II. - What for me is an inhibitor is the bugzilla section tell us
how to reproduce the problem. I have no desire whatsoever to try
Mikus unfortunately plays a troll on the Internet. He probably isn't
one in real life, but the way he uses the XO is extremely unusual, so
he views the XO in
Now I see what's going on. Clueless people are crashing around in the
bug database, helping developers by hassling users. Then if you
don't answer the idiots, 30 days later they close out your bug report
as CLOSED:INSUFFICIENT_DATA. Instead of a bridge, they seem to be
more of a barrier,
2009/4/8 John Gilmore g...@toad.com:
Since OLPC's upstream is both Linus's kernel releases, and Fedora's
distributions, there are two upstream places to push OLPC's hardware
support patches to. Have we only been trying to get them into one of
those places (Linus's)?
The F11 kernel currently
Hi All,
I thought now that we're getting closer to the Fedora 11 freeze it
would be a good time for everyone to where they're at as we move
towards F-11/9.1.0/olpc-next.
I've been keeping the wiki page up to date as I go along and filling
in more details as I find out about them. The fixed list
I thought now that we're getting closer to the Fedora 11 freeze it
would be a good time for everyone to where they're at as we move
towards F-11/9.1.0/olpc-next.
My biggest current question is: When on my XO I enter 'yum
check-update' (using either the latest SoaS2 .iso or the latest
My biggest current question is: When on my XO I enter 'yum check-update'
(using either the latest SoaS2 .iso or the latest ~cjb/rawhide-xo .img), it
tells me that there are more than 220 packages at the rawhide repositories
that are at a more recent version level than those provided by the
Why don't the SoaS/~cjb distributions contain the latest rawhide packages
?
Because rawhide is a daily moving development target.
Aren't you both right? The builds contain the latest rawhide packages
as of the image creation date, right? Thus if it's no longer the
instant the image
On Tue, 7 Apr 2009, p...@laptop.org wrote:
as mikus said, his applications all worked before. this is a
regression, plain an simple, *with respect to the previous XO releases*.
now, to the extent that fedora doesn't really care about any specific
piece of hardware, especially one which
II. - What for me is an inhibitor is the bugzilla section tell us how
to
reproduce the problem. I have no desire whatsoever to try to describe
how
to obtain the Fluendo mp3 codec for an XO, nor how to follow its
instructions for seeing if it works. I have even less desire to
If we are talking about 9.1.0, it would be nice if 'sound' and
'moving pictures' worked in F-11 on the XO. Currently they don't.
Are there bugzilla reports for these?
I. - I haven't figured out how to do an exhaustive search on
bugzilla. 'OLPC' picks up some; 'XO' picks up some;
Are there bugzilla reports for these?
I. - I haven't figured out how to do an exhaustive search on bugzilla.
'OLPC' picks up some; 'XO' picks up some; '461806' picks up some. But let
me emphasize once again - bugzilla appears to be aimed at the problems of
developers (and isn't optimal
peter, and greg --
greg wrote:
Whichever way you go, strong leadership, patience, and many hands are
required to fight through the problems. If the community cares enough and
develops the necessary leadership, the project moves forward. But it's
never easy.
It is my hope that
On Tue, 7 Apr 2009, p...@laptop.org wrote:
peter, and greg --
greg wrote:
Whichever way you go, strong leadership, patience, and many hands are
required to fight through the problems. If the community cares enough and
develops the necessary leadership, the project moves forward. But
The main and probably most major issues outstanding are the
kernel/boot process - so
kernel/initscripts/olpcrd/initscripts/upstart/rainbow collection of
stuff of which I have no real idea about. Updates?
It's pretty trivial to disable Rainbow, whereas it's not trivial to
get maintainers
john wrote:
It looks like perhaps the kernel changes have slipped right through
the F11 schedule. Is it seriously likely that the F11 kernel
for the record, this was a conscious decision. everyone knew there
wouldn't be time to get XO-specific changes upstream, and back to
fedora, before
Hi John,
It's pretty trivial to disable Rainbow, whereas it's not trivial to
get maintainers of half a dozen packages to adopt patches that let
them deal with Rainbow.
Yes, we aren't using rainbow in the F11 builds.
Some of the initscript changes related to the bizarre idea of
Paul,
Whichever way you go, strong leadership, patience, and many hands are
required to fight through the problems. If the community cares enough and
develops the necessary leadership, the project moves forward. But it's
never easy.
It is my hope that people continue to use
Hi Chris,
It's pretty trivial to disable Rainbow, whereas it's not trivial to
get maintainers of half a dozen packages to adopt patches that let
them deal with Rainbow.
Yes, we aren't using rainbow in the F11 builds.
Some of the initscript changes related to the bizarre idea of
Hi,
So is that trying to get them into 2.6.30?
Yes, that would be ideal.
- Chris.
--
Chris Ball c...@laptop.org
___
Devel mailing list
Devel@lists.laptop.org
http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Given everything discussed so far, is it worth considering an F11-OLPC
branch, with the intent of merging with F12?
-- Kevin Sonney
-- ke...@sonney.com
“Around here, however, we don’t look backwards for very long. We keep
moving forward, opening up new doors and doing new things… and
curiosity
On Tue, Apr 07, 2009 at 05:17:09PM +0100, Peter Robinson wrote:
Why don't the SoaS/~cjb distributions contain the latest rawhide packages ?
Because rawhide is a daily moving development target.
Aren't you both right? The builds contain the latest rawhide packages
as of the image creation
21 matches
Mail list logo
