
   testing and feedback. The big issue at the moment is Write failing
   to
   run and I would love some assistance in debugging and fixing that
   soon
   so we can ship it in SoaS 10.
  
   The latest Beta RC2 images can be found here:
  
   x86 (32 and 64 bit)
   http://alt.fedoraproject.org/pub/alt/stage/20-Beta-RC2/Live/
   ARM
  
   http://alt.fedoraproject.org/pub/alt/stage/20-Beta-RC2/Images/armhfp/
  
   Peter
  
  
  
  
   --
   Daniel Narvaez
 
 
 
 
  --
  Daniel Narvaez




 --
 Daniel Narvaez
___
Devel mailing list
Devel@lists.laptop.org
http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel


Re: [Sugar-devel] Activity Central's Sugar related priorities.

2013-10-07 Thread Peter Robinson
On Mon, Oct 7, 2013 at 10:10 PM, James Cameron qu...@laptop.org wrote:
 I agree with Martin on the odd directions Ubuntu is exhibiting; it may
 be safer to target Debian instead, from which support for Ubuntu will
 generally follow.

 (On the other hand, I lack evidence to agree with claims about the
 stability or direction of Fedora.  So few people I know use it.)

So few people I know use Windows but that doesn't mean it's no longer
prevalent, from what I've seen there's been quite a large swing back
to it due to the problems with Ubuntu and most of the upstream
developers of a lot of the stack that sugar relies upon now use Fedora
as their core development OS because of the issues they see with
Ubuntu.

Peter
___
Devel mailing list
Devel@lists.laptop.org
http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel


Re: [Sugar-devel] [support-gang] Helping test Sugar 0.100

2013-10-07 Thread Peter Robinson
On Fri, Sep 27, 2013 at 3:21 PM, Gonzalo Odiard gonz...@laptop.org wrote:
 No, I never had a koji user.

 How can I have one?

Become a Fedora packager.

Peter
___
Devel mailing list
Devel@lists.laptop.org
http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel


Re: [fedora-arm] Seeking advice to buy ARM system.

2013-07-25 Thread Peter Robinson
On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 6:54 AM, Basanta Shrestha
basanta.shres...@olenepal.org wrote:
 Hi,
 We are considering buying an ARM system in order to build Operating System
 Images for XO(1.75 and 4) laptops. Currently we are doing this under
 virtualization environment using Fedora-17-armhfp-vexpress which is very
 slow.

 I am seeking some expert advice on which ARM system/board to buy from the
 list. So far I have been suggested Wandboard quad and Odriod-U2.

We don't currently support the Odriod-U2. The Wandboard Quad is likely
a good start and we'll be supporting it in Fedora 20. The other one
that is very similar and we aim to support soon is the Utilite [1]
which is similar specs to the Quad but nicely packaged.

Peter

http://utilite-computer.com/web/home
___
Devel mailing list
Devel@lists.laptop.org
http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel


Re: OOB V6.0 does not installs example ini files

2013-06-12 Thread Peter Robinson
On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 7:39 PM, Juan Cubillo jcubi...@fundacionqt.org wrote:
 Hello,

 I just flashed a 1.75XO with the stable 13.1.0 image from OLPC. Then, I
 installed OOB via yum install olpc-os-builder

 I wanted to build a test image but no example files were installed in
 /usr/share/docs/

 Any ideas what may be wrong?

A simple rpm -qlp olpc-os-builder | grep ini tells me your looking
in the wrong spot

rpm -ql olpc-os-builder | grep ini
/usr/share/doc/olpc-os-builder-6.0.0/examples/f18-xo1.5.ini
/usr/share/doc/olpc-os-builder-6.0.0/examples/f18-xo1.75.ini
/usr/share/doc/olpc-os-builder-6.0.0/examples/f18-xo1.ini
/usr/share/doc/olpc-os-builder-6.0.0/examples/f18-xo4.ini
/usr/share/doc/olpc-os-builder-6.0.0/examples/olpc-os-13.1.0-xo1.5.ini
/usr/share/doc/olpc-os-builder-6.0.0/examples/olpc-os-13.1.0-xo1.75.ini
/usr/share/doc/olpc-os-builder-6.0.0/examples/olpc-os-13.1.0-xo1.ini
/usr/share/doc/olpc-os-builder-6.0.0/examples/olpc-os-13.1.0-xo4.ini


Peter
___
Devel mailing list
Devel@lists.laptop.org
http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel


Re: Install Firefox

2013-05-30 Thread Peter Robinson
On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 3:09 PM, Daniel Drake d...@laptop.org wrote:
 On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 11:50 PM, Peter Robinson pbrobin...@gmail.com wrote:
 Firefox and xulrunner 17 are the late known good (and matching) builds
 for Fedora 17, you need the major versions to be matching (so
 12/13/17) but if you were pulling in all the latest stable updates
 into the build you would have matching ones AFAICT from koji so
 there's some other issue.

 Ah yes, you are right, the latest available versions on koji are
 matching (v17) and built OK. I didn't spot them in the mass of failed
 builds. So the Fedora situation is OK.

 I'm not sure what the following lines translate to but you should
 never use the koji repositories as repos as they contain all sorts of
 randomly tagged bits that the release repos don't.

 olpc_frozen_1=0,koji.dist-f17-armv7hl
 olpc_frozen_2=0,koji.dist-f17-armv7hl-updates-12.1.0

 Don't worry, these are not the koji repos you are thinking of. They
 are OLPC's frozen versions of fedora repos from the release's freeze
 date and are not directly from koji - really we should change the
 naming scheme.

 And this is the cause of the problem - upon release freeze date, the
 firefox/xulrunner situation was in inconsistent state; this problem
 has been frozen in our repos.

 Basanta, I would advise against adding the official fedora-updates
 repo into your build as has been suggested in this thread - while this
 will result in a well matched firefox/xulrunner combination, it will
 bring in a lot of untested package updates that were not part of the
 release and have probably not been tested on OLPC XO.

 Instead, create a local repo with these 2 packages and add it to your
 build config:
 http://arm.koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=109570
 http://arm.koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=116355

It will need newer nss*/nspr builds too.

Peter
___
Devel mailing list
Devel@lists.laptop.org
http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel


Re: Install Firefox

2013-05-30 Thread Peter Robinson
On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 6:29 AM, Basanta Shrestha
basanta.shres...@olenepal.org wrote:
 Adding fedora=fedora_update and rebuilding didn't work.

And Daniel suggested you didn't do that anyway, there's been a big
change delta since OLPC branched off the F17 release so without
testing I'm not particularly surprised.

 Jerry, As you suggested it installed all the required newer
 firefox,xulrunner and nss... packages but the resulting image couldn't boot
 the XO. Now I am going for your second suggestion. I have created a local
 repo for firefox, xulrunner and other dependencies( 9 altogether) . Could
 you please check if the entries are right?

Does it work if you just yum install them?

