On 8 Aug 2010, at 01:37, Marco Pesenti Gritti ma...@marcopg.org wrote:
On 7 Aug 2010, at 21:08, Tiago Marques tiago...@gmail.com wrote:
Just killing a random activity is a terrible idea becayse you don't want
your product behaving like it's defective; the pop up idea is way more
On Sat, Aug 7, 2010 at 22:08, Tiago Marques tiago...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi all,
On Sat, Aug 7, 2010 at 6:31 PM, Bernie Innocenti ber...@codewiz.org wrote:
El Sat, 07-08-2010 a las 18:14 +0200, Tomeu Vizoso escribió:
So we would have a periodic wakeup? The test would be the amount of
free
On Wed, 04 Aug 2010 20:05:06 +0100, pbrobin...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 5:02 PM, Benjamin M. Schwartz
bmsch...@fas.harvard.edu wrote:
On 07/06/2010 11:51 AM, Bernie Innocenti wrote:
Ok, I think the requirements for activity bundles could be:
1) Support multiple CPU
On Wed, Aug 04, 2010 at 08:05:06PM +0100, pbrobin...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 5:02 PM, Benjamin M. Schwartz
bmsch...@fas.harvard.edu wrote:
On 07/06/2010 11:51 AM, Bernie Innocenti wrote:
Ok, I think the requirements for activity bundles could be:
1) Support multiple CPU
On Sun, Aug 8, 2010 at 4:01 AM, Tomeu Vizoso to...@sugarlabs.org wrote:
I tihnk I have been sloppy with my words, so let me clarify two things:
- killing processes should be done only to avoid OOM (because
currently the kernel kills the wrong thing most of the time).
Can't we just _close it
On Sun, Aug 8, 2010 at 15:15, Martin Langhoff martin.langh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Aug 8, 2010 at 4:01 AM, Tomeu Vizoso to...@sugarlabs.org wrote:
I tihnk I have been sloppy with my words, so let me clarify two things:
- killing processes should be done only to avoid OOM (because
But the one of core ideas to not use only regular packaging systems
(via PackageKit or directly) is having this, natural and desired,
scenario for sugar ecosystem:
* there is an activity,
* several users might decide to experiment w/ this activity
(i.e. change its code) and share this
On Sun, Aug 08, 2010 at 07:18:51AM -0700, Jon Nettleton wrote:
But the one of core ideas to not use only regular packaging systems
(via PackageKit or directly) is having this, natural and desired,
scenario for sugar ecosystem:
* there is an activity,
* several users might decide to
On Sun, Aug 8, 2010 at 9:33 AM, Tomeu Vizoso to...@sugarlabs.org wrote:
Can't we just _close it nicely_?
When you are about to get into OOM?
Early on so we avoid OOM for most cases. Right now our OOM use cases
have nothing to do with misbehaved activities.
Once you're in about to get into
On Sun, Aug 8, 2010 at 8:42 AM, Martin Langhoff
martin.langh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Aug 8, 2010 at 9:33 AM, Tomeu Vizoso to...@sugarlabs.org wrote:
Can't we just _close it nicely_?
When you are about to get into OOM?
Early on so we avoid OOM for most cases. Right now our OOM use cases
On Sun, Aug 8, 2010 at 11:42 AM, Martin Langhoff
martin.langh...@gmail.com wrote:
(Not sure what the
state of play is with seeding the OOM scores from userland).
http://linux-mm.org/OOM_Killer
The pid of the activity should have its oomadj bumped up a bit -- so
OOM knows to spare sugar-shell
On Sun, Aug 8, 2010 at 17:42, Martin Langhoff martin.langh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Aug 8, 2010 at 9:33 AM, Tomeu Vizoso to...@sugarlabs.org wrote:
Can't we just _close it nicely_?
When you are about to get into OOM?
Early on so we avoid OOM for most cases. Right now our OOM use cases
Hi Tomeu,
in general, I think we are saying the same thing :-)
With one exception -- OOM happens because memory is allocated.
Sugar-shell cannot (and I say should not) try to arbitrage in there.
If we try to do it from sugar-shell, all we can do is poll. If we poll
infrequently, we won't catch
On 8 Aug 2010, at 15:18, Jon Nettleton jon.nettle...@gmail.com wrote:
But the one of core ideas to not use only regular packaging systems
(via PackageKit or directly) is having this, natural and desired,
scenario for sugar ecosystem:
* there is an activity,
* several users might decide
On Sun, Aug 8, 2010 at 18:11, Martin Langhoff martin.langh...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Tomeu,
in general, I think we are saying the same thing :-)
My impression as well.
