yioryos wrote:
>
> --- On Wed, 4/14/10, Mikus Grinbergs wrote:
>
> >
> > If not present, OFW (q2e42e) gave the message "No signature
> > for our key list"
>
> My XO-1 has security disabled and boots fine. With the
> exception of the first boot that something on olpc.fth blocks
> it
--- On Thu, 4/15/10, Paul Fox wrote:
> From: Paul Fox
> Subject: Re: ANNOUNCE: F11 for the XO-1 build 140py released
> To: "Yioryos Asprobounitis"
> Cc: "OLPC Devel" , "Fedora OLPC List"
>
> Date: Thursday, April 15, 2010, 8:12 AM
> yioryos wrote:
> >
> > --- On Wed, 4/14/10, Mikus Grinb
yioryos wrote:
>
>
> --- On Thu, 4/15/10, Paul Fox wrote:
>
> > From: Paul Fox
> > Subject: Re: ANNOUNCE: F11 for the XO-1 build 140py released
> > To: "Yioryos Asprobounitis"
> > Cc: "OLPC Devel" , "Fedora OLPC List"
>
> > Date: Thursday, April 15, 2010, 8:12 AM
> > yioryos wrot
On 15 April 2010 09:48, Yioryos Asprobounitis wrote:
>> what changed between the first and second boots that might
>> have
>> made the second successful after the first failed?
>
> See http://lists.laptop.org/pipermail/devel/2010-April/028172.html above
This sounds like http://dev.laptop.org/tick
On 15 April 2010 10:01, Paul Fox wrote:
> so one possibility is that os140py isn't successfully enabling
> smbios, or not recognizing the results correctly.
(assuming this bug is indeed an instance of #9100...)
SMBIOS should not be required for not-crashing during early boot.
Daniel
--- On Thu, 4/15/10, Paul Fox wrote:
> From: Paul Fox
> Subject: Re: ANNOUNCE: F11 for the XO-1 build 140py released
> To: "Yioryos Asprobounitis"
> Cc: "OLPC Devel" , "Fedora OLPC List"
>
> Date: Thursday, April 15, 2010, 9:01 AM
> yioryos wrote:
> >
> >
> > --- On Thu, 4/15/10, Paul
--- On Thu, 4/15/10, Daniel Drake wrote:
> From: Daniel Drake
> Subject: Re: ANNOUNCE: F11 for the XO-1 build 140py released
> To: "Yioryos Asprobounitis"
> Cc: "Paul Fox" , "OLPC Devel" ,
> "Fedora OLPC List"
> Date: Thursday, April 15, 2010, 9:06 AM
> On 15 April 2010 09:48, Yioryos
> Asp
We saw this issue in our work with the Cantagallo comunity school
here in Lima. Tuukka and Kaisa saw it in the teacher training they
attended, it seems to be very confusing for new users, who have
never used a touchpad before (they tend to touch the pad gently
and briefly, obtaining a click instead
BTW how do you disable it?
There is a thread about the subject currently on OLPC-Uruguay.
http://lists.laptop.org/pipermail/olpc-uruguay/2010-April/002075.html
Sebastian
2010/4/15 Sebastian Silva
> We saw this issue in our work with the Cantagallo comunity school
> here in Lima. Tuukka and Kai
On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 11:34 AM, Sebastian Silva
wrote:
> BTW how do you disable it?
Yeah -- can we disable it easily on F11 builds?
m
--
martin.langh...@gmail.com
mar...@laptop.org -- School Server Architect
- ask interesting questions
- don't get distracted with shiny stuff - working
On 15 April 2010 11:40, Martin Langhoff wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 11:34 AM, Sebastian Silva
> wrote:
>> BTW how do you disable it?
>
> Yeah -- can we disable it easily on F11 builds?
(speaking only for XO) No. We would have to change mouse driver which
introduces a handful of regressions,
I have an old HP laptop with tap-to-click turned on by default when there's
no external mouse. It is annoying to be typing text and have your thumb
accidentally brush the touchpad and suddenly you're typing in a totally
different location in the text, wherever the mouse pointer happened to be
aim
daniel wrote:
> On 15 April 2010 11:40, Martin Langhoff wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 11:34 AM, Sebastian Silva
> > wrote:
> >> BTW how do you disable it?
> >
> > Yeah -- can we disable it easily on F11 builds?
>
> (speaking only for XO) No. We would have to change mouse driver whic
Paul -
This issue has bubbled up from time to time over the last 18 months or so
(judging from my email archives). It is not at all clear to me that there is
indeed a "consensus from deployments"; some like it, some don't. We tend to
(unsurprisingly) hear little or nothing from the people who
On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 11:24 AM, Ed McNierney wrote:
> Paul -
>
> This issue has bubbled up from time to time over the last 18 months or so
> (judging from my email archives). It is not at all clear to me that there is
> indeed a "consensus from deployments"; some like it, some don't.
Who are
Richard -
I have a specific recollection of folks in Rwanda "liking it". But my bigger
concern is that we've shipped an awful lot of these with very few reported
complaints. I just don't know what that means. It may well be that most folks
don't like it, but I don't think we know. As they s
Hi Ed,
Our friends and volunteers Tuukka and Kaisa are currently in Pucallpa
working
with the teachers and kids. They probably havent seen this thread but this
issue
has popped up often here too and I wonder what you might think constitutes
"consensus from deployments".
Also, the larger issue of h
Sebastian -
No, you're quite right - it's hard. And it's hard to tell whether most users
are silent because they're happy with it, or they're silent because they don't
even realize that they have a choice.
- Ed
On Apr 15, 2010, at 11:42 AM, Sebastian Silva wrote:
> Hi Ed,
> Our frien
On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 12:35 PM, Richard Smith wrote:
> Who are the ones that like it? I don't remember any good feedback.