 /root/local/.repo

 --
 [local]
 name=firefox-xulrunner local
 baseurl=file:///root/local/
 gpgcheck=0
 enabled=1
 --

  olpc-os-12.1.0-xo1.75.ini

 Right below [repos] section

 --
 [custom_repo]
 local=1,firefox,file:///root/local/
 --





 On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 1:37 AM, Jerry Vonau jvo...@shaw.ca wrote:

 On Thu, 2013-05-30 at 15:22 +0100, Peter Robinson wrote:
  On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 3:09 PM, Daniel Drake d...@laptop.org wrote:
   On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 11:50 PM, Peter Robinson
   pbrobin...@gmail.com wrote:
   Firefox and xulrunner 17 are the late known good (and matching)
   builds
   for Fedora 17, you need the major versions to be matching (so
   12/13/17) but if you were pulling in all the latest stable updates
   into the build you would have matching ones AFAICT from koji so
   there's some other issue.
  
   Ah yes, you are right, the latest available versions on koji are
   matching (v17) and built OK. I didn't spot them in the mass of failed
   builds. So the Fedora situation is OK.
  
   I'm not sure what the following lines translate to but you should
   never use the koji repositories as repos as they contain all sorts of
   randomly tagged bits that the release repos don't.
  
   olpc_frozen_1=0,koji.dist-f17-armv7hl
   olpc_frozen_2=0,koji.dist-f17-armv7hl-updates-12.1.0
  
   Don't worry, these are not the koji repos you are thinking of. They
   are OLPC's frozen versions of fedora repos from the release's freeze
   date and are not directly from koji - really we should change the
   naming scheme.
  
   And this is the cause of the problem - upon release freeze date, the
   firefox/xulrunner situation was in inconsistent state; this problem
   has been frozen in our repos.
  
   Basanta, I would advise against adding the official fedora-updates
   repo into your build as has been suggested in this thread - while this
   will result in a well matched firefox/xulrunner combination, it will
   bring in a lot of untested package updates that were not part of the
   release and have probably not been tested on OLPC XO.
  

 That is why later in the thread I suggested to download what yum
 installed on the XO, then create and use a custom repo for OOB.

   Instead, create a local repo with these 2 packages and add it to your
   build config:
   http://arm.koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=109570
   http://arm.koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=116355
 
  It will need newer nss*/nspr builds too.
 
  Peter

 Jerry








 --
 Basanta Shrestha
 Network Engineer
 Open Learning Exchange (OLE) Nepal
 Tel: +977.1.551, 5520075 Ext. 303
 Cell: +977.9818 605110
 http://www.olenepal.org

 ___
 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


Re: Install Firefox

2013-05-29 Thread Peter Robinson
On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 6:18 AM, Basanta Shrestha
basanta.shres...@olenepal.org wrote:
 Please check my repo list at this configuration file.
 http://pastebin.ca/2384881

 and xulrunner and firefox version
 xulrunner-13.0-1.fc17.armv7vl
 firefox-12.0-1.fc17.armv7hl

Firefox and xulrunner 17 are the late known good (and matching) builds
for Fedora 17, you need the major versions to be matching (so
12/13/17) but if you were pulling in all the latest stable updates
into the build you would have matching ones AFAICT from koji so
there's some other issue.

I'm not sure what the following lines translate to but you should
never use the koji repositories as repos as they contain all sorts of
randomly tagged bits that the release repos don't.

olpc_frozen_1=0,koji.dist-f17-armv7hl
olpc_frozen_2=0,koji.dist-f17-armv7hl-updates-12.1.0

Peter

 Thank you.



 On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 8:38 PM, Jerry Vonau jvo...@shaw.ca wrote:

 On Wed, 2013-05-29 at 08:08 -0600, Daniel Drake wrote:
  On Tue, May 28, 2013 at 9:40 PM, Basanta Shrestha
  basanta.shres...@olenepal.org wrote:
   Adding firefox did install firefox but gave following error while
   trying to
   execute on XO:
   
   $ firefox
   Error: Platform version '13.0' is not compatible with
   minVersion = 12.0
   maxVersion = 12.0
   -
 

 Hi Basanta,

 Think this has something to do with firefox wanting a specific xulrunner
 version. Can you confirm what version is installed with: rpm -q
 xulrunner.

 I have a workaround that I used with F14 that should still work with
 this situation. Which repos are enabled in olpc-so-builder when you
 generate the image?

 Jerry


  Looks like an incompatibility with xulrunner, which hasn't been
  successfully built on F17 in a while:
  http://arm.koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/packageinfo?packageID=10131
  Maybe Peter has some comments.
 
  You could try an older version of firefox to match the latest (old)
  version of xulrunner available.
 
  Daniel
  ___
  Devel mailing list
  Devel@lists.laptop.org
  http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel





 --
 Basanta Shrestha
 Network Engineer
 Open Learning Exchange (OLE) Nepal
 Tel: +977.1.551, 5520075 Ext. 303
 Cell: +977.9818 605110
 http://www.olenepal.org
___
Devel mailing list
Devel@lists.laptop.org
http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel


Re: Announcing OLPC OS 13.1.0

2013-05-27 Thread Peter Robinson
Hi Daniel,

Would just like to note the wiki needs to be updated as is says 13.1.0
is the devel release upcoming.

Peter

On Mon, May 6, 2013 at 10:15 PM, Daniel Drake d...@laptop.org wrote:
 Hi,

 We're pleased to announce the release of OLPC OS 13.1.0 for XO-1,
 XO-1.5, XO-1.75 and XO-4. Details of new features, known issues, and
 how to download/install/upgrade can all be found in the release notes:
 http://wiki.laptop.org/go/Release_notes/13.1.0

 Many thanks to all contributors, testers, upstreams, and those who
 have provided feedback of any kind.

 For those who were following the release candidate process in the last
 few months: candidate build 36 is released as final with no changes.

 Thanks!
 Daniel

 p.s. We're already knee-deep in development of the next release,
 13.2.0. More info here:
 http://wiki.laptop.org/go/13.2.0
 http://wiki.laptop.org/go/13.2.0/Release_plan
 ___
 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


Re: [Server-devel] Yet another ARM board for a server

2013-04-23 Thread Peter Robinson
On 23 Apr 2013 01:21, Sameer Verma sve...@sfsu.edu wrote:

 Beagleboard Black at $45


http://marcin.juszkiewicz.com.pl/2013/04/22/death-to-raspberrypi-beaglebone-black-is-on-a-market/

Why is it another server board? Just dumping links without an explanation
isn't very helpful. Its not really suitable as a server board at all. It
has 1 USB, no sata or WiFi and only 512mb of RAM. IMO it makes it about as
far from a respectable server board as possible. All XOs have a higher spec
than this.

Peter
___
Server-devel mailing list
Server-devel@lists.laptop.org
http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/server-devel


Re: [Server-devel] Cubieboard - linux-sunxi

2013-04-21 Thread Peter Robinson
On Sat, Apr 20, 2013 at 11:12 PM, Sameer Verma sve...@sfsu.edu wrote:
 Another ARM board, courtesy of Robert Howard.

 http://linux-sunxi.org/Cubieboard

There's a Fedora 18 remix image that will work with this device available.