With one exception -- OOM happens because memory is allocated.
Sugar-shell cannot (and I say should not) try to arbitrage in
--- On Thu, 8/5/10, Chris Ball c...@laptop.org wrote:
From: Chris Ball c...@laptop.org
Subject: OLPC 10.1.2 Release Candidate 1
To: Fedora OLPC fedora-olpc-l...@redhat.com
Cc: test...@lists.laptop.org, Devel devel@lists.laptop.org
Date: Thursday, August 5, 2010, 2:45 PM
On Sun, Aug 8, 2010 at 12:36 PM, Tomeu Vizoso to...@sugarlabs.org wrote:
Well, we certainly should not poll, I started this thread because
recent kernels have a mechanism for getting notified when a certain
threshold of free memory is reached (see below).
...
On Sun, Aug 8, 2010 at 2:33 PM, Tomeu Vizoso to...@sugarlabs.org wrote:
On Sun, Aug 8, 2010 at 15:15, Martin Langhoff martin.langh...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Sun, Aug 8, 2010 at 4:01 AM, Tomeu Vizoso to...@sugarlabs.org wrote:
I tihnk I have been sloppy with my words, so let me clarify two
Just killing a random activity is a terrible idea becayse you don't want
your product behaving like it's defective; the pop up idea is way more
acceptable(and a lot better than having the system randomly behaving like
it's crashed). Either way, this is the extremely important use of swap
On 8 August 2010 20:33, Marco Pesenti Gritti ma...@marcopg.org wrote:
On 8 Aug 2010, at 18:40, Tiago Marques tiago...@gmail.com wrote:
The idea of killing activities with the content closed seems ok but it would
probably be a good idea to have a way to opt out of it for some apps. I'm
On Aug 8, 2010, at 12:41 PM, Yioryos Asprobounitis wrote:
(instructions for the olpcnews.com/forum/ kind of people would be
appreciated...:-)
Instructions:
1. Report bugs at http://dev.laptop.org/newticket - if necessary, register
first at http://dev.laptop.org/register (as mavrothal
On 8 August 2010 20:51, Marco Pesenti Gritti ma...@marcopg.org wrote:
On 8 Aug 2010, at 20:38, Lucian Branescu lucian.brane...@gmail.com wrote:
Imo a confirmation popup would become annoying very quickly. Also if the
user refuses, the kernel will have soon to kill an activity, which is worst.
--- On Sun, 8/8/10, Ed McNierney e...@laptop.org wrote:
From: Ed McNierney e...@laptop.org
Subject: Re: OLPC 10.1.2 Release Candidate 1
To: Yioryos Asprobounitis mavrot...@yahoo.com
Cc: Fedora OLPC fedora-olpc-l...@redhat.com, Chris Ball
c...@laptop.org, Devel devel@lists.laptop.org,
On Sun, Aug 8, 2010 at 3:56 PM, Ed McNierney e...@laptop.org wrote:
Instructions:
1. Report bugs at http://dev.laptop.org/newticket - if necessary, register
first at http://dev.laptop.org/register (as mavrothal kindly points out)
2. If you have interesting experiences or user information to
Yioryos -
You asked for instructions for the olpcnews.com/forum/ kind of people, and
that's the information I provided. I wasn't dismissing or ignoring anything;
if we widely disseminate those instructions and they are followed, bugs will be
far less likely to be dismissed or ignored. But a
On Sun, Aug 8, 2010 at 5:09 PM, Christoph Derndorfer
christoph.derndor...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Aug 8, 2010 at 3:56 PM, Ed McNierney e...@laptop.org wrote:
Instructions:
1. Report bugs at http://dev.laptop.org/newticket - if necessary, register
first at http://dev.laptop.org/register (as
On 9 August 2010 09:09, Christoph Derndorfer christoph.derndor...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Sun, Aug 8, 2010 at 3:56 PM, Ed McNierney e...@laptop.org wrote:
Instructions:
1. Report bugs at http://dev.laptop.org/newticket - if necessary,
register first at http://dev.laptop.org/register (as
Christoph -
(you're talking about OLPC and SugarLabs, of course, but I'm only responding
from an OLPC perspective)
There's a difference between approachable and findable. Every member of
the OLPC technical staff is on the de...@laptop.org mailing list, and we all
see bugs filed in trac. I
So if you please go back to the original mail and answer any question you
think you can so tickets can be filed.
