Re: [Sugar-devel] XO on Fedora 20 (was Re: [GSoC] Porting To Python3)
And finally a 1.75 image http://bender.sugarlabs.org:3000/images/xo1.75/1/ installed image ok Browse works downloaded and installed terminal and turtle blocks ok default font a bit big Tony ___ 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)
And finally a 1.75 image http://bender.sugarlabs.org:3000/images/xo1.75/1/ installed image ok Browse works downloaded and installed terminal and turtle blocks ok default font a bit big A few things don't work, presumably just not included in the image: Gnome Write: import error abiword Speak: import error gst ___ 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)
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: [Sugar-devel] XO on Fedora 20 (was Re: [GSoC] Porting To Python3)
On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 4:05 PM, Peter Robinson pbrobin...@gmail.comwrote: 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. Certainly if there are people available to work in update the kernel to support xo arm i386, would had a big impact in our future. Gonzalo ___ 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)
On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 04:39:59PM +0200, Daniel Narvaez wrote: The non-configuration changes we have so far are here: https://github.com/dnarvaez/olpc-os-builder/compare/v7.0...v8.0 Can you review please? I can remove the dropbox change if I'm given access to rpmdropbox.laptop.org. Also, as I mentioned, I would need write access to the repo to push the configuration changes myself. I created an account on dev.laptop.org, user name is dnarvaez. Thanks. I've reviewed them briefly, they look fine. We use versioned branches for releases, not development. Development is on master branch. So please rebase the patches against master. I'll work on getting an account setup for commit over ssh. Please send me an ssh public key by private reply. -- James Cameron http://quozl.linux.org.au/ ___ 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)
Tested here, Sugar starts ok. Wifi ok. Downloaded and tried a few activities. Physics crashed and Browse crash on youtube, but other work ok, and I don't have numbers, but all feels a little faster. Gonzalo On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 9:54 PM, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com wrote: xo4 image finally built (untested yet) http://bender.sugarlabs.org:3000/images/xo4/2/ -- Gonzalo Odiard SugarLabs - Software for children learning ___ 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)
Sent a PR with some changes related to missing CP sections and gsettings [1]. Refs: 1. https://github.com/dnarvaez/olpc-os-builder/pull/1 On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 9:29 AM, Gonzalo Odiard godi...@sugarlabs.orgwrote: Tested here, Sugar starts ok. Wifi ok. Downloaded and tried a few activities. Physics crashed and Browse crash on youtube, but other work ok, and I don't have numbers, but all feels a little faster. Gonzalo On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 9:54 PM, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.comwrote: xo4 image finally built (untested yet) http://bender.sugarlabs.org:3000/images/xo4/2/ -- Gonzalo Odiard SugarLabs - Software for children learning ___ 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)
On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 7:12 PM, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com wrote: On 12 May 2014 21:07, Gonzalo Odiard godi...@sugarlabs.org wrote: First, thanks for doing this work. Thanks for helping out. 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. This is a issue. If we have a Sugar with similar functionalities (settings and activities installed) we can request help from deployments and volunteers. Are you thinking to deployment specific settings and activities here? Or some kind of subset/reference that is good enough for all the interested deployments? I think we should do a generic version. We can start with the activities used by example in AU, but add more based on deployment requests. In the xo-1 models space is a issue, but not so much in the others, and the benefit is have more testing. * Are interested deployments using olpc-update? If I'm not mistake AU is not. We are not using it. I am pretty sure Nicaragua use it. Is AU using yum? Yes, we use a deamon calling yum with a particular configuration. Recently I am testing dnf in F20, and I am impressed. If there are not downsides, could be nice use it. Gonzalo ___ 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)
On 13 May 2014 16:13, Gonzalo Odiard godi...@sugarlabs.org wrote: On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 7:12 PM, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.comwrote: On 12 May 2014 21:07, Gonzalo Odiard godi...@sugarlabs.org wrote: First, thanks for doing this work. Thanks for helping out. 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. This is a issue. If we have a Sugar with similar functionalities (settings and activities installed) we can request help from deployments and volunteers. Are you thinking to deployment specific settings and activities here? Or some kind of subset/reference that is good enough for all the interested deployments? Sounds good. Can you link the .ini with AU activities? ___ 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)
Sounds good. Can you link the .ini with AU activities? Sure https://github.com/godiard/olpc-os-builder/blob/au1b/examples/olpc-os-13.2.0-xo4.ini#L99 -- Gonzalo Odiard SugarLabs - Software for children learning ___ 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)
On 13 May 2014 01:49, James Cameron qu...@laptop.org wrote: * 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. Contribute, please. In whatever way is best for you and your users; (a) patches by mail, (b) fork and pull requests, (c) an account on dev.laptop.org. The non-configuration changes we have so far are here: https://github.com/dnarvaez/olpc-os-builder/compare/v7.0...v8.0 Can you review please? I can remove the dropbox change if I'm given access to rpmdropbox.laptop.org. Also, as I mentioned, I would need write access to the repo to push the configuration changes myself. I created an account on dev.laptop.org, user name is dnarvaez. ___ 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)
And finally a 1.75 image http://bender.sugarlabs.org:3000/images/xo1.75/1/ Testing on this would be appreciated because I don't have a working 1.75 with me. Now I'm going to try to get the olpc-os-builder changes upstream and setup the infrastructure bits more solidly on docky.sugarlabs.org (a vm I setup yesterday). Then I'll do builds with the fixes Martin sent. On 13 May 2014 04:27, Martin Abente martin.abente.lah...@gmail.com wrote: Downloading! On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 8:54 PM, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.comwrote: xo4 image finally built (untested yet) http://bender.sugarlabs.org:3000/images/xo4/2/ -- Daniel Narvaez ___ 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)
On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 9:29 AM, Gonzalo Odiard godi...@sugarlabs.orgwrote: Tested here, Sugar starts ok. Wifi ok. Downloaded and tried a few activities. Physics crashed and Browse crash on youtube, Can you please send me the log file from Physics? thx but other work ok, and I don't have numbers, but all feels a little faster. Gonzalo On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 9:54 PM, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.comwrote: xo4 image finally built (untested yet) http://bender.sugarlabs.org:3000/images/xo4/2/ -- Gonzalo Odiard SugarLabs - Software for children learning ___ Sugar-devel mailing list sugar-de...@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel -- Walter Bender Sugar Labs http://www.sugarlabs.org ___ 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)
The xo1 image boots into sugar (latest from git) and wifi works. I'm now building xo4 images On 12 May 2014 02:12, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com wrote: A couple more images, for xo1 and xo1.5. They have sugar packages built from latest sugar git. I have not tested them yet so they might not even boot, but if someone gives them a try please let me know how they works. http://146.185.144.82:3000/images/xo1/1/ http://146.185.144.82:3000/images/xo1.5/1/ The xo1.5 one also *attempts* to fix the issue reported by Martin. The problem is that I'm running the x86 build slave inside docker.io, which doesn't like xpart. So I patched olpc-os-builder to manually losetup the partitions, but it's sort of tricky to get right. It will work eventually :) I have arm packages for latest git almost built, so tomorrow I should be able to build xo1.75 and xo4 images too. The oob configurations and some initial bits of automated builds infra are now here https://github.com/dnarvaez/xugar On 11 May 2014 20:49, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com wrote: This could be a change I made. I will investigate and let you know. On 11 May 2014 20:31, Martin Abente martin.abente.lah...@gmail.comwrote: Hey Daniel, Could you check if this is correct? $md5sum 10001xx1.zd $0cc8f3f71d636c8dc4464ffb8bf1847b 10001xx1.zd Tested with 2 different XOs 1.5 and I am getting kernel panic errors very early on the boot sequence, with message: tmpfs: No value for mount option 'strictatime' mount: mounting on /newrun failed: invalid argument mount used greatest stack depth 6752 bytes left. On Sun, May 11, 2014 at 12:47 PM, Gonzalo Odiard godi...@sugarlabs.orgwrote: Downloading... On Sun, May 11, 2014 at 1:31 PM, Martin Abente martin.abente.lah...@gmail.com wrote: Downloading 10001xx1.zd , will let you know how it goes soon. On Sun, May 11, 2014 at 12:19 PM, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.comwrote: I made builds for xo1 and xo1.5 with the firmware change http://sugarlabs.org/~dnarvaez/oob/images/ The xo1 boots into sugar but there are no activities installed (I probably got something wrong in the ini). Testing on the xo1.5 one would be welcome, I'm curious if firmware solves the startup freeze. On 11 May 2014 00:24, Martin Abente martin.abente.lah...@gmail.comwrote: great!! Let me know when you have an image with this! On Sat, May 10, 2014 at 4:36 PM, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com wrote: Firmware loading works with the rebuilt systemd! I have not tested much but wifi works now. Next step, build images with latest sugar... On 10 May 2014 01:22, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com wrote: I built a xo4 image, which like 1.75 boots fine into sugar http://sugarlabs.org/~dnarvaez/oob/images/xo4/ The main problem, as discussed, is that firmwares are not loaded. I'm building a systemd rpm with firmware loading enabled. If we can get wifi working then it should be easier to play with stuff, building in the virtual machine takes really too long. On 9 May 2014 14:13, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com wrote: I built an image for 1.75 http://sugarlabs.org/~dnarvaez/oob/images/ I've not been able to test yet. I don't have my usual usb stick with me and having troubles finding something the XO likes. On 8 May 2014 02:04, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com wrote: As an update, I have patched xorg-x11-drv-dove and built rpms for it http://shell.sugarlabs.org/~dnarvaez/oob/f20-xo1.75/ Now building an image with those. On 7 May 2014 15:18, Martin Abente martin.abente.lah...@gmail.com wrote: Great! I will try your oob branch for 1.5, I do have XOs 1.5 for testing :) On Wed, May 7, 2014 at 9:01 AM, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com wrote: On 7 May 2014 01:44, James Cameron qu...@laptop.org wrote: 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 I don't have hardware to test that though... I'm now trying to build for 1.75 which is harder but I can actually test. I need to rebuild the X driver but I think that will require some patching, let's see if I can get it to work... ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel ___ Sugar-devel mailing list sugar-de...@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel -- Daniel Narvaez -- Daniel Narvaez -- Daniel