+1
m
--
martin.langh...@gmail.com
mar...@laptop.org -- School Server Architect
- ask interesting questions
- don't get distracted with shiny stuff - working code f
On Wed, 2010-04-14 at 15:50 -0500, Yamandu Ploskonka wrote:
> Disabling the security system fixed it (?)
>
> http://wiki.laptop.org/go/Activation_and_Developer_Keys#Disable_the_security_system
>
> All Korrect now
Indeed. Our images are signed with the local deployment key, so they
need either on
On Wed, 2010-04-14 at 17:08 -0500, Mikus Grinbergs wrote:
> Was unable to boot XO-1 with build140py installed on jffs2, unless
> develop.sig was present.
>
> If not present, OFW (q2e42e) gave the message "No signature for our key
> list"
I think Stephen Parrish is preparing to release an F11-XO1
Tuukaa -
I don't quite see how you can make statements like "the OLPC project is not in
close contact with the field". How do you know that? We *do* get many reports
from deployment teams that represent hundreds of thousands of children, and try
to collect and communicate that feedback effect
On Wed, 2010-04-14 at 19:35 -0300, Daniel Drake wrote:
> On 14 April 2010 13:22, Bernie Innocenti wrote:
> > * Remove olpc-update and disable the /versions kludge (me, smparrish)
>
> Great work Bernie!
> This is the only bit that seems a bit surprising to me.
I noticed that Stephen Parrish had
On 04/15/2010 01:52 PM, Ed McNierney wrote:
>> We'd really like to see a *memo* about the *decision* that was made
>> to change the default functioning of the touchpad to tap-to-click!
>> Someone recognized the change in time, someone didn't assign enough
>> importance to it to fix it in time.
I
Daniel wrote:
> Ithas only a 15mb overhead.
When I type in 'du -x', on os13 it shows me /versions having around 100 MB.
On os140py the same command shows nothing for /versions. [The remaining
high-level directories (except for /home) have comparable sizes on those
two builds.]
I do not know
tuukka wrote:
>
> Further, the deployment teams *cannot* represent the children. They
> should strive to, but there is no substitute for going out on the field
> and seeing with your own trained eyes.
while your point is well taken, the fact remains that no one but
the deployment teams is i
On Thu, 2010-04-15 at 14:48 -0400, Bernie Innocenti wrote:
> For a future release cycle, we may want to re-evaluate yum-updatesd as
> an alternative to olpc-updates which provides different trade-offs in
> terms of performance, robustness and distro integration. At the time
> olpc-update was writt
On Wed, 2010-04-14 at 17:54 -0500, Mikus Grinbergs wrote:
> I usually bring the system up with messages being displayed (NOT in
> pretty-boot). Several times now, the system has "paused/hung" at about
> the time it should be running through /etc/rc.d/rc0.d (or suchlike).
> [Note: the camera LED i
Hello OLPC!
Glad to have your attention!
Now while we do, it might be a good time to discuss ways to improve
the way we can provide feedback. Please don't let our past and constant
frustration with OLPC taint the very fact that we are volunteers trying to
help OLPC's mission.
It is no secret that
On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 10:54 AM, Daniel Drake wrote:
> On 15 April 2010 11:40, Martin Langhoff wrote:
>> On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 11:34 AM, Sebastian Silva
>> wrote:
>>> BTW how do you disable it?
>>
>> Yeah -- can we disable it easily on F11 builds?
>
> (speaking only for XO) No. We would have
Hi everyone,
Ed McNierney escribió:
> No, you're quite right - it's hard. And it's hard to tell whether most
> users are silent because they're happy with it, or they're silent
> because they don't even realize that they have a choice.
It's very easy to tell: the OLPC project is not in close
Dear Edd,
Ed McNierney escribió:
> Tuukaa -
Thanks for your prompt reply, although it doesn't address the points of
our report. We'd appreciate another one that did. Meanwhile, your reply
demonstrates more general problems in the OLPC project, which would be
worth solving as well.
> I don't
Incidentally, I think it's important to distinguish between "palm
detection" and "tap to click".
In my experience, most users who are used to tap to click, expect it
-- and get frustrated when it doesn't work. On the other hand, I've
been using a litl webbook with tap to click enabled since leavi
On 15 April 2010 15:48, Bernie Innocenti wrote:
> I noticed that Stephen Parrish had removed olpc-update from F11-XO1,
> which made /versions also superfluous. Besides the nice saving in space,
> disabling the versioned fs considerably sped up olpc-os-builder.
I'd be surprised if there is any sig
On Thu, 2010-04-15 at 09:01 -0400, Paul Fox wrote:
> and -- question for bernie -- does os140py include a new firmware?
Yes, it includes q2e42d. It works on all our laptops, and smbios is
enabled.
Yioryos, did you have AC plugged in when you flashed your laptop?
--
// Bernie Innocenti - http
On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 3:35 PM, Bernie Innocenti wrote:
> On Thu, 2010-04-15 at 14:48 -0400, Bernie Innocenti wrote:
>
>> For a future release cycle, we may want to re-evaluate yum-updatesd as
>> an alternative to olpc-updates which provides different trade-offs in
>> terms of performance, robust
--- On Thu, 4/15/10, Bernie Innocenti wrote:
> From: Bernie Innocenti
> Subject: Re: ANNOUNCE: F11 for the XO-1 build 140py released
> To: "Paul Fox"
> Cc: "Yioryos Asprobounitis" , "OLPC Devel"
> , "Fedora OLPC List"
> Date: Thursday, April 15, 2010, 8:33 PM
> On Thu, 2010-04-15 at 09:01 -
37 matches
Mail list logo