Peter
___
Server-devel mailing list
Server-devel@lists.laptop.org
http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/server-devel


Re: 13.1.0 build 32 for XO-4 released

2013-02-27 Thread Peter Robinson
On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 4:53 PM, Samuel Greenfeld greenf...@laptop.org wrote:
 This build is basically usable.  Graphics glitches still exist, as the video
 driver has not been updated yet.  The Record activity can now record audio
 on XO-4, although Scratch cannot.

 If you are working with collaboration with this XO-4 build you should turn
 off automatic power management in Sugar.  The disabling of Wake on LAN
 support causes the wifi card is powered down every suspend cycle, and
 therefore cannot sense if another user does something while the first XO
 aggressively suspends.

 I saw a case where the 8787 card in a XO-4 C1 claimed to be busy (as seen by
 iwlist scan) and could not scan or associate to an AP until NetworkManager
 was shutdown  restarted.  This may have caused due to disconnecting from
 one AP to connect to another, but nothing obvious was seen in
 /var/log/messages to explain the situation.

I suggest using iw wlan0 scan or iw eth0 scan instead of iwlist.
The later is dead and long replaced by iw. It's the iw interface that
NM uses for scanning and it's AP list will/should align with that of
NM where as iwlist doesn't always.

Peter
___
Devel mailing list
Devel@lists.laptop.org
http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel


Re: Adobe Flash for XO-4 and XO-1.75

2013-02-21 Thread Peter Robinson
It's command line, any work for any x86 apps to run through it would
need to be done.

On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 5:45 AM, Roshan Karki ros...@olenepal.org wrote:
 What I mean is on your work, does the virtualized OS runs on top of Fedora
 or it runs as an activity, upon clicking which will run qemu and virtualized
 OS? Or does qemu runs on bare arm installation virtualizing x86 OS and
 running sugar on that?


 On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 4:39 PM, Peter Robinson pbrobin...@gmail.com
 wrote:

 On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 10:52 AM, Roshan Karki ros...@olenepal.org
 wrote:
 
 
 
  On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 3:54 PM, Peter Robinson pbrobin...@gmail.com
  wrote:
 
  On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 5:28 AM, Roshan Karki ros...@olenepal.org
  wrote:
   On Wed, Jan 2, 2013 at 2:44 AM, Samuel Greenfeld
   greenf...@laptop.org
   wrote:
  
   To the best of my knowledge, the XO-1.75 and XO-4 have no
   hardware-level
   x86 compatibility.  They use processors that use the ARM
   architecture.
  
   If you absolutely need x86 support on these platforms and cannot
   recompile/rebuild code, the qemu platform might be able to help.
  
  
   Interesting. Do you know if there has been any work on this?
 
  It works, it's not fast.
 
 
  Can you give me small background? Qemu will run as a separate activity
  on
  top of sugar emulating x86?

 qemu is a machine emulator / virtualiser. Nothing to do with sugar.

 http://wiki.qemu.org/Main_Page

 Peter


___
Devel mailing list
Devel@lists.laptop.org
http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel


Re: Adobe Flash for XO-4 and XO-1.75

2013-02-20 Thread Peter Robinson
On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 5:28 AM, Roshan Karki ros...@olenepal.org wrote:
 On Wed, Jan 2, 2013 at 2:44 AM, Samuel Greenfeld greenf...@laptop.org
 wrote:

 To the best of my knowledge, the XO-1.75 and XO-4 have no hardware-level
 x86 compatibility.  They use processors that use the ARM architecture.

 If you absolutely need x86 support on these platforms and cannot
 recompile/rebuild code, the qemu platform might be able to help.


 Interesting. Do you know if there has been any work on this?

It works, it's not fast.

Peter
___
Devel mailing list
Devel@lists.laptop.org
http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel


Re: Firefox for 1.75

2013-02-20 Thread Peter Robinson
On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 6:02 AM, Roshan Karki ros...@olenepal.org wrote:
 I'm looking for latest available version of Firefox for 1.75. Where can I
 find one? I can't do yum install due to dependency error with xulrunner.

 Using 12.1.0

That's the way to get the latest firefox. Can you output the dependency error?

Peter
___
Devel mailing list
Devel@lists.laptop.org
http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel


Re: Adobe Flash for XO-4 and XO-1.75

2013-02-20 Thread Peter Robinson
On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 10:52 AM, Roshan Karki ros...@olenepal.org wrote:



 On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 3:54 PM, Peter Robinson pbrobin...@gmail.com
 wrote:

 On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 5:28 AM, Roshan Karki ros...@olenepal.org wrote:
  On Wed, Jan 2, 2013 at 2:44 AM, Samuel Greenfeld greenf...@laptop.org
  wrote:
 
  To the best of my knowledge, the XO-1.75 and XO-4 have no
  hardware-level
  x86 compatibility.  They use processors that use the ARM architecture.
 
  If you absolutely need x86 support on these platforms and cannot
  recompile/rebuild code, the qemu platform might be able to help.
 
 
  Interesting. Do you know if there has been any work on this?

 It works, it's not fast.


 Can you give me small background? Qemu will run as a separate activity on
 top of sugar emulating x86?

qemu is a machine emulator / virtualiser. Nothing to do with sugar.

http://wiki.qemu.org/Main_Page

Peter
___
Devel mailing list
Devel@lists.laptop.org
http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel


Re: Firefox for 1.75

2013-02-20 Thread Peter Robinson
A fix is building, it will likely take a day or two to get out to the mirrors.

Peter

On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 10:45 AM, Roshan Karki ros...@olenepal.org wrote:
 Here, http://pastebin.com/ueqek3Ri


 On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 3:55 PM, Peter Robinson pbrobin...@gmail.com
 wrote:

 On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 6:02 AM, Roshan Karki ros...@olenepal.org wrote:
  I'm looking for latest available version of Firefox for 1.75. Where can
  I
  find one? I can't do yum install due to dependency error with xulrunner.
 
  Using 12.1.0

 That's the way to get the latest firefox. Can you output the dependency
 error?

 Peter


___
Devel mailing list
Devel@lists.laptop.org
http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel


Re: removing GNOME and maybe Sugar

2013-02-07 Thread Peter Robinson
 This new image created via olpc-os-builder won't run on locked XOs, right?

Correct, unless you have a signing key. You really need to generate a
new image though for jffs because of the way the file system works.

Peter
___
Devel mailing list
Devel@lists.laptop.org
http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel


Re: removing GNOME and maybe Sugar

2013-02-06 Thread Peter Robinson
On 7 Feb 2013 00:31, Sameer Verma sve...@sfsu.edu wrote:

 Anybody have any pointers on easy ways to remove GNOME and/or Sugar
 from the 12.1.0 build? I'm trying to get more space to build a server.
 This is on a XO-1.

Due to the use of jffs building a custom image using olpc-os-builder is the
way to go.