Re: [Sugar-devel] XO on Fedora 20 (was Re: [GSoC] Porting To Python3)
On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 11:01 AM, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.comwrote: The xo1 image boots into sugar (latest from git) and wifi works. I'm now building xo4 images nice. On 12 May 2014 02:12, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com wrote: A couple more images, for xo1 and xo1.5. They have sugar packages built from latest sugar git. I have not tested them yet so they might not even boot, but if someone gives them a try please let me know how they works. http://146.185.144.82:3000/images/xo1/1/ http://146.185.144.82:3000/images/xo1.5/1/ The xo1.5 one also *attempts* to fix the issue reported by Martin. The problem is that I'm running the x86 build slave inside docker.io, which doesn't like xpart. So I patched olpc-os-builder to manually losetup the partitions, but it's sort of tricky to get right. It will work eventually :) I have arm packages for latest git almost built, so tomorrow I should be able to build xo1.75 and xo4 images too. The oob configurations and some initial bits of automated builds infra are now here https://github.com/dnarvaez/xugar On 11 May 2014 20:49, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com wrote: This could be a change I made. I will investigate and let you know. On 11 May 2014 20:31, Martin Abente martin.abente.lah...@gmail.comwrote: Hey Daniel, Could you check if this is correct? $md5sum 10001xx1.zd $0cc8f3f71d636c8dc4464ffb8bf1847b 10001xx1.zd Tested with 2 different XOs 1.5 and I am getting kernel panic errors very early on the boot sequence, with message: tmpfs: No value for mount option 'strictatime' mount: mounting on /newrun failed: invalid argument mount used greatest stack depth 6752 bytes left. On Sun, May 11, 2014 at 12:47 PM, Gonzalo Odiard godi...@sugarlabs.org wrote: Downloading... On Sun, May 11, 2014 at 1:31 PM, Martin Abente martin.abente.lah...@gmail.com wrote: Downloading 10001xx1.zd , will let you know how it goes soon. On Sun, May 11, 2014 at 12:19 PM, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com wrote: I made builds for xo1 and xo1.5 with the firmware change http://sugarlabs.org/~dnarvaez/oob/images/ The xo1 boots into sugar but there are no activities installed (I probably got something wrong in the ini). Testing on the xo1.5 one would be welcome, I'm curious if firmware solves the startup freeze. On 11 May 2014 00:24, Martin Abente martin.abente.lah...@gmail.comwrote: great!! Let me know when you have an image with this! On Sat, May 10, 2014 at 4:36 PM, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com wrote: Firmware loading works with the rebuilt systemd! I have not tested much but wifi works now. Next step, build images with latest sugar... On 10 May 2014 01:22, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com wrote: I built a xo4 image, which like 1.75 boots fine into sugar http://sugarlabs.org/~dnarvaez/oob/images/xo4/ The main problem, as discussed, is that firmwares are not loaded. I'm building a systemd rpm with firmware loading enabled. If we can get wifi working then it should be easier to play with stuff, building in the virtual machine takes really too long. On 9 May 2014 14:13, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com wrote: I built an image for 1.75 http://sugarlabs.org/~dnarvaez/oob/images/ I've not been able to test yet. I don't have my usual usb stick with me and having troubles finding something the XO likes. On 8 May 2014 02:04, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com wrote: As an update, I have patched xorg-x11-drv-dove and built rpms for it http://shell.sugarlabs.org/~dnarvaez/oob/f20-xo1.75/ Now building an image with those. On 7 May 2014 15:18, Martin Abente martin.abente.lah...@gmail.com wrote: Great! I will try your oob branch for 1.5, I do have XOs 1.5 for testing :) On Wed, May 7, 2014 at 9:01 AM, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com wrote: On 7 May 2014 01:44, James Cameron qu...@laptop.org wrote: 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 I don't have hardware to test that though... I'm now trying to build for 1.75 which is harder but I can actually test. I need to rebuild the X driver but I think that will require some patching, let's see if I can get it to work... ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel ___ Sugar-devel mailing list sugar-de...@lists.sugarlabs.org
Re: [Sugar-devel] XO on Fedora 20 (was Re: [GSoC] Porting To Python3)
xo-1.5 image do not boot, and show a strange gey patterns in the screen. Gonzalo On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 8:01 AM, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com wrote: The xo1 image boots into sugar (latest from git) and wifi works. I'm now building xo4 images On 12 May 2014 02:12, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com wrote: A couple more images, for xo1 and xo1.5. They have sugar packages built from latest sugar git. I have not tested them yet so they might not even boot, but if someone gives them a try please let me know how they works. http://146.185.144.82:3000/images/xo1/1/ http://146.185.144.82:3000/images/xo1.5/1/ The xo1.5 one also *attempts* to fix the issue reported by Martin. The problem is that I'm running the x86 build slave inside docker.io, which doesn't like xpart. So I patched olpc-os-builder to manually losetup the partitions, but it's sort of tricky to get right. It will work eventually :) I have arm packages for latest git almost built, so tomorrow I should be able to build xo1.75 and xo4 images too. The oob configurations and some initial bits of automated builds infra are now here https://github.com/dnarvaez/xugar On 11 May 2014 20:49, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com wrote: This could be a change I made. I will investigate and let you know. On 11 May 2014 20:31, Martin Abente martin.abente.lah...@gmail.comwrote: Hey Daniel, Could you check if this is correct? $md5sum 10001xx1.zd $0cc8f3f71d636c8dc4464ffb8bf1847b 10001xx1.zd Tested with 2 different XOs 1.5 and I am getting kernel panic errors very early on the boot sequence, with message: tmpfs: No value for mount option 'strictatime' mount: mounting on /newrun failed: invalid argument mount used greatest stack depth 6752 bytes left. On Sun, May 11, 2014 at 12:47 PM, Gonzalo Odiard godi...@sugarlabs.org wrote: Downloading... On Sun, May 11, 2014 at 1:31 PM, Martin Abente martin.abente.lah...@gmail.com wrote: Downloading 10001xx1.zd , will let you know how it goes soon. On Sun, May 11, 2014 at 12:19 PM, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com wrote: I made builds for xo1 and xo1.5 with the firmware change http://sugarlabs.org/~dnarvaez/oob/images/ The xo1 boots into sugar but there are no activities installed (I probably got something wrong in the ini). Testing on the xo1.5 one would be welcome, I'm curious if firmware solves the startup freeze. On 11 May 2014 00:24, Martin Abente martin.abente.lah...@gmail.comwrote: great!! Let me know when you have an image with this! On Sat, May 10, 2014 at 4:36 PM, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com wrote: Firmware loading works with the rebuilt systemd! I have not tested much but wifi works now. Next step, build images with latest sugar... On 10 May 2014 01:22, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com wrote: I built a xo4 image, which like 1.75 boots fine into sugar http://sugarlabs.org/~dnarvaez/oob/images/xo4/ The main problem, as discussed, is that firmwares are not loaded. I'm building a systemd rpm with firmware loading enabled. If we can get wifi working then it should be easier to play with stuff, building in the virtual machine takes really too long. On 9 May 2014 14:13, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com wrote: I built an image for 1.75 http://sugarlabs.org/~dnarvaez/oob/images/ I've not been able to test yet. I don't have my usual usb stick with me and having troubles finding something the XO likes. On 8 May 2014 02:04, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com wrote: As an update, I have patched xorg-x11-drv-dove and built rpms for it http://shell.sugarlabs.org/~dnarvaez/oob/f20-xo1.75/ Now building an image with those. On 7 May 2014 15:18, Martin Abente martin.abente.lah...@gmail.com wrote: Great! I will try your oob branch for 1.5, I do have XOs 1.5 for testing :) On Wed, May 7, 2014 at 9:01 AM, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com wrote: On 7 May 2014 01:44, James Cameron qu...@laptop.org wrote: 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 I don't have hardware to test that though... I'm now trying to build for 1.75 which is harder but I can actually test. I need to rebuild the X driver but I think that will require some patching, let's see if I can get it to work... ___ 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)
How far does it get? What are the last messages you see? Mostly I wonder if it's the partitions issue that tch reported yesterday or if we fail when running X. On Monday, 12 May 2014, Gonzalo Odiard godi...@sugarlabs.org wrote: xo-1.5 image do not boot, and show a strange gey patterns in the screen. Gonzalo On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 8:01 AM, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.comwrote: The xo1 image boots into sugar (latest from git) and wifi works. I'm now building xo4 images On 12 May 2014 02:12, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com wrote: A couple more images, for xo1 and xo1.5. They have sugar packages built from latest sugar git. I have not tested them yet so they might not even boot, but if someone gives them a try please let me know how they works. http://146.185.144.82:3000/images/xo1/1/ http://146.185.144.82:3000/images/xo1.5/1/ The xo1.5 one also *attempts* to fix the issue reported by Martin. The problem is that I'm running the x86 build slave inside docker.io, which doesn't like xpart. So I patched olpc-os-builder to manually losetup the partitions, but it's sort of tricky to get right. It will work eventually :) I have arm packages for latest git almost built, so tomorrow I should be able to build xo1.75 and xo4 images too. The oob configurations and some initial bits of automated builds infra are now here https://github.com/dnarvaez/xugar On 11 May 2014 20:49, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com wrote: This could be a change I made. I will investigate and let you know. On 11 May 2014 20:31, Martin Abente martin.abente.lah...@gmail.comwrote: Hey Daniel, Could you check if this is correct? $md5sum 10001xx1.zd $0cc8f3f71d636c8dc4464ffb8bf1847b 10001xx1.zd Tested with 2 different XOs 1.5 and I am getting kernel panic errors very early on the boot sequence, with message: tmpfs: No value for mount option 'strictatime' mount: mounting on /newrun failed: invalid argument mount used greatest stack depth 6752 bytes left. On Sun, May 11, 2014 at 12:47 PM, Gonzalo Odiard godi...@sugarlabs.orgwrote: Downloading... On Sun, May 11, 2014 at 1:31 PM, Martin Abente martin.abente.lah...@gmail.com wrote: Downloading 10001xx1.zd , will let you know how it goes soon. On Sun, May 11, 2014 at 12:19 PM, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.comwrote: I made builds for xo1 and xo1.5 with the firmware change http://sugarlabs.org/~dnarvaez/oob/images/ -- Daniel Narvaez ___ 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)
