On Mon, Apr 28, 2008 at 7:39 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
in fact there was a post within the last week claiming that it would be a
bad idea to make sugar able to use unmodified linux software becouse that
would mean that the educational software and activities being written for
sugar
On Mon, Apr 28, 2008 at 9:59 AM, John Gilmore [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'll say that the impression that I have received as an outsider is that
the people working on Sugar have not at all been interested in
compatibility with normal linux software.
It's more accurate to say that while
On Mon, Apr 28, 2008 at 9:59 AM, John Gilmore [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Somebody who implemented Sugar in the early days clearly didn't
understand the X11 networked graphics model -- or didn't mind breaking
it for expediency -- but they only broke it in small ways, which are
pretty easily
On Mon, Apr 28, 2008 at 9:59 AM, John Gilmore [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'll say that the impression that I have received as an outsider is that
the people working on Sugar have not at all been interested in
compatibility with normal linux software.
It's more accurate to say that while
I must have missed the post you refer to. It has never been the
position of the core Sugar team--that I am aware of--to preclude the
running of standard Linux apps. We even went so far as to hire a
contractor to look at various ways to facilitate the running of
standard X apps last
On Mon, Apr 28, 2008 at 4:25 PM, Jim Gettys [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, 2008-04-28 at 10:06 -0400, Walter Bender wrote:
I must have missed the post you refer to. It has never been the
position of the core Sugar team--that I am aware of--to preclude the
running of standard Linux
Note I understand that metacity can be configured to use a dbus/gconf
version, rather than bringing in the dread CORBA/bonobo dependencies
we've worked so hard to avoid. So don't let ldd mislead you that it
isn't worth a try; it is.
So Metacity is clearly one of the contenders. This wasn't an
On Mon, 2008-04-28 at 16:47 +0200, Marco Pesenti Gritti wrote:
On Mon, Apr 28, 2008 at 4:32 PM, Tomeu Vizoso [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If someone would like to go ahead and try replacing matchbox with
metacity, would be great ;)
And I'd be happy to help out whoever attempts it both on
On Mon, Apr 28, 2008 at 4:55 PM, Jim Gettys [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I suspect we're using dbus in some places where we should just be using
the normal ICCCM/EWMH conventions.
Activities/applications can run fine without DBus right now. The main
problem are a couple of non standard X
On Mon, Apr 28, 2008 at 4:55 PM, Jim Gettys [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Note that this work (should be) the same, no matter what window manager
we end up using. Window managers have been pretty interchangeable
throughout X's history. That's what the ICCCM/EWMH's documents are all
about. If
Incidentally, this whole topic of getting Sugar to play nicely with
Linux was the *exact* topic of my talk at FISL this year. The slides
can be downloaded from
http://download.laptop.org/content/conf/20080417-fisl08/cscott/ ; I'm
under impression that the actual video will be available at some
On Sat, 26 Apr 2008, Walter Bender wrote:
Sugar/Linux could easily have compatibility with regular Linux stuff,
but this has been denied despite strong demand.
Albert, saying that this has been denied is overstated. Was it a
priority in the beginning? No. Were some decisions made that make
On Sat, Apr 26, 2008 at 03:27:21PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
As for Windows, the problem is that you can't scale large
installations without going bankrupt with the annual fees that
Microsoft charges.? This works out to about $100 per computer per year
in many US schools, and is one
On Sat, Apr 26, 2008 at 3:46 PM, Joshua N Pritikin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
As I have posted before, I am not distressed by the inclusion of Windows
on the XO laptop, perhaps in a dual-boot configuration or whatever. What
would distress me is if Windows was not sold as an option. If laptops
On Sat, Apr 26, 2008 at 3:14 PM, Ivan Krstić
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Apr 26, 2008, at 4:55 PM, Albert Cahalan wrote:
Microsoft will never cooperate with dual-boot. They haven't
ever even bothered with false promises. Forget about it.
Actually, this is the last epic battle I fought
15 matches
Mail list logo
