Re: [Sugar-devel] RAM DoS (was: Re: Fwd: Activity startup idea)

2009-03-19 Thread Ivan Krstić
On Mar 19, 2009, at 6:03 PM, Wade Brainerd wrote: > Sugar should always be usable *without* the extra security measures, > they should not become requirements. I will strongly disagree with this assertion. Rainbow does not provide *extra* security measures for Sugar, even though you may think

Re: [Sugar-devel] RAM DoS (was: Re: Fwd: Activity startup idea)

2009-03-19 Thread Tomeu Vizoso
On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 18:03, Wade Brainerd wrote: > On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 5:55 AM, Tomeu Vizoso wrote: >> I see two possible scenarios: >> >> - Rainbow is developed as an independent project and Sugar depends on >> it in the same way as depends on NetworkManager. >> >> - Rainbow becomes part

Re: [Sugar-devel] RAM DoS (was: Re: Fwd: Activity startup idea)

2009-03-19 Thread Wade Brainerd
On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 5:55 AM, Tomeu Vizoso wrote: > I see two possible scenarios: > > - Rainbow is developed as an independent project and Sugar depends on > it in the same way as depends on NetworkManager. > > - Rainbow becomes part of glucose. > > But in both cases, someone needs to stand up

Re: [Sugar-devel] RAM DoS (was: Re: Fwd: Activity startup idea)

2009-03-19 Thread Tomeu Vizoso
On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 22:25, Luke Faraone wrote: > On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 5:22 PM, Sascha Silbe > wrote: >> >> On Mon, Mar 09, 2009 at 11:52:53AM -0500, Wade Brainerd wrote: >> >>> It happens to me at least once every couple of days on build 767...first >>> the >>> UI freezes, then the trackpad

Re: [Sugar-devel] RAM DoS

2009-03-09 Thread Luke Faraone
On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 7:34 PM, David Farning wrote: > > Evidence, please? > > The burden on proof falls on the feature developer. > > If you create a patch which a) works and b) is useful to the project. > It will be accepted. It currently does work, in terms of on the XO+Fedora+OLPC_Customizat

Re: [Sugar-devel] RAM DoS

2009-03-09 Thread David Farning
On 3/10/09, Michael Stone wrote: > On Mon, Mar 09, 2009 at 06:35:59PM -0400, Luke Faraone wrote: >>That's the problem: Rainbow is not currently compatible with GNOME, > > Please explain your claim in more detail. > >>as in there are no bindings for launching a rainbow'd application > > What is a "

Re: [Sugar-devel] RAM DoS (was: Re: Fwd: Activity startup idea)

2009-03-09 Thread Sascha Silbe
On Mon, Mar 09, 2009 at 10:22:06PM +0100, Sascha Silbe wrote: The most simple thing to do would be limiting segment sizes. Just noticed that my understanding of memory management on Linux was too naive (didn't realise that in all those years of administering servers - D'oh!). Limiting the data

Re: [Sugar-devel] RAM DoS (was: Re: Fwd: Activity startup idea)

2009-03-09 Thread Michael Stone
On Mon, Mar 09, 2009 at 10:22:06PM +0100, Sascha Silbe wrote: > On Mon, Mar 09, 2009 at 11:52:53AM -0500, Wade Brainerd wrote: > >> It happens to me at least once every couple of days on build >> 767...first the >> UI freezes, then the trackpad stops responding, and if I'm lucky I can >> manage t

Re: [Sugar-devel] RAM DoS

2009-03-09 Thread Luke Faraone
On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 7:05 PM, Michael Stone wrote: > as in there are no bindings for launching a rainbow'd application >> > What is a "binding for launching a rainbow'd (sic. isolated) application"? > How do I install an application that is not a sugar bundle and request A) that I be isolate

Re: [Sugar-devel] RAM DoS

2009-03-09 Thread Sascha Silbe
On Mon, Mar 09, 2009 at 06:35:59PM -0400, Luke Faraone wrote: IMO Rainbow (the current implementation of process/activity isolation) should be integrated into Sugar and made mandatory. At the very least it should be optional, though. I.e. just installing Rainbow should suffice to make your sys

Re: [Sugar-devel] RAM DoS

2009-03-09 Thread Michael Stone
On Mon, Mar 09, 2009 at 06:35:59PM -0400, Luke Faraone wrote: >That's the problem: Rainbow is not currently compatible with GNOME, Please explain your claim in more detail. >as in there are no bindings for launching a rainbow'd application What is a "binding for launching a rainbow'd (sic. isol

Re: [Sugar-devel] RAM DoS

2009-03-09 Thread Luke Faraone
On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 5:49 PM, Sascha Silbe < sascha-ml-ui-sugar-de...@silbe.org> wrote: > On Mon, Mar 09, 2009 at 05:25:50PM -0400, Luke Faraone wrote: > > But unfortunately most Sugar installations other than XOs will lack >> bitfrost, which is a wider issue that merits further investigation:

Re: [Sugar-devel] RAM DoS

2009-03-09 Thread Sascha Silbe
On Mon, Mar 09, 2009 at 05:25:50PM -0400, Luke Faraone wrote: But unfortunately most Sugar installations other than XOs will lack bitfrost, which is a wider issue that merits further investigation: Should sugar adopt bitfrost? IMO Rainbow (the current implementation of process/activity isolati

Re: [Sugar-devel] RAM DoS (was: Re: Fwd: Activity startup idea)

2009-03-09 Thread Luke Faraone
On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 5:22 PM, Sascha Silbe < sascha-ml-ui-sugar-de...@silbe.org> wrote: > On Mon, Mar 09, 2009 at 11:52:53AM -0500, Wade Brainerd wrote: > > It happens to me at least once every couple of days on build 767...first >> the >> UI freezes, then the trackpad stops responding, and if

[Sugar-devel] RAM DoS (was: Re: Fwd: Activity startup idea)

2009-03-09 Thread Sascha Silbe
On Mon, Mar 09, 2009 at 11:52:53AM -0500, Wade Brainerd wrote: It happens to me at least once every couple of days on build 767...first the UI freezes, then the trackpad stops responding, and if I'm lucky I can manage to Ctrl-Alt-F1 and kill Browse before having to just hard power off. This so