On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 9:06 AM, Tony Anderson <tony_ander...@usa.net> wrote: > It sounds like the XO-1.75 Sugar will not be operable on XO-1 (and possibly > XO-1.5). I assume there is a clear commitment to continue support of Sugar > for XO-1 and XO-1.5.
Not sure why you say this. In any case, we (Sugar Labs) plan to continue support for XO-1 and XO-1.5 although we hope that over time that support is in the form of GTK-3-based systems. All my tests so far seem to suggest that things will run OK on the old hardware. -walter > > Tony > > On 11/07/2011 03:26 AM, devel-requ...@lists.laptop.org wrote: >> >> Send Devel mailing list submissions to >> devel@lists.laptop.org >> >> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit >> http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel >> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to >> devel-requ...@lists.laptop.org >> >> You can reach the person managing the list at >> devel-ow...@lists.laptop.org >> >> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific >> than "Re: Contents of Devel digest..." >> >> >> Today's Topics: >> >> 1. Re: XO-1.75 relative performance (Peter Robinson) >> 2. Re: XO-1.75 relative performance (Jon Nettleton) >> 3. Re: Announcing the development of OLPC OS 11.3.1 >> (Simon Schampijer) >> 4. Re: Announcing the development of OLPC OS 11.3.1 (Peter Robinson) >> 5. Re: XO-1.75 relative performance (Peter Robinson) >> >> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> Message: 1 >> Date: Sun, 6 Nov 2011 22:19:36 +0000 >> From: Peter Robinson<pbrobin...@gmail.com> >> To: Jon Nettleton<jon.nettle...@gmail.com> >> Cc: Sridhar Dhanapalan<srid...@laptop.org.au>, Devel >> <devel@lists.laptop.org> >> Subject: Re: XO-1.75 relative performance >> Message-ID: >> >> <CALeDE9PHfDegCJ=seyEecnw-MMrb=vzolhk9zizohwrfbgc...@mail.gmail.com> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 >> >> On Sun, Nov 6, 2011 at 4:51 PM, Jon Nettleton<jon.nettle...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >>>> >>>> Hi Jon, >>>> >>>> We are doing some forwards-planing with regards to the XO-1.75. Would >>>> you be able to tell us what kind of performance we can expect from the >>>> graphics driver that you are working on? Would it support 3D hardware >>>> acceleration? >>> >>> Well yes and no. ?The graphics hardware does support 3d acceleration, >>> however currently that is only supported via a binary driver. ?We also >>> don't have all the documentation nor man power to write a 3d driver. >>> The nouveau team has had 3 to 4 people working full time on a driver >>> for almost 4 years and their driver is just getting to a stable usage >>> point for desktop compositing. >> >> nouveau has been very usable for quite some time. I was using it >> without issues back in F-12/13 timeframe without too many issues. >> >>> For a general idea of performance our 3d graphics hardware will run >>> Quake3 at native 1200x900 resolution with medium quality graphics at >>> about 30fps on average. >>> >>>> >>>> We are considering working to get GNOME 3 running, but for that to >>>> work well we'll need some good graphics capabilities. >>> >>> There should be a distinction between GNOME 3 and gnome-shell. >>> Gnome-shell is the only part of GNOME 3 that requires 3D acceleration. >>> ?Could our hardware run gnome-shell? ?Well that would take a bit of >>> time to figure out. ?To my knowledge nobody has shown gnome-shell >>> running with clutter utilizing the OpenGLES backend. ?Last I remember >>> clutter didn't support texture from pixmap capabilities with their EGL >>> backend, so that may still have to be implemented. ?This may have >>> changed in the last couple of months by I have definitely not seen it >>> demonstrated or talked about anywhere. >> >> That's not exactly entirely true. There's a number of other apps that >> are making using of clutter through clutter-gtk, clutter-gst or MX. >> totem is one of these for example. Also before long gnome is planning >> on deprecating non gnome-shell based UXs and concentrating on getting >> sofware rendering up to a reasonable speed. We can start testing this >> in F-17 as it'll be a feature [1]. Phoronix has more details on >> llvmpipe [2] and the gallium3D bits [3] >> >>> The bigger concern I have with targeting a compositing window manager >>> is the amount of RAM that it needs. ?Every window also has a >>> duplicated texture in memory that is used to create the composited >>> display. ?Generally gnome-shell will