Re: [Sugar-devel] MANIFEST experiments

2009-11-08 Thread James Cameron
On Sun, Nov 08, 2009 at 02:29:51PM +0700, Philipp Kocher wrote: The patch is good to reduce the boot time, but doesn't work for activity developers. Yes, this is a known side-effect. It is an optimisation for users not developers. -- James Cameron http://quozl.linux.org.au/

Re: [Sugar-devel] MANIFEST experiments

2009-11-07 Thread Philipp Kocher
The patch is good to reduce the boot time, but doesn't work for activity developers. After applying the patch I run setup.py dist_xo of an activity and got the following error (since read_manifest is supposed to set self.manifest and doesn't do it anymore): Traceback (most recent call last):

Re: [Sugar-devel] MANIFEST experiments

2009-10-14 Thread Bert Freudenberg
On 14.10.2009, at 13:44, Daniel Drake wrote: Today I ran a quick experiment on OLPC OS v8.2.1, based on the question: what are the activity MANIFEST files used for? I see sugar frequently complaining about MANIFEST inconsistencies in the logs, but I don't recall seeing it act on these

Re: [Sugar-devel] MANIFEST experiments

2009-10-14 Thread James Cameron
Confirmed. On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 05:29:09PM +0545, Daniel Drake wrote: So, I reflashed 2 XOs, booted for the first time, entered a name. On one, I modified sugar.bundle.ActivityBundle.read_manifest() to be a no-op, then turned it off. On the other, I just turned it off. I reproduced this