On Sun, Nov 08, 2009 at 02:29:51PM +0700, Philipp Kocher wrote:
The patch is good to reduce the boot time, but doesn't work for
activity developers.
Yes, this is a known side-effect. It is an optimisation for users not
developers.
--
James Cameron
http://quozl.linux.org.au/
The patch is good to reduce the boot time, but doesn't work for activity
developers.
After applying the patch I run setup.py dist_xo of an activity and got
the following error (since read_manifest is supposed to set
self.manifest and doesn't do it anymore):
Traceback (most recent call last):
Today I ran a quick experiment on OLPC OS v8.2.1, based on the
question: what are the activity MANIFEST files used for?
I see sugar frequently complaining about MANIFEST inconsistencies in
the logs, but I don't recall seeing it act on these inconsistencies in
any way. I noticed that it even logs
On 14.10.2009, at 13:44, Daniel Drake wrote:
Today I ran a quick experiment on OLPC OS v8.2.1, based on the
question: what are the activity MANIFEST files used for?
I see sugar frequently complaining about MANIFEST inconsistencies in
the logs, but I don't recall seeing it act on these
Confirmed.
On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 05:29:09PM +0545, Daniel Drake wrote:
So, I reflashed 2 XOs, booted for the first time, entered a name. On
one, I modified sugar.bundle.ActivityBundle.read_manifest() to be a
no-op, then turned it off. On the other, I just turned it off.
I reproduced this