You could even as a server module so all the server bits are added. They're
really simple and Daniel has documented it really well.

Peter
___
Devel mailing list
Devel@lists.laptop.org
http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel


Re: Fedora-18 ARM release: support for OLPC hardware?

2013-01-22 Thread Peter Robinson
On 22 Jan 2013 11:14, Chris Ball c...@laptop.org wrote:

 Hi,

 On Tue, Jan 22 2013, Peter Robinson wrote:
  - non complete upstream support. Marvell is supporting all their ARM
  SoCs via the mvebu platform support with components making it upstream
  beginning in 3.7 but it's not all there yet. I'm not sure whether OLPC
  plans on supporting the ARM XO platforms through that or some other
  way.

 As I understand it, mvebu is a set of Marvell systems (Kirkwood, Dove,
 Armada XP) that are unrelated to MMP -- mach-mvebu vs. mach-mmp.  The
 mvebu code doesn't help us.

I thought the 1.75 chip set was codenamed dove?

 - Chris.
 --
 Chris Ball   c...@laptop.org   http://printf.net/
 One Laptop Per Child
___
Devel mailing list
Devel@lists.laptop.org
http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel


Re: Fedora-18 ARM release: support for OLPC hardware?

2013-01-21 Thread Peter Robinson
On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 10:11 PM, Chris Ball c...@laptop.org wrote:
 Hi,

 On Mon, Jan 21 2013, John Gilmore wrote:
 I'm way outside the OLPC  Fedora development processes nowadays, which
 is why I'm asking what may be a dumb question.

 The Fedora 18 release is finally out for x86 and x64.  There's a beta
 for ARM that supports half a dozen ARM systems.  Oddly, in my mind,
 OLPC is not one of them.  It's odd because there are probably more
 OLPC systems running Fedora than any other ARM hardware.  In F17, the
 ARM release went to GA - General Availability for those half dozen
 ARM boards, again not for OLPC hardware.

 Two reasons I can think of:

 * We (OLPC hackers) have taken on the burden of creating these builds.
   Our 12.1.0 ARM release is based on Fedora 17, and our 13.1.0 ARM
   release is based on Fedora 18.  We use the Fedora packages directly,
   other than for packages that we've forked or added.

 * The systems supported by Fedora all have upstream kernel support, but
   OLPC's ARM systems do not yet have upstream kernel support.  (There's
   no particular barrier; we just haven't had time to push it ourselves.)

The user space is completely compatible.

The reason we don't support the XOs out of the box is mostly kernel
based. The two main reasons are:
- non complete upstream support. Marvell is supporting all their ARM
SoCs via the mvebu platform support with components making it upstream
beginning in 3.7 but it's not all there yet. I'm not sure whether OLPC
plans on supporting the ARM XO platforms through that or some other
way.
- Lack of support for standard Fedora kernel update process via grubby
for OFW. This is a problem on both x86 and ARM XOs. This is tracked
via RHBZ  497398
- Lack of support for an open X driver. Although there is now a
project for reverse engineering the Vivante (sp?) driver I have no
idea what the state of it is and whether it works with the XO HW.

Peter
___
Devel mailing list
Devel@lists.laptop.org
http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel


Re: [Server-devel] Hardware for Schoolservers (EDIT)

2013-01-15 Thread Peter Robinson
On Mon, Jan 14, 2013 at 8:46 PM, German Ruiz germa...@opensuse.org.ni wrote:
 Hello everyone

 Sorry, last message was sent without finish.

 Just asking if anyone here knows about fanless server in the field, in any
 country, i was looking at the wiki[1], and the only information about
 hardware from this vendors [2][3], is in Afghanistan.

 We want to buy a few servers from this companies, to use in Nicaragua, but
 first i want to make sure that this ones works very good.

 Any suggestions?

I've always found the Fit-PC computers quite good as fanless lowpower
computers. The fit-pc 1 actually has the same processor as the
original XO-1

The Fit-PC 2i has 2x Gb ethernet and is low power. They even have AMD
and and Intel core i7 devices with usb3 and dual ethernet as well.

http://www.fit-pc.com/
___
Server-devel mailing list
Server-devel@lists.laptop.org
http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/server-devel


Re: The GNU C Library version 2.17 is now available.

2012-12-26 Thread Peter Robinson
It will land in Fedora 19 so it will be when we rebase to that.

Peter

On Wed, Dec 26, 2012 at 4:06 AM, Chris Leonard cjlhomeaddr...@gmail.com wrote:
 FYI,

 * New locales: ayc_PE, doi_IN, ia_FR, mni_IN, nhn_MX, niu_NU, niu_NZ,
   sat_IN, and szl_PL.


 ayc_PE is the Aymara locale developed with our Peruvian collaborators.
  niu_NU and niu_NZ are Niuean locales I developed in collaboration
 with Internet Niue.

 When we we incorporate this version we may need to make some
 adjustments in the locale workarounds we have built into Sugar.

 cjl
 Sugar Labs Translation Team Coordinator

 -- Forwarded message --
 From: David Miller da...@davemloft.net
 Date: Tue, Dec 25, 2012 at 4:42 PM
 Subject: The GNU C Library version 2.17 is now available.
 To: libc-al...@sourceware.org, libc-annou...@sourceware.org, info-...@gnu.org



 The GNU C Library
 =

 The GNU C Library version 2.17 is now available.

 The GNU C Library is used as *the* C library in the GNU systems
 and most systems with the Linux kernel.

 The GNU C Library is primarily designed to be a portable
 and high performance C library.  It follows all relevant
 standards including ISO C11 and POSIX.1-2008.  It is also
 internationalized and has one of the most complete
 internationalization interfaces known.

 The GNU C Library webpage is at http://www.gnu.org/software/libc/

 Packages for the 2.17 release may be downloaded from:
 http://ftpmirror.gnu.org/libc/
 http://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/libc/

 The mirror list is at http://www.gnu.org/order/ftp.html

 NEWS for version 2.17
 

 * The following bugs are resolved with this release:

   1349, 3439, 3479, 3665, 5044, 5246, 5298, 5400, 6530, 6677, 6778, 6808,
   9685, 9914, 10014, 10038, 10114, 10631, 10873, 11438, 11607, 11638, 11741,
   12140, 13013, 13412, 13542, 13601, 13603, 13604, 13629, 13679, 13696,
   13698, 13717, 13741, 13759, 13761, 13763, 13881, 13939, 13950, 13952,
   13966, 14042, 14047, 14090, 14150, 14151, 14152, 14154, 14157, 14166,
   14173, 14195, 14197, 14237, 14246, 14251, 14252, 14283, 14298, 14303,
   14307, 14328, 14331, 14336, 14337, 14347, 14349, 14368, 14376, 14417,
   14447, 14459, 14476, 14477, 14501, 14505, 14510, 14516, 14518, 14519,
   14530, 14532, 14538, 14543, 14544, 14545, 14557, 14562, 14568, 14576,
   14579, 14583, 14587, 14595, 14602, 14610, 14621, 14638, 14645, 14648,
   14652, 14660, 14661, 14669, 14672, 14683, 14694, 14716, 14719, 14743,
   14767, 14783, 14784, 14785, 14793, 14796, 14797, 14801, 14803, 14805,
   14807, 14811, 14815, 14821, 14822, 14824, 14828, 14831, 14833, 14835,
   14838, 14856, 14863, 14865, 14866, 14868, 14869, 14871, 14872, 14879,
   14889, 14893, 14898, 14914.

