Here's a build of the F11 beta release for XO:
Here's my experience on an XO-1 with q2e33 firmware, booting it from
an 8GB SD card made withLiveUSB Creator from the 20090403.iso file. I
don't repeat all the issues mentioned at
http://wiki.laptop.org/go/Rawhide-XO such as pressing checkmark to
On Sat, Apr 4, 2009 at 9:39 AM, Martin Langhoff
martin.langh...@gmail.com wrote:
Yeah, that's what I am thinking of doing. Is there stuff that is known
to be 'broken' on the XO?
http://wiki.laptop.org/go/Rawhide-XO#Known_issues , edit away.It also
links to the Sugar Labs Testing pages for SoaS
Hi,
I clicked the yellow triangle on the login screen for boot
errors, there was one: Starting Avahi daemon... [FAILED]
I suspect this is all some kind of filesystem corruption associated
with your write to the SD card. I don't think I've seen anything
like these errors myself.
On Mon, Apr 6, 2009 at 11:54 AM, Martin Dengler
mar...@martindengler.com wrote:
On Sun, Apr 05, 2009 at 01:43:07PM +0100, Martin Dengler wrote:
- network frame icon still blank (I think for the same reason as
http://dev.sugarlabs.org/ticket/307 )
- some WPA (1) networks unable to be
Martin Dengler wrote:
On Sun, Apr 05, 2009 at 01:43:07PM +0100, Martin Dengler wrote:
- network frame icon still blank (I think for the same reason as
http://dev.sugarlabs.org/ticket/307 )
- some WPA (1) networks unable to be associated with (not sure why,
could be #307 again)
I just
On Mon, Apr 06, 2009 at 11:57:14AM +0100, Peter Robinson wrote:
On Mon, Apr 6, 2009 at 11:54 AM, Martin Dengler
mar...@martindengler.com wrote:
On Sun, Apr 05, 2009 at 01:43:07PM +0100, Martin Dengler wrote:
- network frame icon still blank (I think for the same reason as
On Sun, Apr 05, 2009 at 01:43:07PM +0100, Martin Dengler wrote:
- network frame icon still blank (I think for the same reason as
http://dev.sugarlabs.org/ticket/307 )
- some WPA (1) networks unable to be associated with (not sure why,
could be #307 again)
I just rebuilt a Soas2-based
On Sat, Apr 04, 2009 at 08:18:50PM +0100, Peter Robinson wrote:
Out of interest does OFW support ext4? I've tried today to get a SD
card to boot using your image with no luck, but shoved a usb key in
that has the standard F11 beta on it and the kernel booted straight up
but got no further.
If
On Sat, Apr 04, 2009 at 06:39:53PM +0200, Martin Langhoff wrote:
On Sat, Apr 4, 2009 at 3:10 PM, Martin Dengler mar...@martindengler.com
wrote:
I'd test Soas-2 (what I'm running on my XO now). Just a personal
opinion.
Yeah, that's what I am thinking of doing. Is there stuff that is
On Fri, Apr 3, 2009 at 9:51 PM, Chris Ball c...@laptop.org wrote:
Here's a build of the F11 beta release for XO:
http://dev.laptop.org/~cjb/rawhide-xo/f11-beta/
Instructions on flashing are at http://dev.laptop.org/~cjb/rawhide-xo/.
How does this relate to the recent SoaS builds?
I am
On Sat, Apr 04, 2009 at 12:13:36PM +0100, Peter Robinson wrote:
Here's a build of the F11 beta release for XO:
http://dev.laptop.org/~cjb/rawhide-xo/f11-beta/
Instructions on flashing are at http://dev.laptop.org/~cjb/rawhide-xo/.
How does this relate to the recent SoaS builds?
From the Fedora perspective this is the latest beta release
Is this statement meant to be equivalent to this is the latest F11
beta?
Now I read it, a fairly pointless statement should have coffee
_BEFORE_ replying to emails in the morning.
It has all the latest Sugar stuff in it but
On Sat, Apr 04, 2009 at 01:05:39PM +0200, Martin Langhoff wrote:
On Fri, Apr 3, 2009 at 9:51 PM, Chris Ball c...@laptop.org wrote:
Here's a build of the F11 beta release for XO:
http://dev.laptop.org/~cjb/rawhide-xo/f11-beta/
Instructions on flashing are at
On Sat, Apr 4, 2009 at 3:10 PM, Martin Dengler mar...@martindengler.com wrote:
I'd test Soas-2 (what I'm running on my XO now). Just a personal
opinion.