I will attach a serial cable later and report. Gonzalo On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 8:51 AM, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com wrote: How far does it get? What are the last messages you see? Mostly I wonder if it's the partitions issue that tch reported yesterday or if we fail when running X. On Monday, 12 May 2014, Gonzalo Odiard godi...@sugarlabs.org wrote: xo-1.5 image do not boot, and show a strange gey patterns in the screen. Gonzalo On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 8:01 AM, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.comwrote: The xo1 image boots into sugar (latest from git) and wifi works. I'm now building xo4 images On 12 May 2014 02:12, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com wrote: A couple more images, for xo1 and xo1.5. They have sugar packages built from latest sugar git. I have not tested them yet so they might not even boot, but if someone gives them a try please let me know how they works. http://146.185.144.82:3000/images/xo1/1/ http://146.185.144.82:3000/images/xo1.5/1/ The xo1.5 one also *attempts* to fix the issue reported by Martin. The problem is that I'm running the x86 build slave inside docker.io, which doesn't like xpart. So I patched olpc-os-builder to manually losetup the partitions, but it's sort of tricky to get right. It will work eventually :) I have arm packages for latest git almost built, so tomorrow I should be able to build xo1.75 and xo4 images too. The oob configurations and some initial bits of automated builds infra are now here https://github.com/dnarvaez/xugar On 11 May 2014 20:49, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com wrote: This could be a change I made. I will investigate and let you know. On 11 May 2014 20:31, Martin Abente martin.abente.lah...@gmail.comwrote: Hey Daniel, Could you check if this is correct? $md5sum 10001xx1.zd $0cc8f3f71d636c8dc4464ffb8bf1847b 10001xx1.zd Tested with 2 different XOs 1.5 and I am getting kernel panic errors very early on the boot sequence, with message: tmpfs: No value for mount option 'strictatime' mount: mounting on /newrun failed: invalid argument mount used greatest stack depth 6752 bytes left. On Sun, May 11, 2014 at 12:47 PM, Gonzalo Odiard godi...@sugarlabs.orgwrote: Downloading... On Sun, May 11, 2014 at 1:31 PM, Martin Abente martin.abente.lah...@gmail.com wrote: Downloading 10001xx1.zd , will let you know how it goes soon. On Sun, May 11, 2014 at 12:19 PM, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.comwrote: I made builds for xo1 and xo1.5 with the firmware change http://sugarlabs.org/~dnarvaez/oob/images/ -- Daniel Narvaez -- Gonzalo Odiard SugarLabs - Software for children learning ___ 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)
Regarding XO 1.5 image, no more kernel panic, but as Gonzalo mentioned the fading problem is still present. On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 7:53 AM, Gonzalo Odiard godi...@sugarlabs.orgwrote: I will attach a serial cable later and report. Gonzalo On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 8:51 AM, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.comwrote: How far does it get? What are the last messages you see? Mostly I wonder if it's the partitions issue that tch reported yesterday or if we fail when running X. On Monday, 12 May 2014, Gonzalo Odiard godi...@sugarlabs.org wrote: xo-1.5 image do not boot, and show a strange gey patterns in the screen. Gonzalo On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 8:01 AM, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.comwrote: The xo1 image boots into sugar (latest from git) and wifi works. I'm now building xo4 images On 12 May 2014 02:12, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com wrote: A couple more images, for xo1 and xo1.5. They have sugar packages built from latest sugar git. I have not tested them yet so they might not even boot, but if someone gives them a try please let me know how they works. http://146.185.144.82:3000/images/xo1/1/ http://146.185.144.82:3000/images/xo1.5/1/ The xo1.5 one also *attempts* to fix the issue reported by Martin. The problem is that I'm running the x86 build slave inside docker.io, which doesn't like xpart. So I patched olpc-os-builder to manually losetup the partitions, but it's sort of tricky to get right. It will work eventually :) I have arm packages for latest git almost built, so tomorrow I should be able to build xo1.75 and xo4 images too. The oob configurations and some initial bits of automated builds infra are now here https://github.com/dnarvaez/xugar On 11 May 2014 20:49, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com wrote: This could be a change I made. I will investigate and let you know. On 11 May 2014 20:31, Martin Abente martin.abente.lah...@gmail.comwrote: Hey Daniel, Could you check if this is correct? $md5sum 10001xx1.zd $0cc8f3f71d636c8dc4464ffb8bf1847b 10001xx1.zd Tested with 2 different XOs 1.5 and I am getting kernel panic errors very early on the boot sequence, with message: tmpfs: No value for mount option 'strictatime' mount: mounting on /newrun failed: invalid argument mount used greatest stack depth 6752 bytes left. On Sun, May 11, 2014 at 12:47 PM, Gonzalo Odiard godi...@sugarlabs.orgwrote: Downloading... On Sun, May 11, 2014 at 1:31 PM, Martin Abente martin.abente.lah...@gmail.com wrote: Downloading 10001xx1.zd , will let you know how it goes soon. On Sun, May 11, 2014 at 12:19 PM, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.comwrote: I made builds for xo1 and xo1.5 with the firmware change http://sugarlabs.org/~dnarvaez/oob/images/ -- Daniel Narvaez -- Gonzalo Odiard SugarLabs - Software for children learning ___ 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)
Ok, at least the partitions problem is fixed then. If Gonzalo can look at the logs with a serial port that might tell what is going on. I susoect the X driver but hard to say blindly :) On 12 May 2014 14:34, Martin Abente martin.abente.lah...@gmail.com wrote: Regarding XO 1.5 image, no more kernel panic, but as Gonzalo mentioned the fading problem is still present. On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 7:53 AM, Gonzalo Odiard godi...@sugarlabs.orgwrote: I will attach a serial cable later and report. Gonzalo On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 8:51 AM, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.comwrote: How far does it get? What are the last messages you see? Mostly I wonder if it's the partitions issue that tch reported yesterday or if we fail when running X. On Monday, 12 May 2014, Gonzalo Odiard godi...@sugarlabs.org wrote: xo-1.5 image do not boot, and show a strange gey patterns in the screen. Gonzalo On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 8:01 AM, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.comwrote: The xo1 image boots into sugar (latest from git) and wifi works. I'm now building xo4 images On 12 May 2014 02:12, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com wrote: A couple more images, for xo1 and xo1.5. They have sugar packages built from latest sugar git. I have not tested them yet so they might not even boot, but if someone gives them a try please let me know how they works. http://146.185.144.82:3000/images/xo1/1/ http://146.185.144.82:3000/images/xo1.5/1/ The xo1.5 one also *attempts* to fix the issue reported by Martin. The problem is that I'm running the x86 build slave inside docker.io, which doesn't like xpart. So I patched olpc-os-builder to manually losetup the partitions, but it's sort of tricky to get right. It will work eventually :) I have arm packages for latest git almost built, so tomorrow I should be able to build xo1.75 and xo4 images too. The oob configurations and some initial bits of automated builds infra are now here https://github.com/dnarvaez/xugar On 11 May 2014 20:49, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com wrote: This could be a change I made. I will investigate and let you know. On 11 May 2014 20:31, Martin Abente martin.abente.lah...@gmail.comwrote: Hey Daniel, Could you check if this is correct? $md5sum 10001xx1.zd $0cc8f3f71d636c8dc4464ffb8bf1847b 10001xx1.zd Tested with 2 different XOs 1.5 and I am getting kernel panic errors very early on the boot sequence, with message: tmpfs: No value for mount option 'strictatime' mount: mounting on /newrun failed: invalid argument mount used greatest stack depth 6752 bytes left. On Sun, May 11, 2014 at 12:47 PM, Gonzalo Odiard godi...@sugarlabs.org wrote: Downloading... On Sun, May 11, 2014 at 1:31 PM, Martin Abente martin.abente.lah...@gmail.com wrote: Downloading 10001xx1.zd , will let you know how it goes soon. On Sun, May 11, 2014 at 12:19 PM, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.comwrote: I made builds for xo1 and xo1.5 with the firmware change http://sugarlabs.org/~dnarvaez/oob/images/ -- Daniel Narvaez -- Gonzalo Odiard SugarLabs - Software for children learning -- Daniel Narvaez ___ 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)
log from xo-1.5 Looks like eth0 is not initialized and all stop there. Probably you already know that, but xo-1 and xo-1.5 have a 8686 wireless card, different to the 8787 in the xo-4 Gonzalo On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 9:36 AM, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com wrote: Ok, at least the partitions problem is fixed then. If Gonzalo can look at the logs with a serial port that might tell what is going on. I susoect the X driver but hard to say blindly :) On 12 May 2014 14:34, Martin Abente martin.abente.lah...@gmail.comwrote: Regarding XO 1.5 image, no more kernel panic, but as Gonzalo mentioned the fading problem is still present. On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 7:53 AM, Gonzalo Odiard godi...@sugarlabs.orgwrote: I will attach a serial cable later and report. Gonzalo On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 8:51 AM, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.comwrote: How far does it get? What are the last messages you see? Mostly I wonder if it's the partitions issue that tch reported yesterday or if we fail when running X. On Monday, 12 May 2014, Gonzalo Odiard godi...@sugarlabs.org wrote: xo-1.5 image do not boot, and show a strange gey patterns in the screen. Gonzalo On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 8:01 AM, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.comwrote: The xo1 image boots into sugar (latest from git) and wifi works. I'm now building xo4 images On 12 May 2014 02:12, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com wrote: A couple more images, for xo1 and xo1.5. They have sugar packages built from latest sugar git. I have not tested them yet so they might not even boot, but if someone gives them a try please let me know how they works. http://146.185.144.82:3000/images/xo1/1/ http://146.185.144.82:3000/images/xo1.5/1/ The xo1.5 one also *attempts* to fix the issue reported by Martin. The problem is that I'm running the x86 build slave inside docker.io, which doesn't like xpart. So I patched olpc-os-builder to manually losetup the partitions, but it's sort of tricky to get right. It will work eventually :) I have arm packages for latest git almost built, so tomorrow I should be able to build xo1.75 and xo4 images too. The oob configurations and some initial bits of automated builds infra are now here https://github.com/dnarvaez/xugar On 11 May 2014 20:49, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com wrote: This could be a change I made. I will investigate and let you know. On 11 May 2014 20:31, Martin Abente martin.abente.lah...@gmail.comwrote: Hey Daniel, Could you check if this is correct? $md5sum 10001xx1.zd $0cc8f3f71d636c8dc4464ffb8bf1847b 10001xx1.zd Tested with 2 different XOs 1.5 and I am getting kernel panic errors very early on the boot sequence, with message: tmpfs: No value for mount option 'strictatime' mount: mounting on /newrun failed: invalid argument mount used greatest stack depth 6752 bytes left. On Sun, May 11, 2014 at 12:47 PM, Gonzalo Odiard godi...@sugarlabs.org wrote: Downloading... On Sun, May 11, 2014 at 1:31 PM, Martin Abente martin.abente.lah...@gmail.com wrote: Downloading 10001xx1.zd , will let you know how it goes soon. On Sun, May 11, 2014 at 12:19 PM, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.comwrote: I made builds for xo1 and xo1.5 with the firmware change http://sugarlabs.org/~dnarvaez/oob/images/ -- Daniel Narvaez -- Gonzalo Odiard SugarLabs - Software for children learning -- Daniel Narvaez -- Gonzalo Odiard SugarLabs - Software for children learning screenlog.0 Description: Binary data ___ 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)