use 100+MB's of RAM just to >>> display the desktop, and there is no way to tweak around this by using >>> 16-bit colors as everything is an ARGB texture. ?On a machine with 1GB >>> of RAM this isn't so bad, but that is a hefty chunk of memory for a >>> machine with 512MB's of memory. ?Oh and that is just system RAM it >>> doesn't take into account the memory that is needed for the actual >>> graphics engine. >> >> Aren't the production 1.75s moving to 1Gb of RAM due to pricing of the >> different units? >> >>> To sum things up. ?Yes the hardware should have the capabilities to >>> run gnome-shell, again I say should as it is very untested. ?I would >>> not recommend targetting it's use in any future plans unless you have >>> GNOME and Xorg hackers lined up to spend a good chunk of time working >>> on it. >> >> Peter >> >> [1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/Gnome_shell_software_rendering >> [2] http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=MTAxMTI >> [3] http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=MTAwNTg >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 2 >> Date: Sun, 6 Nov 2011 17:11:50 -0800 >> From: Jon Nettleton<jon.nettle...@gmail.com> >> To: Peter Robinson<pbrobin...@gmail.com> >> Cc: Sridhar Dhanapalan<srid...@laptop.org.au>, Devel >> <devel@lists.laptop.org> >> Subject: Re: XO-1.75 relative performance >> Message-ID: >> >> <CALHpu37pCRRV5bRZOWw-a7ib+_OpaSDp-WyvtTx_=rctaug...@mail.gmail.com> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 >> >>> >>> nouveau has been very usable for quite some time. I was using it >>> without issues back in F-12/13 timeframe without too many issues. >> >> What have you been using it for? Gnome-shell didn't exist back then. >> They have been incrementally adding features but it has taken time. I >> have never used nouveau because there has been no power control >> features, not something we I can do without. I am not trying to say >> something negative on the project, I just think it is a good barometer >> for people to realistically grasp how long it takes to mature modern >> graphics drivers without documentation. >> >>>> >>>> There should be a distinction between GNOME 3 and gnome-shell. >>>> Gnome-shell is the only part of GNOME 3 that requires 3D acceleration. >>>> ?Could our hardware run gnome-shell? ?Well that would take a bit of >>>> time to figure out. ?To my knowledge nobody has shown gnome-shell >>>> running with clutter utilizing the OpenGLES backend. ?Last I remember >>>> clutter didn't support texture from pixmap capabilities with their EGL >>>> backend, so that may still have to be implemented. ?This may have >>>> changed in the last couple of months by I have definitely not seen it >>>> demonstrated or talked about anywhere. >>> >>> That's not exactly entirely true. There's a number of other apps that >>> are making using of clutter through clutter-gtk, clutter-gst or MX. >>> totem is one of these for example. Also before long gnome is planning >>> on deprecating non gnome-shell based UXs and concentrating on getting >>> sofware rendering up to a reasonable speed. We can start testing this >>> in F-17 as it'll be a feature [1]. Phoronix has more details on >>> llvmpipe [2] and the gallium3D bits [3] >> >> Is this argument for or against GNOME 3? You point out a lot of >> libraries that require clutter, but none that are hard dependencies of >> GNOME. I understand a lot of projects are dependant on clutter, but >> none are hard dependencies of the GNOME project. >> >> The use of software rendering via llvm is great, but unfortunately >> that is targeted at modern multi-core processors that have cycles to >> spare. This does not target at the limited resources an XO has >> available. >> >>>> ?Oh and that is just system RAM it >>>> doesn't take into account the memory that is needed for the actual >>>> graphics engine. >>> >>> Aren't the production 1.75s moving to 1Gb of RAM due to pricing of the >>> different units? >> >> Not that I have heard but we will see. Regardless I don't see any >> justification that would suggest we should target gnome-shell as a >> desktop. >> >> I understand the push to proliferate GNOME, however as Linus and many >> other GNOME expatriates have emphasized it is not the right fit for >> everyone. I have been a gnome-shell contributor and propenent from >> early on, but I can' t suggest it is a good alternative for limited >> resource computers, when it continually fails me on my quad-core >> desktop with a top of the line video card, which I originally ran the >> nouveau drivers on but had to switch to the binary nvidia drivers >> because it ran the fan at 100% the entire time. >> >> -Jon >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 3 >> Date: Mon, 07 Nov 2011 08:38:23 +0100 >> From: Simon Schampijer<si...