Dan, > Most of this can be achieved already. Grab the build logs, and diff > them. You'll see additions/removals from the package lists, which will > alert you to issues like the libGL one. A reasonable suggestion is a > per-build mail sent to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with package additions/removals. We > should also have somewhere the hard list of libraries that, at a > minimum, we expect to ship. Anything not on that list could not be > counted on to be in the images, even _if_ it did slip into a few of them > at various points. Examples: libGL, perl, emacs, vi, etc.
Sorry to ask this, but where can I find the build logs? > Ideally, we would have developed the platform for the past 3 years and, > this past summer, rolled it out with a stability guarantee and > occasional bugfixes. But that's not the case, and the platform is being > developed _in parallel_ with the activities that are supposed to run on > it. That's not particularly easy for anyone, but the alternative is for > activity developers to wait until next year when OLPC comes out, and > _then_ start developing. If people want to get a head-start, then there > is going to be a certain amount of flux and pain; that's the choice. Well, I don't think I mentioned, asked or suggested that kind of ideal but unrealistic things. > OLPC also needs the software to be successful, and to that end, shafting > activity developers makes no sense. We need to do better here. But > those of you developing for the platform already have much more input > and much more technical influence and involvement in the direction OLPC > takes than if we dropped a ready made platform over the wall. Thank you! -- Yoshiki _______________________________________________ Sugar mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.laptop.org/mailman/listinfo/sugar