I'm not quite convinced this is due to the not initialized eth0 (I'm not sure what that is due too though). From the serial console are you able to see the content of /var/log/Xorg.0.log (assuming there is one)? On 12 May 2014 15:08, Gonzalo Odiard godi...@sugarlabs.org wrote: log from xo-1.5 Looks like eth0 is not initialized and all stop there. Probably you already know that, but xo-1 and xo-1.5 have a 8686 wireless card, different to the 8787 in the xo-4 Gonzalo On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 9:36 AM, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.comwrote: Ok, at least the partitions problem is fixed then. If Gonzalo can look at the logs with a serial port that might tell what is going on. I susoect the X driver but hard to say blindly :) On 12 May 2014 14:34, Martin Abente martin.abente.lah...@gmail.comwrote: Regarding XO 1.5 image, no more kernel panic, but as Gonzalo mentioned the fading problem is still present. On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 7:53 AM, Gonzalo Odiard godi...@sugarlabs.orgwrote: I will attach a serial cable later and report. Gonzalo On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 8:51 AM, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.comwrote: How far does it get? What are the last messages you see? Mostly I wonder if it's the partitions issue that tch reported yesterday or if we fail when running X. On Monday, 12 May 2014, Gonzalo Odiard godi...@sugarlabs.org wrote: xo-1.5 image do not boot, and show a strange gey patterns in the screen. Gonzalo On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 8:01 AM, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.comwrote: The xo1 image boots into sugar (latest from git) and wifi works. I'm now building xo4 images On 12 May 2014 02:12, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com wrote: A couple more images, for xo1 and xo1.5. They have sugar packages built from latest sugar git. I have not tested them yet so they might not even boot, but if someone gives them a try please let me know how they works. http://146.185.144.82:3000/images/xo1/1/ http://146.185.144.82:3000/images/xo1.5/1/ The xo1.5 one also *attempts* to fix the issue reported by Martin. The problem is that I'm running the x86 build slave inside docker.io, which doesn't like xpart. So I patched olpc-os-builder to manually losetup the partitions, but it's sort of tricky to get right. It will work eventually :) I have arm packages for latest git almost built, so tomorrow I should be able to build xo1.75 and xo4 images too. The oob configurations and some initial bits of automated builds infra are now here https://github.com/dnarvaez/xugar On 11 May 2014 20:49, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com wrote: This could be a change I made. I will investigate and let you know. On 11 May 2014 20:31, Martin Abente martin.abente.lah...@gmail.comwrote: Hey Daniel, Could you check if this is correct? $md5sum 10001xx1.zd $0cc8f3f71d636c8dc4464ffb8bf1847b 10001xx1.zd Tested with 2 different XOs 1.5 and I am getting kernel panic errors very early on the boot sequence, with message: tmpfs: No value for mount option 'strictatime' mount: mounting on /newrun failed: invalid argument mount used greatest stack depth 6752 bytes left. On Sun, May 11, 2014 at 12:47 PM, Gonzalo Odiard godi...@sugarlabs.org wrote: Downloading... On Sun, May 11, 2014 at 1:31 PM, Martin Abente martin.abente.lah...@gmail.com wrote: Downloading 10001xx1.zd , will let you know how it goes soon. On Sun, May 11, 2014 at 12:19 PM, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com wrote: I made builds for xo1 and xo1.5 with the firmware change http://sugarlabs.org/~dnarvaez/oob/images/ -- Daniel Narvaez -- Gonzalo Odiard SugarLabs - Software for children learning -- Daniel Narvaez -- Gonzalo Odiard SugarLabs - Software for children learning -- Daniel Narvaez ___ 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)
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 /usr/lib/xorg/modules/drivers/chrome_drv.so [32.676] (II) Module chrome: vendor=X.Org Foundation [32.676] compiled for 1.14.4, module version = 5.74.255 [32.676] Module class: X.Org Video Driver [32.676] (II) chrome: driver for VIA chipsets: P4M800PRO, CX700, K8M890, P4M890, P4M900, VX800, VX855, VX900, CN750 [32.676] (++) using VT number 1 [
Re: [Sugar-devel] XO on Fedora 20 (was Re: [GSoC] Porting To Python3)
I haven't really looked into this yet, but I wonder about this [32.849] [drm] failed to load kernel module chrome [32.849] (EE) [drm] drmOpen failed. Can you also post dmesg? I suppose it might have info about why loading the module failed. On 12 May 2014 16:16, 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]
Re: [Sugar-devel] XO on Fedora 20 (was Re: [GSoC] Porting To Python3)
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: [Sugar-devel] XO on Fedora 20 (was Re: [GSoC] Porting To Python3)
I rebuilt the X driver and the build succeeded with no changes. I suppose it might need modifications to really work... On 12 May 2014 16:25, Peter Robinson pbrobin...@gmail.com wrote: 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
Re: [Sugar-devel] XO on Fedora 20 (was Re: [GSoC] Porting To Python3)
Hello, 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? ___ 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)
On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 8:02 PM, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com wrote: Hello, 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. -Jon ___ 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)
On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 20:11:28 +0200, Jon Nettleton jon.nettle...@gmail.com wrote: 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. Fedora would probably be a better place to do the work. Arm is now a primary architecure (though not all arm devices are supported) in Fedora. One would probably want to use XFCE as a desktop, rather than Gnome 3. ___ 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)
On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 3:02 PM, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com wrote: Hello, things are looking good so far, we already have all the models booting into sugar 0.101 with wif apparentlyi working. First, thanks for doing this work. 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. This is a issue. If we have a Sugar with similar functionalities (settings and activities installed) we can request help from deployments and volunteers. * Which deployments are planning to ship 0.102 soon and hence are interested in this work? I know of AU. Maybe Uruguay? AU sure, if w don't have serious regressions. We need ask to Uruguay. Other deployments usually update slowly. * Do we need to support all the XO models? In a ideal world, that would make our life easier, we can define a eond of line to our support of F18. * 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. Probably James would know better respect of this issue. The changes we did for AU are in a fork [1], but are not low level stuff, just configurations. * Are interested deployments using olpc-update? If I'm not mistake AU is not. We are not using it. I am pretty sure Nicaragua use it. * Do we care about maintaining the GNOME dual boot? I'm afraid we do, but I want to make sure. Yes. Is a important feature for the deployments. In the end deployments don't ask for Gnome, but for a standard desktop, for some cases. If Gnome don't work without acceleration in F20, XFCE, mate or similar can work. * 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? I am not sure if do a complete build for every sugar commit have sense, maybe yes do weekly builds, or automatic rpms. The deployments usually make their own customizations, and will deploy one or two images in a year. -- Gonzalo Odiard SugarLabs - Software for children learning [1] https://github.com/godiard/olpc-os-builder/tree/au1b ___ 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)
Hi, 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. On 12 May 2014 20:11, Jon Nettleton jon.nettle...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 8:02 PM, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com wrote: Hello, 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. -Jon -- Daniel Narvaez ___ 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)
+1 On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 6:37 PM, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, 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. On 12 May 2014 20:11, Jon Nettleton jon.nettle...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 8:02 PM, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com wrote: Hello, 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. -Jon -- Daniel Narvaez -- Gonzalo Odiard SugarLabs - Software for children learning ___ 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)
On 12 May 2014 21:07, Gonzalo Odiard godi...@sugarlabs.org wrote: First, thanks for doing this work. Thanks for helping out. 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. This is a issue. If we have a Sugar with similar functionalities (settings and activities installed) we can request help from deployments and volunteers. Are you thinking to deployment specific settings and activities here? Or some kind of subset/reference that is good enough for all the interested deployments? * 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. Probably James would know better respect of this issue. The changes we did for AU are in a fork [1], but are not low level stuff, just configurations. Yes. I don't really have a strong feeling one way or another. I can send patches for the generic parts if they are wanted. I think we also need a place where to put reference configurations. I initially had put them in olpc-os-builder, numbered as 14.0.0 but that feels wrong... since no official olpc releases are planned. I suppose I could edit the examples/f18-[model].ini ones instead, but I would need access to whatever repository we use to change those without needing review every time. * Are interested deployments using olpc-update? If I'm not mistake AU is not. We are not using it. I am pretty sure Nicaragua use it. Is AU using yum? * Do we care about maintaining the GNOME dual boot? I'm afraid we do, but I want to make sure. Yes. Is a important feature for the deployments. In the end deployments don't ask for Gnome, but for a standard desktop, for some cases. If Gnome don't work without acceleration in F20, XFCE, mate or similar can work. I've seen screenshots of GNOME fallback in F20, so I'm hopeful it's still there. But yeah, in the worst case there are alternatives. * 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? I am not sure if do a complete build for every sugar commit have sense, maybe yes do weekly builds, or automatic rpms. Yeah, weekly images and one rpm per commit was pretty much what I had in mind. (With yum based updates doing frequent builds is less important by the way). Well, it's probably good to have one image per commit to the build configurations repository, but that's different. ___ 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)