@schampijer.de> >> To: devel@lists.laptop.org >> Subject: Re: Announcing the development of OLPC OS 11.3.1 >> Message-ID:<4eb78aef.5010...@schampijer.de> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed >> >> On 11/04/2011 09:45 PM, Gonzalo Odiard wrote: >>> >>> Martin, >>> In 11.3.0 a few activities didn't include translations because of >>> problems >>> with packaging of the activities. >>> Probably will be a good idea update these activities. >>> I can prepare a list of recommended activities if you want. >>> >>> Gonzalo >> >> Are those really critical items? I would only do the really really must >> do changes besides any 1.75 bug fixes. Because (a) this release should >> be only about bug fixes in my opinion and (b) preparing/testing/shipping >> this takes time away from our new dev cycle. >> >> Regards, >> Simon >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 4 >> Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2011 08:09:36 +0000 >> From: Peter Robinson<pbrobin...@gmail.com> >> To: Simon Schampijer<si...@schampijer.de> >> Cc: devel@lists.laptop.org >> Subject: Re: Announcing the development of OLPC OS 11.3.1 >> Message-ID: >> >> <calede9o5thcj7wcfunk+aag8khsuecwsrh9myonxqqdjmfp...@mail.gmail.com> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 >> >> On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 7:38 AM, Simon Schampijer<si...@schampijer.de> >> wrote: >>> >>> On 11/04/2011 09:45 PM, Gonzalo Odiard wrote: >>>> >>>> Martin, >>>> In 11.3.0 a few activities didn't include translations because of >>>> problems >>>> with packaging of the activities. >>>> Probably will be a good idea update these activities. >>>> I can prepare a list of recommended activities if you want. >>>> >>>> Gonzalo >>> >>> Are those really critical items? ?I would only do the really really must >>> do >>> changes besides any 1.75 bug fixes. Because (a) this release should be >>> only >>> about bug fixes in my opinion and (b) preparing/testing/shipping this >>> takes >>> time away from our new dev cycle. >> >> I think translation updates should be OK but only in the form of >> translations in a dot release of the existing version of Activities we >> ship. >> >> Peter >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 5 >> Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2011 08:27:24 +0000 >> From: Peter Robinson<pbrobin...@gmail.com> >> To: Jon Nettleton<jon.nettle...@gmail.com> >> Cc: Sridhar Dhanapalan<srid...@laptop.org.au>, Devel >> <devel@lists.laptop.org> >> Subject: Re: XO-1.75 relative performance >> Message-ID: >> >> <calede9owu1ttnaaswygzfyk1atc-edgecieoogg+c+wh32u...@mail.gmail.com> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 >> >> On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 1:11 AM, Jon Nettleton<jon.nettle...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >>>> >>>> nouveau has been very usable for quite some time. I was using it >>>> without issues back in F-12/13 timeframe without too many issues. >>> >>> What have you been using it for? Gnome-shell didn't exist back then. >>> They have been incrementally adding features but it has taken time. ?I >>> have never used nouveau because there has been no power control >>> features, not something we I can do without. ?I am not trying to say >>> something negative on the project, I just think it is a good barometer >>> for people to realistically grasp how long it takes to mature modern >>> graphics drivers without documentation. >> >> Actually it did! It was the first release that Fedora has it in there >> [1] , I packaged all the dependencies [2] as I packaged Moblin 2. It >> worked fine for the testing of Moblin although as you mention the >> power management was limited. My point still remains it was usable a >> lot earlier than the 3-4 years you mentioned. They've also had to >> reverse engineer it without any form of documentation. >> >> The gnome team are working for a minimal subset of implemented >> features for less capable cards so they run faster using SW rendering. >> See some of the links I provided previously. >> >>>>> There should be a distinction between GNOME 3 and gnome-shell. >>>>> Gnome-shell is the only part of GNOME 3 that requires 