 * Optimization of memcpy for MIPS.

 * CVE-2011-4609 svc_run() produces high cpu usage when accept fails with
   EMFILE has been fixed (Bugzilla #14889).

 * The add-on ports collection is now distributed in the ports subdirectory
   of the main GNU C Library distribution, rather than separately.

 * Port to ARM AArch64 contributed by Linaro.

 * Support for STT_GNU_IFUNC symbols added for s390 and s390x.
   Optimized versions of memcpy, memset, and memcmp added for System z10 and
   zEnterprise z196.
   Implemented by Andreas Krebbel.

 * The new function secure_getenv allows secure access to the environment,
   returning NULL if running in a SUID/SGID process.  This function replaces
   the internal function __secure_getenv.

 * SystemTap static probes have been added into the dynamic linker.
   Implemented by Gary Benson.

 * Optimizations of string functions strstr, strcasestr and memmem.
   Implemented by Maxim Kuvyrkov.

 * The minimum Linux kernel version that this version of the GNU C Library
   can be used with is 2.6.16.

 * Optimizations of string functions memchr, wcschr, wcscpy, and wcsrchr for
   powerpc POWER7.  Implemented by Will Schmidt.

 * New configure option --disable-nscd builds the C library such that it
   never attempts to contact the Name Service Caching Daemon (nscd).
   New configure option --disable-build-nscd avoids building nscd itself;
   this is the default if --disable-nscd is used.

 * Improved support for cross-compilation, including cross-testing and
   bootstrap builds without a previously built glibc.

 * Several testsuite tests are now able to test multiple IFUNC variants of an
   interface, rather than just testing the one that would be chooen by
   default.

 * New configure options --with-bugurl and --with-pkgversion, for
   distributors to use to embed their bug-reporting and package version
   information in --help and --version output.

 * The ttyname and ttyname_r functions on Linux now fall back to searching for
   the tty file descriptor in /dev/pts or /dev if /proc is not available.  This
   allows creation of chroots without the procfs mounted on /proc.

 * The `crypt' function now fails if passed salt bytes that violate the
   specification for those values.  On Linux, 

Re: Locations for bitfrost src-rpm packages

2012-12-19 Thread Peter Robinson
On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 10:48 PM, Jerry Vonau jvo...@shaw.ca wrote:
 On Thu, 2012-12-20 at 03:37 +0530, Ajay Garg wrote:
 Hi all.

 Where can I find the corresponding source-rpm packages, for ::

  *
 http://rpmdropbox.laptop.org/f18/bitfrost-1.0.18-1.fc18.armv7hl.rpm
   AND
  *
 http://rpmdropbox.laptop.org/f18/bitfrost-sugar-1.0.18-1.fc18.armv7hl.rpm



 These are in Fedora proper for i686 but looks like not in fedora's ARM
 repo.

 http://mirrors.kernel.org/fedora/updates/testing/18/SRPMS/bitfrost-1.0.18-1.fc18.src.rpm

They are the same, there's no separation between ARM and i686 when it
comes to the Fedora src.rpm

Peter
___
Devel mailing list
Devel@lists.laptop.org
http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel


Re: Porting Sugar on Android (Ice cream sandwich)

2012-12-12 Thread Peter Robinson
On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 5:19 AM, RJV jv.ravichand...@gmail.com wrote:
 Implement a shell -- replacing the standard Android shell -- that has the
 main features of Sugar shell

 This looks like the nearest to what I hope to achieve - the same experience
 of the XO on a hand-held device especially the Ad-Hoc networking.

If using Sugar on a handheld tablet style device you might also want
to look at running Linux on the tablet device and then you wouldn't
need to deal with the sugar side of it at all. Fedora, on which the XO
OS is based, for example will run find on a number of tablet devices
with some work. With the touch work in the last cycle, that will
continue into the next, it might be an option that might yield the
same eventual wanted outcome.

Peter

 On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 2:01 AM, Martin Langhoff martin.langh...@gmail.com
 wrote:

 I'm sorry! Looks like I misread your name. A faux pass typical of
 borderline autistic people -- get all the technical details clearly,
 mess up the other person's name.

 Hope the technical part was useful. No offense intended.

 cheers,


 martin

 On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 3:12 PM, RJV jv.ravichand...@gmail.com wrote:
  Thanks, Martin. Btw, where did you deduce the name Rajiv from? :)
 
  RJv
 
  On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 1:13 AM, Martin Langhoff
  martin.langh...@gmail.com
  wrote:
 
  Implement a shell -- replacing the standard Android shell -- that
  has the main features of Sugar shell
 
 
 
 
  --
  Regards,
 
  Ravichandran J.V.
  http://ravichandranjv.blogspot.com
  XO 1.75 - 12.1, 0.96, Build 21, Q4D17
 



 --
  martin.langh...@gmail.com
  mar...@laptop.org -- Software Architect - OLPC
  - ask interesting questions
  - don't get distracted with shiny stuff  - working code first
  - http://wiki.laptop.org/go/User:Martinlanghoff




 --
 Regards,

 Ravichandran J.V.
 http://ravichandranjv.blogspot.com
 XO 1.75 - 12.1, 0.96, Build 21, Q4D17


 ___
 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


Re: [Sugar-devel] OLPC OS on Zync Z930 Tablet

2012-11-23 Thread Peter Robinson
On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 5:51 AM, Johnson Chetty johnsonche...@gmail.com wrote:
 Hey,

 Yes... we're working on getting Sugar on the tablet form factor.
 We're looking at compiling Sugar for an armv7 chip based tablet. (Allwinner
 A10 chip- armhf ). There are many cheap tablets flooding the market here in
 India, so we thought it is a good idea to get Sugar on them.
 Would be quite cost effective, (not in the long run though, none of them are
 as sturdy as the XOs)
 Getting the touch screen  and multi-touch capabilities in linux are
 seemingly a problem here.
 If anyone is working on the linux/environment configuration for the new XOs,
 would love to get some technical guidance for this..

Sugar is already compiled and known working for ARMv7 hardfp via the
Fedora project and downstream OLPC. The Fedora stack would happily
work on this device and all we would need is a kernel, a Xorg driver
as possibly a touchscreen driver. If the tablet is based on the
AllWinner A1x CPUs I'm already working on getting Fedora support so it
shouldn't be hard to extend the support to the tablet.

All the userspace is already done as you can use the existing Fedora
ARMv7 hardfp userspace without any problems.