daniel wrote: * 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. ... Yes. I don't really have a strong feeling one way or another. I can send patches for the generic parts if they are wanted. I think we also need a place where to put reference configurations. I initially had put them in olpc-os-builder, numbered as 14.0.0 but that feels wrong... since no official olpc releases are planned. I suppose I could edit the examples/f18-[model].ini ones instead, but I would need access to whatever repository we use to change those without needing review every time. in my opinion, the value of not forking would outweigh the risk of giving commit privs to someone from (gasp!) sugarlabs. ;-) (that really is just an opinion, of course. it's not my call.) it also seems like this problem could be well solved with branches and tags. i haven't looked at the o-o-b tree, but i assume the current 13.2.0 point could be frozen (branch or tag) and other work could continue, and eventually branched or tagged itself. paul =- paul fox, p...@laptop.org ___ 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)
On 13 May 2014 00:43, Paul Fox p...@laptop.org wrote: daniel wrote: * 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. ... Yes. I don't really have a strong feeling one way or another. I can send patches for the generic parts if they are wanted. I think we also need a place where to put reference configurations. I initially had put them in olpc-os-builder, numbered as 14.0.0 but that feels wrong... since no official olpc releases are planned. I suppose I could edit the examples/f18-[model].ini ones instead, but I would need access to whatever repository we use to change those without needing review every time. in my opinion, the value of not forking would outweigh the risk of giving commit privs to someone from (gasp!) sugarlabs. ;-) (that really is just an opinion, of course. it's not my call.) I don't know... we are kind of dangerous people :P it also seems like this problem could be well solved with branches and tags. i haven't looked at the o-o-b tree, but i assume the current 13.2.0 point could be frozen (branch or tag) and other work could continue, and eventually branched or tagged itself. Yeah, I made my changes on a branch already (v8.0). ___ 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)
On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 08:02:22PM +0200, Daniel Narvaez wrote: things are looking good so far, we already have all the models booting into sugar 0.101 with wif apparentlyi working. I agree, well done. Why is it everybody named Daniel does development so fast? ;-) * 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. Contribute, please. In whatever way is best for you and your users; (a) patches by mail, (b) fork and pull requests, (c) an account on dev.laptop.org. I also don't know if OLPC will do any active development on the Linux side of things. It is more likely now than yesterday, because FZT's new requirements may cascade into work by OLPC. * Are interested deployments using olpc-update? If I'm not mistake AU is not. UY is not. It is very useful feature though, small changes possible without reinstalling every laptop. -- Also, I agree with Jon Nettleton, while there is substantial risk continuing with Fedora, with reduced opportunity, there are greater opportunities with other distributions. However, the deployments are an installed base, and may not be interested in switching at this time, unless a compelling reason exists. So by all means, look for compelling reasons and ways to reduce development effort. Meanwhile, work with Fedora specialists. -- In past 24 hours the activity caused 14 unsubscribe on devel@, with 699 remaining. Good sign. -- James Cameron http://quozl.linux.org.au/ ___ 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)
xo4 image finally built (untested yet) http://bender.sugarlabs.org:3000/images/xo4/2/ ___ 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)
Downloading! On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 8:54 PM, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com wrote: xo4 image finally built (untested yet) http://bender.sugarlabs.org:3000/images/xo4/2/ ___ 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)
On May 12, 2014, at 7:34 PM, James Cameron wrote: On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 10:08:41AM -0300, Gonzalo Odiard wrote: Probably you already know that, but xo-1 and xo-1.5 have a 8686 wireless card, different to the 8787 in the xo-4 Actually, XO-1 has 8388 and is soldered down card. XO-1: 88W8388 soldered to motherboard XO-1.5, XO-1.75, and XO-4: 88W8686 SDIO card XO-4: 88W8787 SDIO card From a hardware point of view, the 88W8787 802.11a/b/g SDIO card works fine in XO-1.5/1.75/4 laptops (early driver development was done using XO-1.5...) but was only certified/available in XO-4 laptops. Cheers, wad ___ 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)
I made builds for xo1 and xo1.5 with the firmware change http://sugarlabs.org/~dnarvaez/oob/images/ The xo1 boots into sugar but there are no activities installed (I probably got something wrong in the ini). Testing on the xo1.5 one would be welcome, I'm curious if firmware solves the startup freeze. On 11 May 2014 00:24, Martin Abente martin.abente.lah...@gmail.com wrote: great!! Let me know when you have an image with this! On Sat, May 10, 2014 at 4:36 PM, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.comwrote: Firmware loading works with the rebuilt systemd! I have not tested much but wifi works now. Next step, build images with latest sugar... On 10 May 2014 01:22, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com wrote: I built a xo4 image, which like 1.75 boots fine into sugar http://sugarlabs.org/~dnarvaez/oob/images/xo4/ The main problem, as discussed, is that firmwares are not loaded. I'm building a systemd rpm with firmware loading enabled. If we can get wifi working then it should be easier to play with stuff, building in the virtual machine takes really too long. On 9 May 2014 14:13, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com wrote: I built an image for 1.75 http://sugarlabs.org/~dnarvaez/oob/images/ I've not been able to test yet. I don't have my usual usb stick with me and having troubles finding something the XO likes. On 8 May 2014 02:04, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com wrote: As an update, I have patched xorg-x11-drv-dove and built rpms for it http://shell.sugarlabs.org/~dnarvaez/oob/f20-xo1.75/ Now building an image with those. On 7 May 2014 15:18, Martin Abente martin.abente.lah...@gmail.comwrote: Great! I will try your oob branch for 1.5, I do have XOs 1.5 for testing :) On Wed, May 7, 2014 at 9:01 AM, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.comwrote: On 7 May 2014 01:44, James Cameron qu...@laptop.org wrote: 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 I don't have hardware to test that though... I'm now trying to build for 1.75 which is harder but I can actually test. I need to rebuild the X driver but I think that will require some patching, let's see if I can get it to work... ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel ___ Sugar-devel mailing list sugar-de...@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel -- Daniel Narvaez -- Daniel Narvaez -- Daniel Narvaez -- Daniel Narvaez -- Daniel Narvaez ___ 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)
Downloading 10001xx1.zd , will let you know how it goes soon. On Sun, May 11, 2014 at 12:19 PM, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.comwrote: I made builds for xo1 and xo1.5 with the firmware change http://sugarlabs.org/~dnarvaez/oob/images/ The xo1 boots into sugar but there are no activities installed (I probably got something wrong in the ini). Testing on the xo1.5 one would be welcome, I'm curious if firmware solves the startup freeze. On 11 May 2014 00:24, Martin Abente martin.abente.lah...@gmail.comwrote: great!! Let me know when you have an image with this! On Sat, May 10, 2014 at 4:36 PM, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.comwrote: Firmware loading works with the rebuilt systemd! I have not tested much but wifi works now. Next step, build images with latest sugar... On 10 May 2014 01:22, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com wrote: I built a xo4 image, which like 1.75 boots fine into sugar http://sugarlabs.org/~dnarvaez/oob/images/xo4/ The main problem, as discussed, is that firmwares are not loaded. I'm building a systemd rpm with firmware loading enabled. If we can get wifi working then it should be easier to play with stuff, building in the virtual machine takes really too long. On 9 May 2014 14:13, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com wrote: I built an image for 1.75 http://sugarlabs.org/~dnarvaez/oob/images/ I've not been able to test yet. I don't have my usual usb stick with me and having troubles finding something the XO likes. On 8 May 2014 02:04, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com wrote: As an update, I have patched xorg-x11-drv-dove and built rpms for it http://shell.sugarlabs.org/~dnarvaez/oob/f20-xo1.75/ Now building an image with those. On 7 May 2014 15:18, Martin Abente martin.abente.lah...@gmail.comwrote: Great! I will try your oob branch for 1.5, I do have XOs 1.5 for testing :) On Wed, May 7, 2014 at 9:01 AM, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.comwrote: On 7 May 2014 01:44, James Cameron qu...@laptop.org wrote: 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 I don't have hardware to test that though... I'm now trying to build for 1.75 which is harder but I can actually test. I need to rebuild the X driver but I think that will require some patching, let's see if I can get it to work... ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel ___ Sugar-devel mailing list sugar-de...@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel -- Daniel Narvaez -- Daniel Narvaez -- Daniel Narvaez -- Daniel Narvaez -- Daniel Narvaez ___ 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)
Downloading... On Sun, May 11, 2014 at 1:31 PM, Martin Abente martin.abente.lah...@gmail.com wrote: Downloading 10001xx1.zd , will let you know how it goes soon. On Sun, May 11, 2014 at 12:19 PM, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.comwrote: I made builds for xo1 and xo1.5 with the firmware change http://sugarlabs.org/~dnarvaez/oob/images/ The xo1 boots into sugar but there are no activities installed (I probably got something wrong in the ini). Testing on the xo1.5 one would be welcome, I'm curious if firmware solves the startup freeze. On 11 May 2014 00:24, Martin Abente martin.abente.lah...@gmail.comwrote: great!! Let me know when you have an image with this! On Sat, May 10, 2014 at 4:36 PM, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.comwrote: Firmware loading works with the rebuilt systemd! I have not tested much but wifi works now. Next step, build images with latest sugar... On 10 May 2014 01:22, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com wrote: I built a xo4 image, which like 1.75 boots fine into sugar http://sugarlabs.org/~dnarvaez/oob/images/xo4/ The main problem, as discussed, is that firmwares are not loaded. I'm building a systemd rpm with firmware loading enabled. If we can get wifi working then it should be easier to play with stuff, building in the virtual machine takes really too long. On 9 May 2014 14:13, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com wrote: I built an image for 1.75 http://sugarlabs.org/~dnarvaez/oob/images/ I've not been able to test yet. I don't have my usual usb stick with me and having troubles finding something the XO likes. On 8 May 2014 02:04, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com wrote: As an update, I have patched xorg-x11-drv-dove and built rpms for it http://shell.sugarlabs.org/~dnarvaez/oob/f20-xo1.75/ Now building an image with those. On 7 May 2014 15:18, Martin Abente martin.abente.lah...@gmail.comwrote: Great! I will try your oob branch for 1.5, I do have XOs 1.5 for testing :) On Wed, May 7, 2014 at 9:01 AM, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com wrote: On 7 May 2014 01:44, James Cameron qu...@laptop.org wrote: 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 I don't have hardware to test that though... I'm now trying to build for 1.75 which is harder but I can actually test. I need to rebuild the X driver but I think that will require some patching, let's see if I can get it to work... ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel ___ Sugar-devel mailing list sugar-de...@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel -- Daniel Narvaez -- Daniel Narvaez -- Daniel Narvaez -- Daniel Narvaez -- Daniel Narvaez -- Gonzalo Odiard SugarLabs - Software for children learning ___ 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)