Yeah, that's what I am thinking of doing. Is there stuff that is known
to be 'broken' on the XO?
IIRC, the NM there can't handle the mesh
Hi Martin,
How does this relate to the recent SoaS builds?
They're very similar, indeed. The rawhide-xo builds have both GNOME
and Sugar for you to choose between, and we can imagine putting an OLPC
kernel on to the XO builds to get better support, but otherwise they're
pretty identical.
-
I have made an outline for a google spreadsheet that tries to provide a
checklist of information about XO compatibility for various possible
distributions that an XO owner could choose to put on their hardware. Would
it be appropriate for knowledgeable persons to fill out this checklist for
the
Hi Chris,
Out of interest does OFW support ext4? I've tried today to get a SD
card to boot using your image with no luck, but shoved a usb key in
that has the standard F11 beta on it and the kernel booted straight up
but got no further.
Peter
On Fri, Apr 3, 2009 at 8:51 PM, Chris Ball
Hi,
Here's a build of the F11 beta release for XO:
http://dev.laptop.org/~cjb/rawhide-xo/f11-beta/
Instructions on flashing are at http://dev.laptop.org/~cjb/rawhide-xo/.
Enjoy,
- Chris, with thanks to the SoaS and Fedora teams.
--
Chris Ball c...@laptop.org
Chris, are there release notes somewhere?
On Fri, Apr 3, 2009 at 12:51 PM, Chris Ball c...@laptop.org wrote:
Hi,
Here's a build of the F11 beta release for XO:
http://dev.laptop.org/~cjb/rawhide-xo/f11-beta/http://dev.laptop.org/%7Ecjb/rawhide-xo/f11-beta/
Instructions on flashing are
The Fedora F11 beta announcement is here
http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2009-March/msg02103.html
Peter
On Fri, Apr 3, 2009 at 9:01 PM, Carol Farlow Lerche c...@msbit.com wrote:
Chris, are there release notes somewhere?
On Fri, Apr 3, 2009 at 12:51 PM, Chris Ball
That is somewhat helpful, but I suppose I was hoping for the XO-specific
parts. E.g. power management? Does all the hardware work (leaving aside
the stylus area, of course)? Is sugar installed and if so what version?
Does wifi definition work in the sugar gui? That stuff.
On Fri, Apr 3, 2009
It is as far as I'm aware plain rawhide which means it will be sugar
0.84 with default Fedora power stuff using the new devicekit [1]. All
the hardware should work as expected and if it doesn't please report
it, either here or in the Fedora Bugzilla.
Cheers,
Peter
[1]
Hi Carol,
That is somewhat helpful, but I suppose I was hoping for the
XO-specific parts. E.g. power management?
This build is pure Fedora, so there are many XO-specific things that do
not work, but the build is still quite generally usable, and contains
Sugar 0.84.
We're looking at
peter wrote:
It is as far as I'm aware plain rawhide which means it will be sugar
0.84 with default Fedora power stuff using the new devicekit [1]. All
the hardware should work as expected and if it doesn't please report
it, either here or in the Fedora Bugzilla.
i don't understand.
It is as far as I'm aware plain rawhide which means it will be sugar
0.84 with default Fedora power stuff using the new devicekit [1]. All
the hardware should work as expected and if it doesn't please report
it, either here or in the Fedora Bugzilla.
i don't understand. wasn't there
peter wrote:
It is as far as I'm aware plain rawhide which means it will be sugar
0.84 with default Fedora power stuff using the new devicekit [1]. All
the hardware should work as expected and if it doesn't please report
it, either here or in the Fedora Bugzilla.
i don't
i don't understand. wasn't there just a thread yesterday or the
day before about how there are major XO-specific pieces (e.g.
suspend/resume, the dcon driver) missing from the fedora kernel?
what do you mean by hardware should work as expected?
Yes. This isn't a joyride
On Fri, Apr 03, 2009 at 04:58:22PM -0400, p...@laptop.org wrote:
right. joyride or not, it's simply not the case that hardware
should work as expected. :-)
Actually, the hardware should work as expected, but the software might
not. ;-)
--
James Cameronmailto:qu...@us.netrek.org
joyride or not, it's simply not the case that hardware
should work as expected. :-)
Actually, the hardware should work as expected, but the software might
not. ;-)
I'm running ~cjb/rawhide-xo/f11-beta/20090403.img on my XO.
[I don't know it that was built with the correct repositories.]
29 matches
Mail list logo