There's probably better places to discuss this as it's kind of
offtopic for this list. Archives and details to subscribe to the
Fedora ARM list are here [1]
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/arm

Peter
___
Devel mailing list
Devel@lists.laptop.org
http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel


Re: [Techteam] 13.1.0 development build 11 released

2012-11-12 Thread Peter Robinson
On 12 Nov 2012 11:18, Simon Schampijer si...@schampijer.de wrote:

 On 11/11/2012 11:18 PM, Peter Robinson wrote:

 A new 13.1.0 development build is available.

 http://wiki.laptop.org/go/13.1.0
 http://build.laptop.org/13.1.0/os11/

 Changes:
 - The latest sugar component versions that were released on Thursday


 Actually, the package list [1] shows that Saturday's releases went in as
well. Thanks a lot for that!

Oh yes, I forgot those ones were the ones I meant... all the releases are
blending into one!

 Cheers,
Simon

 [1] http://build.laptop.org/13.1.0/os11/xo-4/31011o4.packages.txt


___
Devel mailing list
Devel@lists.laptop.org
http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel


13.1.0 development build 11 released

2012-11-11 Thread Peter Robinson
A new 13.1.0 development build is available.

http://wiki.laptop.org/go/13.1.0
http://build.laptop.org/13.1.0/os11/

Changes:
- The latest sugar component versions that were released on Thursday
- new maliit 0.93.1 release
- Latest XO-4 kernel work for suspend/resume

Thanks for any testing and feedback!
___
Devel mailing list
Devel@lists.laptop.org
http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel


13.1.0 development build 9 released

2012-11-04 Thread Peter Robinson
A new 13.1.0 development build is available:

http://build.laptop.org/13.1.0/os9
http://wiki.laptop.org/go/13.1.0

- The some activity updates
- XO-4 kernel work for 8787/mwifiex wireless, touchscreen improvement, and
I believe some suspend/resume work

Thanks for any testing and feedback!

Note there currently isn't x86 builds. These should appear at some point
soonish  with luck!
___
Devel mailing list
Devel@lists.laptop.org
http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel


Re: Software Update section

2012-10-29 Thread Peter Robinson
On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 8:08 PM, Jerry Vonau jvo...@shaw.ca wrote:
 On Tue, 2012-10-30 at 01:13 +0530, Ajay Garg wrote:
 Hi all.

 How is the Software Update section
 (/usr/share/sugar/extensions/cpsection/updater) installed in
 http://build.laptop.org/13.1.0/os7/xo-1.75/ done?

 As I see, the contents of extensions/cpsection/updater present on
 the build; and on the sugar-mainline
 (http://git.sugarlabs.org/sugar/mainline) are different.


 See http://build.laptop.org/13.1.0/os7/xo-1.75/31007o2.packages.txt

 sugar-0.97.8-1.fc18.noarch
 sugar-artwork-0.97.7-1.fc18.armv7hl
 sugar-base-0.96.0-2.fc18.armv7hl
 sugar-cp-datetime-0.97.8-1.fc18.noarch
 sugar-cp-frame-0.97.8-1.fc18.noarch
 sugar-cp-language-0.97.8-1.fc18.noarch
 sugar-cp-modemconfiguration-0.97.8-1.fc18.noarch
 sugar-cp-network-0.97.8-1.fc18.noarch
 sugar-cp-power-0.97.8-1.fc18.noarch
 sugar-datastore-0.97.1-1.fc18.armv7hl
 sugar-presence-service-0.90.2-2.fc18.noarch
 sugar-toolkit-0.97.1-2.fc18.armv7hl
 sugar-toolkit-gtk3-0.97.7-1.fc18.armv7hl
 sugar-update-control-0.26-1.fc18.noarch

 and the latest src rpm for sugar[1] and note the cp section of the spec
 file. Observe that sugar-update-control is present above while
 sugar-cp-control is absent. You can get the src rpm for
 sugar-update-control from OLPC[2].

Or you can get the upstream version from Fedora repos, it's called
sugar-cp-updater. You should be able to install it with rpm -e
sugar-update-control; yum install -y sugar-cp-updater

Peter
___
Devel mailing list
Devel@lists.laptop.org
http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel


Re: Software Update section

2012-10-29 Thread Peter Robinson
 On Tue, 2012-10-30 at 01:13 +0530, Ajay Garg wrote:
  Hi all.
 
  How is the Software Update section
  (/usr/share/sugar/extensions/cpsection/updater) installed in
  http://build.laptop.org/13.1.0/os7/xo-1.75/ done?
 
  As I see, the contents of extensions/cpsection/updater present on
  the build; and on the sugar-mainline
  (http://git.sugarlabs.org/sugar/mainline) are different.


 See http://build.laptop.org/13.1.0/os7/xo-1.75/31007o2.packages.txt

 sugar-0.97.8-1.fc18.noarch
 sugar-artwork-0.97.7-1.fc18.armv7hl
 sugar-base-0.96.0-2.fc18.armv7hl
 sugar-cp-datetime-0.97.8-1.fc18.noarch
 sugar-cp-frame-0.97.8-1.fc18.noarch
 sugar-cp-language-0.97.8-1.fc18.noarch
 sugar-cp-modemconfiguration-0.97.8-1.fc18.noarch
 sugar-cp-network-0.97.8-1.fc18.noarch
 sugar-cp-power-0.97.8-1.fc18.noarch
 sugar-datastore-0.97.1-1.fc18.armv7hl
 sugar-presence-service-0.90.2-2.fc18.noarch
 sugar-toolkit-0.97.1-2.fc18.armv7hl
 sugar-toolkit-gtk3-0.97.7-1.fc18.armv7hl
 sugar-update-control-0.26-1.fc18.noarch



 Great .. !!

 So.. the next question, should not everything in
 extensions/cpsection/updater  in sugar repository be deleted?
 I understand that since as of  now, sugar-update-control has a dependency
 over sugar, so the over-writing is done; but this does not seem the right
 way.

It doesn't, it's two separate rpms that provide slightly different
functionality.

Peter
___
Devel mailing list
Devel@lists.laptop.org
http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel


Re: Installing patch on XO-4

2012-10-26 Thread Peter Robinson
On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 6:10 AM, Jerry Vonau jvo...@shaw.ca wrote:

 As a workaround, maybe edit /etc/yum.repos.d/*.repos and toggle
 gpgcheck= to 0? OOB could do that till the issue is resolved upstream.

It's an ongoing issue, basically we're building packages quicker than
we can sign them. Signing is a manual process because it needs someone
to unlock the key and begin the process to ensure security. I believe
we're slowly catching up but it tends to be a moving target at the
moment, but should start to slow down now that we're in pre beta
freeze.

Peter


 On Fri, 2012-10-26 at 00:55 -0400, Chris Leonard wrote:
 AFAICT, no GPG keys are checking out.