Hey Daniel, Could you check if this is correct? $md5sum 10001xx1.zd $0cc8f3f71d636c8dc4464ffb8bf1847b 10001xx1.zd Tested with 2 different XOs 1.5 and I am getting kernel panic errors very early on the boot sequence, with message: tmpfs: No value for mount option 'strictatime' mount: mounting on /newrun failed: invalid argument mount used greatest stack depth 6752 bytes left. On Sun, May 11, 2014 at 12:47 PM, Gonzalo Odiard godi...@sugarlabs.orgwrote: Downloading... On Sun, May 11, 2014 at 1:31 PM, Martin Abente martin.abente.lah...@gmail.com wrote: Downloading 10001xx1.zd , will let you know how it goes soon. On Sun, May 11, 2014 at 12:19 PM, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.comwrote: I made builds for xo1 and xo1.5 with the firmware change http://sugarlabs.org/~dnarvaez/oob/images/ The xo1 boots into sugar but there are no activities installed (I probably got something wrong in the ini). Testing on the xo1.5 one would be welcome, I'm curious if firmware solves the startup freeze. On 11 May 2014 00:24, Martin Abente martin.abente.lah...@gmail.comwrote: great!! Let me know when you have an image with this! On Sat, May 10, 2014 at 4:36 PM, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.comwrote: Firmware loading works with the rebuilt systemd! I have not tested much but wifi works now. Next step, build images with latest sugar... On 10 May 2014 01:22, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com wrote: I built a xo4 image, which like 1.75 boots fine into sugar http://sugarlabs.org/~dnarvaez/oob/images/xo4/ The main problem, as discussed, is that firmwares are not loaded. I'm building a systemd rpm with firmware loading enabled. If we can get wifi working then it should be easier to play with stuff, building in the virtual machine takes really too long. On 9 May 2014 14:13, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com wrote: I built an image for 1.75 http://sugarlabs.org/~dnarvaez/oob/images/ I've not been able to test yet. I don't have my usual usb stick with me and having troubles finding something the XO likes. On 8 May 2014 02:04, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com wrote: As an update, I have patched xorg-x11-drv-dove and built rpms for it http://shell.sugarlabs.org/~dnarvaez/oob/f20-xo1.75/ Now building an image with those. On 7 May 2014 15:18, Martin Abente martin.abente.lah...@gmail.comwrote: Great! I will try your oob branch for 1.5, I do have XOs 1.5 for testing :) On Wed, May 7, 2014 at 9:01 AM, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com wrote: On 7 May 2014 01:44, James Cameron qu...@laptop.org wrote: 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 I don't have hardware to test that though... I'm now trying to build for 1.75 which is harder but I can actually test. I need to rebuild the X driver but I think that will require some patching, let's see if I can get it to work... ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel ___ Sugar-devel mailing list sugar-de...@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel -- Daniel Narvaez -- Daniel Narvaez -- Daniel Narvaez -- Daniel Narvaez -- Daniel Narvaez -- Gonzalo Odiard SugarLabs - Software for children learning ___ 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)
This could be a change I made. I will investigate and let you know. On 11 May 2014 20:31, Martin Abente martin.abente.lah...@gmail.com wrote: Hey Daniel, Could you check if this is correct? $md5sum 10001xx1.zd $0cc8f3f71d636c8dc4464ffb8bf1847b 10001xx1.zd Tested with 2 different XOs 1.5 and I am getting kernel panic errors very early on the boot sequence, with message: tmpfs: No value for mount option 'strictatime' mount: mounting on /newrun failed: invalid argument mount used greatest stack depth 6752 bytes left. On Sun, May 11, 2014 at 12:47 PM, Gonzalo Odiard godi...@sugarlabs.orgwrote: Downloading... On Sun, May 11, 2014 at 1:31 PM, Martin Abente martin.abente.lah...@gmail.com wrote: Downloading 10001xx1.zd , will let you know how it goes soon. On Sun, May 11, 2014 at 12:19 PM, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.comwrote: I made builds for xo1 and xo1.5 with the firmware change http://sugarlabs.org/~dnarvaez/oob/images/ The xo1 boots into sugar but there are no activities installed (I probably got something wrong in the ini). Testing on the xo1.5 one would be welcome, I'm curious if firmware solves the startup freeze. On 11 May 2014 00:24, Martin Abente martin.abente.lah...@gmail.comwrote: great!! Let me know when you have an image with this! On Sat, May 10, 2014 at 4:36 PM, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.comwrote: Firmware loading works with the rebuilt systemd! I have not tested much but wifi works now. Next step, build images with latest sugar... On 10 May 2014 01:22, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com wrote: I built a xo4 image, which like 1.75 boots fine into sugar http://sugarlabs.org/~dnarvaez/oob/images/xo4/ The main problem, as discussed, is that firmwares are not loaded. I'm building a systemd rpm with firmware loading enabled. If we can get wifi working then it should be easier to play with stuff, building in the virtual machine takes really too long. On 9 May 2014 14:13, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com wrote: I built an image for 1.75 http://sugarlabs.org/~dnarvaez/oob/images/ I've not been able to test yet. I don't have my usual usb stick with me and having troubles finding something the XO likes. On 8 May 2014 02:04, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com wrote: As an update, I have patched xorg-x11-drv-dove and built rpms for it http://shell.sugarlabs.org/~dnarvaez/oob/f20-xo1.75/ Now building an image with those. On 7 May 2014 15:18, Martin Abente martin.abente.lah...@gmail.com wrote: Great! I will try your oob branch for 1.5, I do have XOs 1.5 for testing :) On Wed, May 7, 2014 at 9:01 AM, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com wrote: On 7 May 2014 01:44, James Cameron qu...@laptop.org wrote: 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 I don't have hardware to test that though... I'm now trying to build for 1.75 which is harder but I can actually test. I need to rebuild the X driver but I think that will require some patching, let's see if I can get it to work... ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel ___ Sugar-devel mailing list sugar-de...@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel -- Daniel Narvaez -- Daniel Narvaez -- Daniel Narvaez -- Daniel Narvaez -- Daniel Narvaez -- Gonzalo Odiard SugarLabs - Software for children learning -- Daniel Narvaez ___ 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)
A couple more images, for xo1 and xo1.5. They have sugar packages built from latest sugar git. I have not tested them yet so they might not even boot, but if someone gives them a try please let me know how they works. http://146.185.144.82:3000/images/xo1/1/ http://146.185.144.82:3000/images/xo1.5/1/ The xo1.5 one also *attempts* to fix the issue reported by Martin. The problem is that I'm running the x86 build slave inside docker.io, which doesn't like xpart. So I patched olpc-os-builder to manually losetup the partitions, but it's sort of tricky to get right. It will work eventually :) I have arm packages for latest git almost built, so tomorrow I should be able to build xo1.75 and xo4 images too. The oob configurations and some initial bits of automated builds infra are now here https://github.com/dnarvaez/xugar On 11 May 2014 20:49, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com wrote: This could be a change I made. I will investigate and let you know. On 11 May 2014 20:31, Martin Abente martin.abente.lah...@gmail.comwrote: Hey Daniel, Could you check if this is correct? $md5sum 10001xx1.zd $0cc8f3f71d636c8dc4464ffb8bf1847b 10001xx1.zd Tested with 2 different XOs 1.5 and I am getting kernel panic errors very early on the boot sequence, with message: tmpfs: No value for mount option 'strictatime' mount: mounting on /newrun failed: invalid argument mount used greatest stack depth 6752 bytes left. On Sun, May 11, 2014 at 12:47 PM, Gonzalo Odiard godi...@sugarlabs.orgwrote: Downloading... On Sun, May 11, 2014 at 1:31 PM, Martin Abente martin.abente.lah...@gmail.com wrote: Downloading 10001xx1.zd , will let you know how it goes soon. On Sun, May 11, 2014 at 12:19 PM, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.comwrote: I made builds for xo1 and xo1.5 with the firmware change http://sugarlabs.org/~dnarvaez/oob/images/ The xo1 boots into sugar but there are no activities installed (I probably got something wrong in the ini). Testing on the xo1.5 one would be welcome, I'm curious if firmware solves the startup freeze. On 11 May 2014 00:24, Martin Abente martin.abente.lah...@gmail.comwrote: great!! Let me know when you have an image with this! On Sat, May 10, 2014 at 4:36 PM, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.comwrote: Firmware loading works with the rebuilt systemd! I have not tested much but wifi works now. Next step, build images with latest sugar... On 10 May 2014 01:22, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com wrote: I built a xo4 image, which like 1.75 boots fine into sugar http://sugarlabs.org/~dnarvaez/oob/images/xo4/ The main problem, as discussed, is that firmwares are not loaded. I'm building a systemd rpm with firmware loading enabled. If we can get wifi working then it should be easier to play with stuff, building in the virtual machine takes really too long. On 9 May 2014 14:13, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com wrote: I built an image for 1.75 http://sugarlabs.org/~dnarvaez/oob/images/ I've not been able to test yet. I don't have my usual usb stick with me and having troubles finding something the XO likes. On 8 May 2014 02:04, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com wrote: As an update, I have patched xorg-x11-drv-dove and built rpms for it http://shell.sugarlabs.org/~dnarvaez/oob/f20-xo1.75/ Now building an image with those. On 7 May 2014 15:18, Martin Abente martin.abente.lah...@gmail.com wrote: Great! I will try your oob branch for 1.5, I do have XOs 1.5 for testing :) On Wed, May 7, 2014 at 9:01 AM, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com wrote: On 7 May 2014 01:44, James Cameron qu...@laptop.org wrote: 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 I don't have hardware to test that though... I'm now trying to build for 1.75 which is harder but I can actually test. I need to rebuild the X driver but I think that will require some patching, let's see if I can get it to work... ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel ___ Sugar-devel mailing list sugar-de...@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel -- Daniel Narvaez -- Daniel Narvaez -- Daniel Narvaez -- Daniel Narvaez -- Daniel Narvaez -- Gonzalo Odiard SugarLabs - Software for children learning -- Daniel Narvaez -- Daniel Narvaez