No, no reflexes - the only other question in that email I can answer
immediately is, no, there is planned printing support in 10.1.2 or later. I
have not heard of anyone
--- On Sun, 8/8/10, Ed McNierney e...@laptop.org wrote:
From: Ed McNierney e...@laptop.org
Subject: Re: OLPC 10.1.2 Release Candidate 1
To: Yioryos Asprobounitis mavrot...@yahoo.com
Cc: Fedora OLPC fedora-olpc-l...@redhat.com, Chris Ball
c...@laptop.org, Devel devel@lists.laptop.org,
On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 9:36 AM, Walter Bender walter.ben...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Aug 8, 2010 at 5:09 PM, Christoph Derndorfer
christoph.derndor...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Aug 8, 2010 at 3:56 PM, Ed McNierney e...@laptop.org wrote:
1. Report bugs at http://dev.laptop.org/newticket - if
Brenda -
I'm assuming your teachers and education ministry decision makers don't
normally interact with OLPC by asking questions on OLPCNews forums, which was
the context and the specific question I was answering. The topic of, what are
all the ways all interested parties worldwide
On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 10:07 AM, Ed McNierney e...@laptop.org wrote:
But it is absolutely true that anyone who is volunteering (or getting paid)
to test OLPC software and hardware should know how to submit a trac ticket.
That is the mechanism we use to track reported problems, so using trac
Every member of the OLPC technical staff is on the de...@laptop.org mailing
list, and we all see bugs filed in trac.
Sorry - that's not correct. I forgot that Mitch Bradley unsubscribed from
de...@laptop.org last December, as he found the noise level has gotten out of
control. He does,
in general I think it's entirely appropriate to expect
that people asking for help do so via the correct channels
I believe that asking for help should not be the only supported
motivation for contacting developers.
In my opinion, developers of a product ought to be interested in
learning
On 7 Aug 2010, at 21:08, Tiago Marques tiago...@gmail.com wrote:
Just killing a random activity is a terrible idea becayse you don't want your
product behaving like it's defective; the pop up idea is way more
acceptable(and a lot better than having the system randomly behaving like
it's
Le 06/08/2010 11:04, Bert Freudenberg a écrit :
For people unfamiliar with Squeak, you might want to add a note about how to
quit (e.g., not to save when asked).
Right.
I though I had to stop with last minute enhancements, so I decided to
left this for the next release with some other
Sent from my iPad
On 8 Aug 2010, at 18:40, Tiago Marques tiago...@gmail.com wrote:
Just killing a random activity is a terrible idea becayse you don't want
your product behaving like it's defective; the pop up idea is way more
acceptable(and a lot better than having the system randomly
On 8 Aug 2010, at 18:40, Tiago Marques tiago...@gmail.com wrote:
The idea of killing activities with the content closed seems ok but it would
probably be a good idea to have a way to opt out of it for some apps. I'm
thinking a PDF that may be left open on purpose to serve as reference to
On 8 Aug 2010, at 20:57, Lucian Branescu lucian.brane...@gmail.com wrote:
Separating the activity from the service would help here. In the case
of music, MPD would use a lot less memory than one of its GUIs.
Right, I was thinking to something along these lines too. I'm not sure how
the
On Sun, 2010-08-08 at 18:02 -0500, Mikus Grinbergs wrote:
in general I think it's entirely appropriate to expect
that people asking for help do so via the correct channels
I believe that asking for help should not be the only supported
motivation for contacting developers.
Along these
As long as activities are saving and restoring properly it could be
made pretty much transparent to the user. Of course that's easier
said then done...
Android has a whole mechanism for this:
http://blog.rlove.org/2010/04/why-ipad-and-iphone-dont-support.html
That explains the problem,
On 9 August 2010 11:02, Mikus Grinbergs mi...@bga.com wrote:
in general I think it's entirely appropriate to expect
that people asking for help do so via the correct channels
I believe that asking for help should not be the only supported
motivation for contacting developers.
Not at all,
On Aug 8, 2010, at 7:15 PM, Neil Graham wrote:
There is a small open handheld console. http://www.openpandora.org/
http://pandorapress.net/ The openness and friendliness of the community
environment is a model for how things can work.