 Try

 sudo yum install patch --nogpg

 I have seen the same error type on every yum attempt and the --nogpg
 gets around it.

 cjl

 On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 12:50 AM,  fors...@ozonline.com.au wrote:
  Hi
 
  I tried installing patch on a XO-4, sudo yum install patch
 
  I got a checksum error so I deleted 
  /var/cache/yum/armhfp/18/fedora/packages/patch-2.6.1-13.fc18.armv7hl.rpm 
  and tried again, it still fails
 
  Any suggestions?
  thanks
  Tony
 
  Total download size: 94 k
  Installed size: 174 k
  Is this ok [y/N]: y
  Downloading Packages:
  warning: 
  /var/cache/yum/armhfp/18/fedora/packages/patch-2.6.1-13.fc18.armv7hl.rpm: 
  Header V3 RSA/SHA1 Signature, key ID a4d647e9: NOKEY
  Public key for patch-2.6.1-13.fc18.armv7hl.rpm is not installed
  patch-2.6.1-13.fc18.armv7hl.rpm|  94 kB   00:04
  Retrieving key from file:///etc/pki/rpm-gpg/RPM-GPG-KEY-fedora-armhfp
 
 
  Invalid GPG Key from file:///etc/pki/rpm-gpg/RPM-GPG-KEY-fedora-armhfp: 
  bad checksum on pgp message
 
  ___
  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


 ___
 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


Re: Opportunities to slim down 13.1.0 build file cruft

2012-10-17 Thread Peter Robinson
On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 7:17 PM, Gary C Martin
garycmar...@googlelibgweathermail.com wrote:
 Hi folks,

 I was just having a dig around in 13.1.0 build 6 for the XO-4 (using 
 GrandPerspective), and noticed that we are still including libgweather and 
 its 88Mb worth of Locations.xml files. I know this came up in a previous 
 release cycle, but just want to check again that we can't save this valuable 
 space.

Try yum remove libgweather and see what it wants to remove. I've
made some improvements surrounding other bits and I'm aware of some
more but I've not had the time to pursue upstream.

Peter
___
Devel mailing list
Devel@lists.laptop.org
http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel


Re: Opportunities to slim down 13.1.0 build file cruft

2012-10-17 Thread Peter Robinson
On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 7:40 PM, Peter Robinson pbrobin...@gmail.com wrote:
 On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 7:17 PM, Gary C Martin
 garycmar...@googlelibgweathermail.com wrote:
 Hi folks,

 I was just having a dig around in 13.1.0 build 6 for the XO-4 (using 
 GrandPerspective), and noticed that we are still including libgweather and 
 its 88Mb worth of Locations.xml files. I know this came up in a previous 
 release cycle, but just want to check again that we can't save this valuable 
 space.

 Try yum remove libgweather and see what it wants to remove. I've
 made some improvements surrounding other bits and I'm aware of some
 more but I've not had the time to pursue upstream.

It belongs to gnome-panel so it shouldn't be pulled in for the XO-1 build

Peter
___
Devel mailing list
Devel@lists.laptop.org
http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel


Re: XO-4 B1 units

2012-10-11 Thread Peter Robinson
On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 9:23 AM,  fors...@ozonline.com.au wrote:
 Martin
 I received my XO-4 today, thanks.

 I reflashed to OS5 for XO-4

 The touchscreen is out of calibration, up to 10 mm, worse at the screen 
 margins. It seemed OK with the OS it came with but I didnt use it for long 
 before reflashing.

I believe that's a known issue, at least the touch screen config will
be tweaked in the next build.

 The fascia is misaligned with the game keys, maybe 0.5mm but its not causing 
 problems.

 Three times in maybe an 2 hours, the trackpad stopped working, the 
 touchscreen still controlled the cursor though. No obvious errors in log. 
 Reboot to fix.

Known issue, we need to forward port all the trackpad patches from the
other kernels. Not sure what the status is.

 A few random major lockups, needed a long press on the power button, (in 
 Pippy/lines, Pippy/snow, TA speak block, Maze, Physics, Speak).

 Twice I got blank Journal entries (no size, no title, no Activity) but they 
 deleted OK

 My Settings/keyboard restarts Sugar

Known issue.

 My settings / Datetime cant select city

 when a dropdown menu appears, the cursor disappears till you move (also in 
 Abacus, on moving a bead the cursor disappears till you move)

I think this is improving, either way it's known.

 Alt tab doesnt work (I think theres already a ticket)

 Journal from the home view takes 2 clicks, first click it minimises (I think 
 theres already a ticket)

 Is there an ambient light sensor? (TA doesnt find one, no sign of the screen 
 going monochrome but best I had was light cloud)

Yes, but I think the driver details are still to be ported to the kernel.

 Are there any touchscreen gestures beyond drag and click? virtual keyboard? 
 zoom?

The virtual keyboard is in the os5 release. In os6 there's an
improvement that should make it appear when in ebook mode. Whether all
the rest of the glue is there I'm not sure.

Peter
___
Devel mailing list
Devel@lists.laptop.org
http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel


Re: [bug-report][build4 - 13.1.0] Totem is crashing in Gnome

2012-10-10 Thread Peter Robinson
On Mon, Oct 8, 2012 at 3:56 PM, Praveen Kumar
kumarpraveen.nit...@gmail.com wrote:
 Hi folks,

 I am using development 13.1.0 (build 4) for XO-1.75 , and  installed totem
 but it's crashing with below message .

What version of totem? The newer totem 3.6 crashing is a known issue
due to its dependency on clutter and we don't have 3D enabled due to
clutter needing openGL and the ARM devices supporting GLES. We
normally ship an older 3.0 release but I'm not sure the of the state
of this for 13.1.0 yet.

Peter
___
Devel mailing list
Devel@lists.laptop.org
http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel


Re: [Techteam] 13.1.0 devel build 5 released, for the XO-1, XO-1.5, XO-1.75 and XO-4

2012-10-08 Thread Peter Robinson
On 8 Oct 2012 00:41, Gary Martin garycmar...@googlemail.com wrote:

 On 7 Oct 2012, at 23:56, Peter Robinson pbrobin...@gmail.com wrote:

 
  On 7 Oct 2012 23:17, Martin Langhoff mar...@laptop.org wrote:
  
   On Sun, Oct 7, 2012 at 5:22 PM, Peter Robinson pbrobin...@gmail.com
wrote:
#12082  Maliit on-screen keyboard
  
   Yay!!! Is the evdev trickery all hooked up? Does ebook mode DTRT?
 
  Not yet, all the layouts are in and gtk2 works now

 Not quite all the layouts, but the vast majority are done in both
landscape and portrait. I have Türkçe, Українська, Việt, and 1 usable (out
of 3 due to the need of the others for a proprietary glyph composition
engine) Chinese keyboards still to do, and some general bug fixes on
several extended keys I spotted while testing. Expect an updated set of
similar patches before build lockdown. There is also still the hanging
question with regard for the need for additional keyboards for existing or
potential deployments. Armenia has been raised as one possible extra, but
not yet confirmed. Perhaps once XO-4's start to land and folks play with
the OSK we'll see some formal requests.


Are the layouts each in a distinct set of files? If so we could possibly
split out layouts to standalone packages to make it easy to add extras at a
later date.