Re: [Sugar-devel] XO on Fedora 20 (was Re: [GSoC] Porting To Python3)
Downloading! On Sun, May 11, 2014 at 8:12 PM, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com wrote: A couple more images, for xo1 and xo1.5. They have sugar packages built from latest sugar git. I have not tested them yet so they might not even boot, but if someone gives them a try please let me know how they works. http://146.185.144.82:3000/images/xo1/1/ http://146.185.144.82:3000/images/xo1.5/1/ The xo1.5 one also *attempts* to fix the issue reported by Martin. The problem is that I'm running the x86 build slave inside docker.io, which doesn't like xpart. So I patched olpc-os-builder to manually losetup the partitions, but it's sort of tricky to get right. It will work eventually :) I have arm packages for latest git almost built, so tomorrow I should be able to build xo1.75 and xo4 images too. The oob configurations and some initial bits of automated builds infra are now here https://github.com/dnarvaez/xugar On 11 May 2014 20:49, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com wrote: This could be a change I made. I will investigate and let you know. On 11 May 2014 20:31, Martin Abente martin.abente.lah...@gmail.comwrote: Hey Daniel, Could you check if this is correct? $md5sum 10001xx1.zd $0cc8f3f71d636c8dc4464ffb8bf1847b 10001xx1.zd Tested with 2 different XOs 1.5 and I am getting kernel panic errors very early on the boot sequence, with message: tmpfs: No value for mount option 'strictatime' mount: mounting on /newrun failed: invalid argument mount used greatest stack depth 6752 bytes left. On Sun, May 11, 2014 at 12:47 PM, Gonzalo Odiard godi...@sugarlabs.orgwrote: Downloading... On Sun, May 11, 2014 at 1:31 PM, Martin Abente martin.abente.lah...@gmail.com wrote: Downloading 10001xx1.zd , will let you know how it goes soon. On Sun, May 11, 2014 at 12:19 PM, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.comwrote: I made builds for xo1 and xo1.5 with the firmware change http://sugarlabs.org/~dnarvaez/oob/images/ The xo1 boots into sugar but there are no activities installed (I probably got something wrong in the ini). Testing on the xo1.5 one would be welcome, I'm curious if firmware solves the startup freeze. On 11 May 2014 00:24, Martin Abente martin.abente.lah...@gmail.comwrote: great!! Let me know when you have an image with this! On Sat, May 10, 2014 at 4:36 PM, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com wrote: Firmware loading works with the rebuilt systemd! I have not tested much but wifi works now. Next step, build images with latest sugar... On 10 May 2014 01:22, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com wrote: I built a xo4 image, which like 1.75 boots fine into sugar http://sugarlabs.org/~dnarvaez/oob/images/xo4/ The main problem, as discussed, is that firmwares are not loaded. I'm building a systemd rpm with firmware loading enabled. If we can get wifi working then it should be easier to play with stuff, building in the virtual machine takes really too long. On 9 May 2014 14:13, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com wrote: I built an image for 1.75 http://sugarlabs.org/~dnarvaez/oob/images/ I've not been able to test yet. I don't have my usual usb stick with me and having troubles finding something the XO likes. On 8 May 2014 02:04, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com wrote: As an update, I have patched xorg-x11-drv-dove and built rpms for it http://shell.sugarlabs.org/~dnarvaez/oob/f20-xo1.75/ Now building an image with those. On 7 May 2014 15:18, Martin Abente martin.abente.lah...@gmail.com wrote: Great! I will try your oob branch for 1.5, I do have XOs 1.5 for testing :) On Wed, May 7, 2014 at 9:01 AM, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com wrote: On 7 May 2014 01:44, James Cameron qu...@laptop.org wrote: 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 I don't have hardware to test that though... I'm now trying to build for 1.75 which is harder but I can actually test. I need to rebuild the X driver but I think that will require some patching, let's see if I can get it to work... ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel ___ Sugar-devel mailing list sugar-de...@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel -- Daniel Narvaez -- Daniel Narvaez -- Daniel Narvaez -- Daniel Narvaez -- Daniel Narvaez --
Re: [Sugar-devel] XO on Fedora 20 (was Re: [GSoC] Porting To Python3)
Firmware loading works with the rebuilt systemd! I have not tested much but wifi works now. Next step, build images with latest sugar... On 10 May 2014 01:22, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com wrote: I built a xo4 image, which like 1.75 boots fine into sugar http://sugarlabs.org/~dnarvaez/oob/images/xo4/ The main problem, as discussed, is that firmwares are not loaded. I'm building a systemd rpm with firmware loading enabled. If we can get wifi working then it should be easier to play with stuff, building in the virtual machine takes really too long. On 9 May 2014 14:13, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com wrote: I built an image for 1.75 http://sugarlabs.org/~dnarvaez/oob/images/ I've not been able to test yet. I don't have my usual usb stick with me and having troubles finding something the XO likes. On 8 May 2014 02:04, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com wrote: As an update, I have patched xorg-x11-drv-dove and built rpms for it http://shell.sugarlabs.org/~dnarvaez/oob/f20-xo1.75/ Now building an image with those. On 7 May 2014 15:18, Martin Abente martin.abente.lah...@gmail.comwrote: Great! I will try your oob branch for 1.5, I do have XOs 1.5 for testing :) On Wed, May 7, 2014 at 9:01 AM, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.comwrote: On 7 May 2014 01:44, James Cameron qu...@laptop.org wrote: 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 I don't have hardware to test that though... I'm now trying to build for 1.75 which is harder but I can actually test. I need to rebuild the X driver but I think that will require some patching, let's see if I can get it to work... ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel ___ Sugar-devel mailing list sugar-de...@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel -- Daniel Narvaez -- Daniel Narvaez -- Daniel Narvaez -- Daniel Narvaez ___ 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)
great!! Let me know when you have an image with this! On Sat, May 10, 2014 at 4:36 PM, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com wrote: Firmware loading works with the rebuilt systemd! I have not tested much but wifi works now. Next step, build images with latest sugar... On 10 May 2014 01:22, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com wrote: I built a xo4 image, which like 1.75 boots fine into sugar http://sugarlabs.org/~dnarvaez/oob/images/xo4/ The main problem, as discussed, is that firmwares are not loaded. I'm building a systemd rpm with firmware loading enabled. If we can get wifi working then it should be easier to play with stuff, building in the virtual machine takes really too long. On 9 May 2014 14:13, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com wrote: I built an image for 1.75 http://sugarlabs.org/~dnarvaez/oob/images/ I've not been able to test yet. I don't have my usual usb stick with me and having troubles finding something the XO likes. On 8 May 2014 02:04, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com wrote: As an update, I have patched xorg-x11-drv-dove and built rpms for it http://shell.sugarlabs.org/~dnarvaez/oob/f20-xo1.75/ Now building an image with those. On 7 May 2014 15:18, Martin Abente martin.abente.lah...@gmail.comwrote: Great! I will try your oob branch for 1.5, I do have XOs 1.5 for testing :) On Wed, May 7, 2014 at 9:01 AM, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.comwrote: On 7 May 2014 01:44, James Cameron qu...@laptop.org wrote: 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 I don't have hardware to test that though... I'm now trying to build for 1.75 which is harder but I can actually test. I need to rebuild the X driver but I think that will require some patching, let's see if I can get it to work... ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel ___ Sugar-devel mailing list sugar-de...@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel -- Daniel Narvaez -- Daniel Narvaez -- Daniel Narvaez -- Daniel Narvaez ___ 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)
I built an image for 1.75 http://sugarlabs.org/~dnarvaez/oob/images/ I've not been able to test yet. I don't have my usual usb stick with me and having troubles finding something the XO likes. On 8 May 2014 02:04, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com wrote: As an update, I have patched xorg-x11-drv-dove and built rpms for it http://shell.sugarlabs.org/~dnarvaez/oob/f20-xo1.75/ Now building an image with those. On 7 May 2014 15:18, Martin Abente martin.abente.lah...@gmail.com wrote: Great! I will try your oob branch for 1.5, I do have XOs 1.5 for testing :) On Wed, May 7, 2014 at 9:01 AM, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.comwrote: On 7 May 2014 01:44, James Cameron qu...@laptop.org wrote: 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 I don't have hardware to test that though... I'm now trying to build for 1.75 which is harder but I can actually test. I need to rebuild the X driver but I think that will require some patching, let's see if I can get it to work... ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel ___ Sugar-devel mailing list sugar-de...@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel -- Daniel Narvaez -- Daniel Narvaez ___ 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)
On 9 May 2014 14:24, Daniel Drake d...@laptop.org wrote: On Wed, May 7, 2014 at 9:01 PM, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com wrote: On 7 May 2014 01:44, James Cameron qu...@laptop.org wrote: 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. Does the 3.10 kernel which is used there have olpc patches applied? ___ 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)
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: [Sugar-devel] XO on Fedora 20 (was Re: [GSoC] Porting To Python3)
On 9 May 2014 15:50, Peter Robinson pbrobin...@gmail.com wrote: 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) Is this the change you are referring to https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/arm/2013-June/006116.html Rebuilding systemd wouldn't be too bad if it solves it... Support of the XOs in Fedora upstream is something I've been asked about a number of times of late by varying different people. That would be awesome of course. ___ 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)
