Ivan Krstić wrote: > On Aug 23, 2007, at 7:20 PM, Carlos Neves wrote: >> This 'My Own Image' should not pose problems in the future, but the >> shared stuff in the activity will, because activities will no longer >> have access to other activity dirs, right? > > Right. > >> So, my solution would be to add some post installation script for the >> code sharing activity (that might end up being just a placeholder >> activity, always invisible) and have that create hard links on some >> ~olpc/.sugar/default/$(OUR_PREFIX} directory. >> Would this work? > > No. > >> Can I assume the activities will have access to >> ~olpc/.sugar? > > No. > >> Will they have write access to all of it or will there be >> another place to write files on the filesystem? > > You'll get chrooted into a activity-specific path with a few writable > and few immutable folders. You won't get a view of the FS outside of > that. So the only writable common ground will be the datastore/journal? Isn't that a bit harsh? I mean, we can assert that some places are write only, and I know this whole home/my documents assumption is product of (bad) habits created from years of using computers, and the XO is not targeted for people like me. I know that there is a new usage paradigm on the make here but shouldn't there be some kind of file based, invisible unless searched specifically (not the journal) place for generic data, i.e. files?
Imagine I want to create an sqlite db. And I have interest in accessing that from two separate activities. Is this an impossible task given the security being implemented? > > I think you're attempting to solve a non-problem, however. The > activity installation system will take care of not downloading (and > not storing) duplicate information, based on file hashes. Making three > activities that all incorporate the same shared files is sufficient; > the OS will make sure no space is being wasted by storing multiple > copies. If you really want to manage things yourself, you'll need to > package up all three activities as one activity whose frontend is the > launcher. But Launchers are one thing so strongly opposed by many. You are puzzling me, what is your opinion on having a Launcher frontend for multiple activities (ignore the multiple things under the same activity x multiple separate activities argument). > > -- > Ivan Krstić <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | http://radian.org Thanks, Carlos Neves [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ Sugar mailing list [email protected] http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/sugar
