Is in shell.log file
OK thanks.
Unfortunately this entry is not created when activities are launched by
sugar-launch.
Any line of code that could mend this?
Gonzalo
On Fri, Jul 5, 2013 at 1:07 PM, Yioryos Asprobounitis mavrot...@yahoo.com
wrote:
Metodology:
* Changed
Metodology:
* Changed SUGAR_LOGGER_DEVEL
* The activities were started from the listview, then are new instances
* The start up time is the time reported by sugar in the log.
Looked throughout $HOME/.sugar/default and could not find the launched in
time reported anywere
Could you please
Is in shell.log file
Gonzalo
On Fri, Jul 5, 2013 at 1:07 PM, Yioryos Asprobounitis
mavrot...@yahoo.comwrote:
Metodology:
* Changed SUGAR_LOGGER_DEVEL
* The activities were started from the listview, then are new instances
* The start up time is the time reported by sugar in the log.
- Original Message -
From: James Cameron qu...@laptop.org
To: Yioryos Asprobounitis mavrot...@yahoo.com
Cc: OLPC Devel devel@lists.laptop.org
Sent: Thursday, July 4, 2013 8:44 AM
Subject: Re: XO-1(.75)
On Wed, Jul 03, 2013 at 10:02:15PM -0700, Yioryos Asprobounitis wrote
@lists.laptop.org
Sent: Thursday, July 4, 2013 8:44 AM
Subject: Re: XO-1(.75)
On Wed, Jul 03, 2013 at 10:02:15PM -0700, Yioryos Asprobounitis wrote:
- Original Message -
From: James Cameron qu...@laptop.org
To: Yioryos Asprobounitis mavrot...@yahoo.com
Cc: OLPC Devel
This comparison has been done a couple of months ago and is clear that
F18/S0.98 taxes the systems considerably.
What I found interesting in this unmatched comparison was the
inconsistency. They might point to specific stacks in the architecture
and/or core OS that may need attention (I
On Thu, Jul 4, 2013 at 2:53 AM, Gonzalo Odiard gonz...@laptop.org wrote:
No inconsistency here.
Most of the activities you see slower were ported to Gtk3.
Tam-tam suit, speak, calculate, turtle art, maze, moon, record were not
ported
scratch and etoys are not related with Gtk
Browse received
So, having someone generate activity startup time numbers in a fair
test (i.e. same platform, different software versions) would be of
value.
Tried the following little script but I can not find a way to get the output of
'time' command to the output.txt file.
Any suggestions?
#!/bin/bash
On Thu, Jul 4, 2013 at 12:48 PM, Yioryos Asprobounitis
mavrot...@yahoo.com wrote:
Tried the following little script but I can not find a way to get the output
of 'time' command to the output.txt file.
Not really sure what you are trying to do here - sugar-launch will not
return until the
On Thu, Jul 4, 2013 at 2:00 PM, Yioryos Asprobounitis
mavrot...@yahoo.com wrote:
The following script appears to work as expected, but is the result valid?
That's hard to judge without having an explanation for what you are
trying to measure. I can't immediately see your intentions from
reading
On Thu, 2013-07-04 at 13:57 -0600, Daniel Drake wrote:
On Thu, Jul 4, 2013 at 12:48 PM, Yioryos Asprobounitis
mavrot...@yahoo.com wrote:
Tried the following little script but I can not find a way to get the
output of 'time' command to the output.txt file.
Not really sure what you are
While more manual, you can get the activity startup time
uncommenting the line
export SUGAR_LOGGER_LEVEL=debug
in the file .sugar/debug
Gonzalo
On Thu, Jul 4, 2013 at 3:48 PM, Yioryos Asprobounitis
mavrot...@yahoo.comwrote:
So, having someone generate activity startup time numbers in a
The following script appears to work as expected, but is the result valid?
That's hard to judge without having an explanation for what you are
trying to measure. I can't immediately see your intentions from
reading the script.
Daniel
My intention is to get a list of the user and
I did another comparison, between 13.2.0 os11 and os883 (sugar 0.94)
You can see the results here:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0As_jQJX0Me6XdDI2clFpX1FFRHhKMHVFZGkyakdST2cusp=sharing
Metodology:
* Changed SUGAR_LOGGER_DEVEL
* The activities were started from the listview, then
On Thu, Jul 4, 2013 at 2:13 PM, Jerry Vonau jvo...@shaw.ca wrote:
Of the total available, would that not be a 100% increase in CPU time
used by the process running X?
What do you mean by the process running X?
The parent process of the X process?
Daniel
On Thu, Jul 04, 2013 at 01:00:09PM -0700, Yioryos Asprobounitis wrote:
So, having someone generate activity startup time numbers in a fair
test (i.e. same platform, different software versions) would be of
value.
OK.
The following script appears to work as expected, but is the result
On Thu, Jul 04, 2013 at 07:16:11PM -0300, Gonzalo Odiard wrote:
I did another comparison, between 13.2.0 os11 and os883 (sugar 0.94)
You can see the results here:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=
0As_jQJX0Me6XdDI2clFpX1FFRHhKMHVFZGkyakdST2cusp=sharing
Good data, thanks.
qu...@laptop.org said:
A better measurement to look for is the elapsed time of activity startup.
This is a most interesting value, but it is difficult to obtain without
changing the activity source so that the point of startup completion is
identified. (That task is made more difficult since
On Thu, Jul 4, 2013 at 9:55 PM, James Cameron qu...@laptop.org wrote:
On Thu, Jul 04, 2013 at 07:16:11PM -0300, Gonzalo Odiard wrote:
I did another comparison, between 13.2.0 os11 and os883 (sugar 0.94)
You can see the results here:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=
On Wed, Jul 03, 2013 at 02:21:08PM -0700, Yioryos Asprobounitis wrote:
I'm using the XO-1.75 a bit more these days and gives me a sense of
XO-1 performance wise. So I compared my (500/200 overclocked) XO-1
running F14/os885/Sugar-0.94 to XO-1.75 running
F-18/13.2.0-11/Sugar-0.98.
Since some
On Wed, Jul 3, 2013 at 7:10 PM, James Cameron qu...@laptop.org wrote:
versions, the comparison is uninteresting.
+1 -- we got some performance gains in drivers... and we lost some
performance in the GTK3 PyGI battle.
So it is paramount to compare matched sw versions.
m
--
From: Martin LanghoffSent: Wednesday, July 3, 2013 19:15To: James Cameron; Yioryos Asprobounitis; OLPC DevelSubject: Re: XO-1(.75)On Wed, Jul 3, 2013 at 7:10 PM, James Cameron qu...@laptop.org wrote: versions, the comparison is uninteresting.+1 -- we got some performance gains
.
Cheers,
KG
Sent from my currently functioning gadget
From: Martin Langhoff
Sent: Wednesday, July 3, 2013 19:15
To: James Cameron; Yioryos Asprobounitis; OLPC Devel
Subject: Re: XO-1(.75)
On Wed, Jul 3, 2013 at 7:10 PM, James Cameron qu...@laptop.org wrote:
versions
- Original Message -
From: James Cameron qu...@laptop.org
To: Yioryos Asprobounitis mavrot...@yahoo.com
Cc: OLPC Devel devel@lists.laptop.org
Sent: Thursday, July 4, 2013 2:10 AM
Subject: Re: XO-1(.75)
On Wed, Jul 03, 2013 at 02:21:08PM -0700, Yioryos Asprobounitis wrote:
I'm
24 matches
Mail list logo