I built a xo4 image, which like 1.75 boots fine into sugar http://sugarlabs.org/~dnarvaez/oob/images/xo4/ The main problem, as discussed, is that firmwares are not loaded. I'm building a systemd rpm with firmware loading enabled. If we can get wifi working then it should be easier to play with stuff, building in the virtual machine takes really too long. On 9 May 2014 14:13, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com wrote: I built an image for 1.75 http://sugarlabs.org/~dnarvaez/oob/images/ I've not been able to test yet. I don't have my usual usb stick with me and having troubles finding something the XO likes. On 8 May 2014 02:04, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com wrote: As an update, I have patched xorg-x11-drv-dove and built rpms for it http://shell.sugarlabs.org/~dnarvaez/oob/f20-xo1.75/ Now building an image with those. On 7 May 2014 15:18, Martin Abente martin.abente.lah...@gmail.comwrote: Great! I will try your oob branch for 1.5, I do have XOs 1.5 for testing :) On Wed, May 7, 2014 at 9:01 AM, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.comwrote: On 7 May 2014 01:44, James Cameron qu...@laptop.org wrote: 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 I don't have hardware to test that though... I'm now trying to build for 1.75 which is harder but I can actually test. I need to rebuild the X driver but I think that will require some patching, let's see if I can get it to work... ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel ___ Sugar-devel mailing list sugar-de...@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel -- Daniel Narvaez -- Daniel Narvaez -- Daniel Narvaez ___ 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)
By the way, I suspect the issue with small icons is something we already fixed in 0.101. As soon as we have the base system working decently I'm planning to make builds with latest sugar from git. On 10 May 2014 01:22, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com wrote: I built a xo4 image, which like 1.75 boots fine into sugar http://sugarlabs.org/~dnarvaez/oob/images/xo4/ The main problem, as discussed, is that firmwares are not loaded. I'm building a systemd rpm with firmware loading enabled. If we can get wifi working then it should be easier to play with stuff, building in the virtual machine takes really too long. On 9 May 2014 14:13, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com wrote: I built an image for 1.75 http://sugarlabs.org/~dnarvaez/oob/images/ I've not been able to test yet. I don't have my usual usb stick with me and having troubles finding something the XO likes. On 8 May 2014 02:04, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com wrote: As an update, I have patched xorg-x11-drv-dove and built rpms for it http://shell.sugarlabs.org/~dnarvaez/oob/f20-xo1.75/ Now building an image with those. On 7 May 2014 15:18, Martin Abente martin.abente.lah...@gmail.comwrote: Great! I will try your oob branch for 1.5, I do have XOs 1.5 for testing :) On Wed, May 7, 2014 at 9:01 AM, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.comwrote: On 7 May 2014 01:44, James Cameron qu...@laptop.org wrote: 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 I don't have hardware to test that though... I'm now trying to build for 1.75 which is harder but I can actually test. I need to rebuild the X driver but I think that will require some patching, let's see if I can get it to work... ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel ___ Sugar-devel mailing list sugar-de...@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel -- Daniel Narvaez -- Daniel Narvaez -- Daniel Narvaez -- Daniel Narvaez ___ 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)
These are fantastic news! Thanks Daniel for working on this Gonzalo On Wed, May 7, 2014 at 9:04 PM, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com wrote: As an update, I have patched xorg-x11-drv-dove and built rpms for it http://shell.sugarlabs.org/~dnarvaez/oob/f20-xo1.75/ Now building an image with those. On 7 May 2014 15:18, Martin Abente martin.abente.lah...@gmail.com wrote: Great! I will try your oob branch for 1.5, I do have XOs 1.5 for testing :) On Wed, May 7, 2014 at 9:01 AM, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.comwrote: On 7 May 2014 01:44, James Cameron qu...@laptop.org wrote: 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 I don't have hardware to test that though... I'm now trying to build for 1.75 which is harder but I can actually test. I need to rebuild the X driver but I think that will require some patching, let's see if I can get it to work... ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel ___ Sugar-devel mailing list sugar-de...@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel -- Daniel Narvaez -- Gonzalo Odiard SugarLabs - Software for children learning ___ 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)
Hello Daniel, I built the image for XO 1.5 but it freezes during boot. It reaches to the stage: Starting Wait for Wait for Plymouth Boot Screen to Quit... Right after that I see these two messages: dcon_freeze_store: 1 dcon_source_switch to DCON Then the screen slowly and gradually turns gray. Any idea what this could be? Any suggestion for debugging it? Regards, Martin. On Thu, May 8, 2014 at 8:16 AM, Gonzalo Odiard godi...@sugarlabs.orgwrote: These are fantastic news! Thanks Daniel for working on this Gonzalo On Wed, May 7, 2014 at 9:04 PM, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.comwrote: As an update, I have patched xorg-x11-drv-dove and built rpms for it http://shell.sugarlabs.org/~dnarvaez/oob/f20-xo1.75/ Now building an image with those. On 7 May 2014 15:18, Martin Abente martin.abente.lah...@gmail.comwrote: Great! I will try your oob branch for 1.5, I do have XOs 1.5 for testing :) On Wed, May 7, 2014 at 9:01 AM, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.comwrote: On 7 May 2014 01:44, James Cameron qu...@laptop.org wrote: 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 I don't have hardware to test that though... I'm now trying to build for 1.75 which is harder but I can actually test. I need to rebuild the X driver but I think that will require some patching, let's see if I can get it to work... ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel ___ Sugar-devel mailing list sugar-de...@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel -- Daniel Narvaez -- Gonzalo Odiard SugarLabs - Software for children learning ___ 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)
It would be good to start the kernel with systemd.unit=multi-user.target so that (hopefully) we just get a console instead of dcon freezing/X startup... I'm not sure how to easily pass kernel arguments on the XO though. Does anyone know? On 8 May 2014 18:55, Martin Abente martin.abente.lah...@gmail.com wrote: Hello Daniel, I built the image for XO 1.5 but it freezes during boot. It reaches to the stage: Starting Wait for Wait for Plymouth Boot Screen to Quit... Right after that I see these two messages: dcon_freeze_store: 1 dcon_source_switch to DCON Then the screen slowly and gradually turns gray. Any idea what this could be? Any suggestion for debugging it? Regards, Martin. On Thu, May 8, 2014 at 8:16 AM, Gonzalo Odiard godi...@sugarlabs.orgwrote: These are fantastic news! Thanks Daniel for working on this Gonzalo On Wed, May 7, 2014 at 9:04 PM, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.comwrote: As an update, I have patched xorg-x11-drv-dove and built rpms for it http://shell.sugarlabs.org/~dnarvaez/oob/f20-xo1.75/ Now building an image with those. On 7 May 2014 15:18, Martin Abente martin.abente.lah...@gmail.comwrote: Great! I will try your oob branch for 1.5, I do have XOs 1.5 for testing :) On Wed, May 7, 2014 at 9:01 AM, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.comwrote: On 7 May 2014 01:44, James Cameron qu...@laptop.org wrote: 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 I don't have hardware to test that though... I'm now trying to build for 1.75 which is harder but I can actually test. I need to rebuild the X driver but I think that will require some patching, let's see if I can get it to work... ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel ___ Sugar-devel mailing list sugar-de...@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel -- Daniel Narvaez -- Gonzalo Odiard SugarLabs - Software for children learning -- Daniel Narvaez ___ 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)
On Thu, May 08, 2014 at 12:55:32PM -0400, Martin Abente wrote: I built the image for XO 1.5 but it freezes during boot. It reaches to the stage: Starting Wait for Wait for Plymouth Boot Screen to Quit... Right after that I see these two messages: dcon_freeze_store: 1 dcon_source_switch to DCON Are these messages on display or on serial port? If on display, attach a serial terminal and look for more messages. Because once the DCON is frozen, you won't see any display updates. Then the screen slowly and gradually turns gray. The screen does this in the event that the video output from the processor stops. With the DCON frozen, the screen should not do this. I think the DCON has been unfrozen, but the video output has stopped. Any idea what this could be? Any suggestion for debugging it? Attach serial terminal and enquire as to the state of processes responsible for video output. Usually the X server. Check the X server logs. Alternatively, if serial terminal cannot be used (e.g. no cable), build the image with a preloaded SSH key, and a preselected network. Then once the wireless LED shows network connection, use SSH to log in and debug through that channel. -- James Cameron http://quozl.linux.org.au/ ___ 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)
On Thu, May 08, 2014 at 11:49:39PM +0200, Daniel Narvaez wrote: It would be good to start the kernel with systemd.unit=multi-user.target so that (hopefully) we just get a console instead of dcon freezing/X startup... I'm not sure how to easily pass kernel arguments on the XO though. Does anyone know? Yes. Stop Open Firmware at the ok [1] prompt, then edit the olpc.fth file using microEmacs [2]: ok emacs int:\boot\olpc.fth Scroll down to the extra kernel parameters section: \ extra kernel parameters here to boot-file and change it to systemd.unit=multi-user.target to boot-file Carefully see that the slash has been removed, and that a space is kept after the first double quote character. The slash is a comment character [3]. Write the file with Control/X Control/S, then exit with Control/X Control/C. The file is reset by fs-update. You can also customise olpc.fth in olpc-os-builder. You can also manually pass arguments, but this is more typing and isn't remembered: ok int:\boot\vmlinuz to boot-device ok int:\boot\initrd.img to ramdisk ok systemd.unit=multi-user.target to boot-file ok boot References: 1. http://wiki.laptop.org/go/Ok 2. http://wiki.laptop.org/go/Forth_Lesson_13#Text_editor 3. http://wiki.laptop.org/go/Forth_Lesson_2#Comment_to_End_of_Line -- James Cameron http://quozl.linux.org.au/ ___ 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)
On Thu, May 08, 2014 at 06:07:44PM -0500, Jerry Vonau wrote: Can you not hold down the X key while powering on to suppress the splash screen? Yes, but it might be frame buffer driver related too. Should you not be able to use ctl+alt+F2(F3,F4) to access a command prompt in the other ttys? Yes, but it might be frame buffer driver related too. Both ideas worth trying, but I guess it depends on the kernel. -- James Cameron http://quozl.linux.org.au/ ___ 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)
As an update, I have patched xorg-x11-drv-dove and built rpms for it http://shell.sugarlabs.org/~dnarvaez/oob/f20-xo1.75/ Now building an image with those. On 7 May 2014 15:18, Martin Abente martin.abente.lah...@gmail.com wrote: Great! I will try your oob branch for 1.5, I do have XOs 1.5 for testing :) On Wed, May 7, 2014 at 9:01 AM, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.comwrote: On 7 May 2014 01:44, James Cameron qu...@laptop.org wrote: 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 I don't have hardware to test that though... I'm now trying to build for 1.75 which is harder but I can actually test. I need to rebuild the X driver but I think that will require some patching, let's see if I can get it to work... ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel ___ Sugar-devel mailing list sugar-de...@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel -- Daniel Narvaez ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