Peter

 Regards,
 --Gary

   cheers,
  
  
  
  
   m
   --
mar...@laptop.org -- Software Architect - OLPC
- ask interesting questions
- don't get distracted with shiny stuff  - working code first
- http://wiki.laptop.org/go/User:Martinlanghoff
  ___
  olpc mailing list
  o...@lists.fedoraproject.org
  https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/olpc

___
Devel mailing list
Devel@lists.laptop.org
http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel


Re: [Techteam] 13.1.0 devel build 5 released, for the XO-1, XO-1.5, XO-1.75 and XO-4

2012-10-08 Thread Peter Robinson
On Mon, Oct 8, 2012 at 1:54 PM, Chris Leonard cjlhomeaddr...@gmail.com wrote:
 On Mon, Oct 8, 2012 at 8:04 AM, Gary Martin garycmar...@googlemail.com 
 wrote:

 Are the layouts each in a distinct set of files? If so we could possibly 
 split out layouts to standalone packages to make it easy to add extras at a 
 later date.

 Yes the language layouts are a distinct set of XML files in one directory. 
 They can be edited live on running system, so it's not like they really need 
 to be part of maliit-plugins build compilation.

 If the OLPC OS build creators (e.g. dsd) do not plan to include all of
 these files in stock releases, then we should definitely look at
 incorporating them into language packs installs.

At the moment all layouts are packaged as part of the maliit-plugins package

 Just like with L10n MO files there may be good reasons (mostly size in
 image) not to include them all, but in a such a case  we definitely
 want to make them easy to find and easy to install, without much
 technical knowledge, or even knowledge that they even exist.

The layouts are xml files and hence very small is size so the easiest
way to install them would be to have them there by default.

My question to Gary about the layouts was more about how hard it would
be to package them up separately so it's easy to add new layouts post
release of a release. It's quicker to add a single package with a
single layout than having to QA an entire release again.

 With a little tweaking of the language pack generating script,

 http://git.sugarlabs.org/pootle-helpers/mainline/trees/master/langpackgen

 the language packs could serve that purpose.

I'm sure there's a number of ways to skin that cat :-)

Peter
___
Devel mailing list
Devel@lists.laptop.org
http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel


Re: 13.1.0 devel build 5 released, for the XO-1, XO-1.5, XO-1.75 and XO-4

2012-10-08 Thread Peter Robinson
On Tue, Oct 9, 2012 at 12:36 AM, Martin Langhoff
martin.langh...@gmail.com wrote:
 On Sun, Oct 7, 2012 at 5:22 PM, Peter Robinson pbrobin...@gmail.com wrote:
 The ball? What ball? release.

 THIS IS A DEVELOPMENT RELEASE

 Users on XO-4 need to be aware of lots of limitations -- no
 suspend/resume, no audio, etc. We need a quick status page for this
 :-/

 Also, if you find you have no disk space free, please make yourself
 heard at http://dev.laptop.org/ticket/12150

Martin was this still an issue on os5? I rebuilt the binaries to make
sure there wasn't any changes that hadn't been in the binary to see if
an old zhashfs may have been the cause of that.

Peter
___
Devel mailing list
Devel@lists.laptop.org
http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel


Re: 13.1.0 devel build 5 released, for the XO-1, XO-1.5, XO-1.75 and XO-4

2012-10-08 Thread Peter Robinson
On Tue, Oct 9, 2012 at 1:51 AM, Walter Bender walter.ben...@gmail.com wrote:
 On Mon, Oct 8, 2012 at 7:36 PM, Martin Langhoff
 martin.langh...@gmail.com wrote:
 On Sun, Oct 7, 2012 at 5:22 PM, Peter Robinson pbrobin...@gmail.com wrote:
 The ball? What ball? release.

 THIS IS A DEVELOPMENT RELEASE

 Has anyone else had trouble getting to the OK prompt in OFW? When I
 boot with the gamekeys down, it seems that OFW is detecting some
 spurious keypress and gets stuck in a cycle of error msgs due to the
 bad command being typed. Any workarounds?

I tested the XO 1.5 and a couple of 1.75s that I had close handy and
they both worked fine. My XO-1 that I'd used previously had issues and
I didn't have time to dig another one out to test it. What type of
machine was it?

Peter
___
Devel mailing list
Devel@lists.laptop.org
http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel


13.1.0 devel build 5 released, for the XO-1, XO-1.5, XO-1.75 and XO-4

2012-10-07 Thread Peter Robinson
The ball? What ball? release.

THIS IS A DEVELOPMENT RELEASE

Latest sugar builds
GNOME 3.6

Fixed bugs:
#12082  Maliit on-screen keyboard
#12088  Browse died on XO-1 with SIGILL in 13.1.0

Activity changes:
-Abacus-37
-Browse-141
+Abacus-39
+Browse-142
-Clock-9
+Clock-10
-ImageViewer-21
+ImageViewer-51
-Paint-45
+Paint-46
-Pippy-49
+Pippy-50
-TamTamEdit-63
-TamTamJam-63
-TamTamMini-63
-TamTamSynthLab-63
+TamTamEdit-66
+TamTamJam-66
+TamTamMini-66
+TamTamSynthLab-66

http://build.laptop.org/13.1.0/os5/
___
Devel mailing list
Devel@lists.laptop.org
http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel


Re: [Techteam] 13.1.0 devel build 5 released, for the XO-1, XO-1.5, XO-1.75 and XO-4

2012-10-07 Thread Peter Robinson
On 7 Oct 2012 23:17, Martin Langhoff mar...@laptop.org wrote:

 On Sun, Oct 7, 2012 at 5:22 PM, Peter Robinson pbrobin...@gmail.com
wrote:
  #12082  Maliit on-screen keyboard

 Yay!!! Is the evdev trickery all hooked up? Does ebook mode DTRT?

Not yet, all the layouts are in and gtk2 works now

 cheers,




 m
 --
  mar...@laptop.org -- Software Architect - OLPC
  - 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: qemu wine experiments on ARM

2012-10-05 Thread Peter Robinson
On Fri, Oct 5, 2012 at 5:22 AM, Martin Langhoff mar...@laptop.org wrote:
 Just a quick outline of one experiment to see if simple Win32
 content-ware apps can be run. Commands may be missing switches,
 options and steps. Caveat reader. BYO smarts.

 On x87 host F17
  - install livecd-tools spin-kickstarts
  - copy fedora-live-mini.ks, add wine -- remove some stuff
  - sudo setarch i686 livecd-creator fedora-live-mini.ks
  - wait
  - copy resulting iso to ext disk
  - yumdownloader sgabios-bin-0-0.20110622SVN.fc17.noarch
 seabios-bin-1.7.0-1.fc17.noarch -- they are noarch but missing from
 arm repos. copy to ext disk

They should be appearing soon, I was discussing them with the
maintainer only a week or so ago. Let me know if there's any other
improvements that can be made.

Peter
___
Devel mailing list
Devel@lists.laptop.org
http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel


  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   >