The support page on that wiki points you to enter the
--- On Sun, 8/8/10, Ed McNierney e...@laptop.org wrote:
From: Ed McNierney e...@laptop.org
Subject: Re: OLPC 10.1.2 Release Candidate 1
To: Yioryos Asprobounitis mavrot...@yahoo.com
Cc: Fedora OLPC fedora-olpc-l...@redhat.com, Chris Ball
c...@laptop.org, Devel devel@lists.laptop.org,
On Sun, Aug 08, 2010 at 09:41:32AM -0700, Yioryos Asprobounitis wrote:
Wifi disappearing after switching back and forth from sugar to gnome.
I've not tried to track down the original problem report that you are
referring to, but Sugar and GNOME manage connection to an access point
without
On Sun, Aug 08, 2010 at 05:08:48PM -0700, Yioryos Asprobounitis wrote:
Where should someone look for relevant problem info if this reappears,
so a ticket can be filed?
It depends on how the problem is reported. Best thing is a description
of the steps that lead to the problem, including each
On Sun, Aug 08, 2010 at 05:37:14PM -0700, Yioryos Asprobounitis wrote:
The issue is not loss of an access point, and in my case at least,
connection was established in both environments before lost during the
switch.
The issue is I lost eth0 altogether both from sugar and gnome. Mesh
was
switching between the desktop
environments will certainly cause one of the following:
...
2. loss of association and no reassociation (the other desktop hasn't
been told to trust the access point).
When phrases such as trust the access point start being used, I have
great difficulty
Mikus,
OLPC/Sugarlabs did not introduce that terminology.
Take your wrath out on Linux and Apple (and possibly
M$, I don't use Windows enough to know if they have
also adopted that phrase.)
My Mac doesn't ask if I want to use an AP, it asks me
if I trust an AP. It then remembers that AP as
Hi,
I upgraded my OLPC XO from Build 656 to 802. Having not used the XO
for the last 2 years, I was pleased with the changes. I am planning
to give it to my niece who asked if she could have it.All works well
except the Speak activity. After running correctly the first time, it
On Sun, Aug 08, 2010 at 09:52:28PM -0500, Mikus Grinbergs wrote:
switching between the desktop
environments will certainly cause one of the following:
...
2. loss of association and no reassociation (the other desktop hasn't
been told to trust the access point).
When phrases such as
On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 3:38 PM, Adam Holt h...@laptop.org wrote:
Plz CC de...@laptop.org if you can help!
Subject: Speak.Activity v16 on Build 802 - Problem Date: Sun, 08 Aug
2010 19:44:23 -0700 From: Tony Rizos
tri...@pacbell.nettri...@pacbell.net To:
devel@lists.laptop.org
Hi,
On Sun, 2010-08-08 at 19:55 -0400, John Watlington wrote:
On Aug 8, 2010, at 7:15 PM, Neil Graham wrote:
There is a small open handheld console. http://www.openpandora.org/
http://pandorapress.net/ The openness and friendliness of the community
environment is a model for how things can
On Sun, Aug 08, 2010 at 06:02:58PM -0500, Mikus Grinbergs wrote:
In my opinion, developers of a product ought to be interested in
learning about shortcomings perceived in that product by users.
Certainly interested. But not willing to prance about looking for
problems when some very neatly
On Aug 9, 2010, at 12:46 AM, Neil Graham wrote:
On Sun, 2010-08-08 at 19:55 -0400, John Watlington wrote:
On Aug 8, 2010, at 7:15 PM, Neil Graham wrote:
There is a small open handheld console. http://www.openpandora.org/
http://pandorapress.net/ The openness and friendliness of the
Having problems trying
yum --enablerepo=olpcxs-testing -y update
Could not retrieve mirrorlist (Error 404: Not Found)
Cannot retrieve repository metadata (repomd.xml). Please verify path and try
again.
Could be our bad connection here. Meanwhile we downloaded the latest rpms
manually
While i'm no expert on this, i can point to a previous answer from
server-devel 2 weeks ago.
http://lists.laptop.org/pipermail/server-devel/2010-July/005046.html
http://lists.laptop.org/pipermail/server-devel/2010-July/005046.html
Maxime Raynaud
2010/8/8 David Leeming da...@leeming-consulting.com
Missed that, thanks. Done.
David
From: plo...@gmail.com [mailto:plo...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Maxime RAYNAUD
Sent: Sunday, 8 August 2010 8:25 p.m.
To: David Leeming
Cc: XS Devel
Subject: Re: [Server-devel] Updating offline
While i'm no expert on this, i can point to a previous
59 matches
Mail list logo