3D acceleration. >>>>> ?Could our hardware run gnome-shell? ?Well that would take a bit of >>>>> time to figure out. ?To my knowledge nobody has shown gnome-shell >>>>> running with clutter utilizing the OpenGLES backend. ?Last I remember >>>>> clutter didn't support texture from pixmap capabilities with their EGL >>>>> backend, so that may still have to be implemented. ?This may have >>>>> changed in the last couple of months by I have definitely not seen it >>>>> demonstrated or talked about anywhere. >>>> >>>> That's not exactly entirely true. There's a number of other apps that >>>> are making using of clutter through clutter-gtk, clutter-gst or MX. >>>> totem is one of these for example. Also before long gnome is planning >>>> on deprecating non gnome-shell based UXs and concentrating on getting >>>> sofware rendering up to a reasonable speed. We can start testing this >>>> in F-17 as it'll be a feature [1]. Phoronix has more details on >>>> llvmpipe [2] and the gallium3D bits [3] >>> >>> Is this argument for or against GNOME 3? ?You point out a lot of >>> libraries that require clutter, but none that are hard dependencies of >>> GNOME. ?I understand a lot of projects are dependant on clutter, but >>> none are hard dependencies of the GNOME project. >> >> No, its not an argument about gnome 3. Its to point out that >> gnome-shell isn't the only bit of gnome-shell that uses/requires >> 3D/OpenGL GPU functionality. totem is one of them that we use. >> >>> The use of software rendering via llvm is great, but unfortunately >>> that is targeted at modern multi-core processors that have cycles to >>> spare. ?This does not target at the limited resources an XO has >>> available. >> >> I don't disagree, my point is though that this is the way the gnome >> project is going and that its likely fallback mode will soon >> disappear. >> >>>>> ?Oh and that is just system RAM it >>>>> doesn't take into account the memory that is needed for the actual >>>>> graphics engine. >>>> >>>> Aren't the production 1.75s moving to 1Gb of RAM due to pricing of the >>>> different units? >>> >>> Not that I have heard but we will see. ?Regardless I don't see any >>> justification that would suggest we should target gnome-shell as a >>> desktop. >> >> I'm staying we should target gnome-shell, my point is that if we want >> to keep using the gnome desktop in upcoming releases we might not have >> a choice. Read the previous links and you'll actually see the details >> of the point that I raised. >> >>> I understand the push to proliferate GNOME, however as Linus and many >>> other GNOME expatriates have emphasized it is not the right fit for >>> everyone. ? I have been a gnome-shell contributor and propenent from >>> early on, but I can' t suggest it is a good alternative for limited >>> resource computers, when it continually fails me on my quad-core >>> desktop with a top of the line video card, which I originally ran the >>> nouveau drivers on but had to switch to the binary nvidia drivers >>> because it ran the fan at 100% the entire time. >> >> I'm not and have never said its the right and only desktop. On the >> flip side I've not had many issues with gnome-shell in the F-15/16 >> timeframe and regularly will suspend/resume my laptop for weeks on end >> without issues now. Moblin/Meego ran quite happily on my original atom >> netbook which is of similar vintage and speed as the XO 1.5 without >> massive issues. I have no doubt issues with some nouveau cards is >> largely due to they are reverse engineered. The ATI and Intel GPUs >> which have published docs don't seem to have nearly the amount of >> issues on the NV based one. >> >> Peter >> >> [1] >> http://archives.fedoraproject.org/pub/archive/fedora/linux/releases/12/Everything/source/SRPMS/gnome-shell-2.28.0-3.fc12.src.rpm >> [2] >> http://archives.fedoraproject.org/pub/archive/fedora/linux/releases/12/Everything/source/SRPMS/mutter-2.28.0-2.fc12.src.rpm >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Devel mailing list >> Devel@lists.laptop.org >> http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel >> >> >> End of Devel Digest, Vol 69, Issue 11 >> ************************************* >> . >> > > _______________________________________________ > Devel mailing list > Devel@lists.laptop.org > http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel > -- Walter Bender Sugar Labs http://www.sugarlabs.org _______________________________________________ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel