Re: [sugar] notes on 8.2.0, specifically 767 (was 8.2.1)
On Sat, Nov 29, 2008 at 8:11 PM, Bernie Innocenti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >> > > * Firefox 2 and 3 are only slightly sugarized. >> > GS - True. It is what it is and no plans to make big changes here AFAIK. >> >> greg -- i think you answered your own question. the issues >> raised in that linked email are a result of firefox not being >> fully sugarized. it might be possible to improve their behavior, >> but this falls squarely under the big "make traditional X11 apps >> work better under sugar" umbrella. > > We already have a Sugarized version of Firefox: Browse. But people > complained the interface didn't look and behave like Firefox. > So now we provide a Firefox activity, but people complain it's not > sugarized enough!!! > > We can't win this game ;-) But you can bet it's fun to watch ;) Tomeu ___ Sugar mailing list Sugar@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/sugar
Re: [sugar] notes on 8.2.0, specifically 767 (was 8.2.1)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > * Firefox 2 and 3 are only slightly sugarized. > > GS - True. It is what it is and no plans to make big changes here AFAIK. > > greg -- i think you answered your own question. the issues > raised in that linked email are a result of firefox not being > fully sugarized. it might be possible to improve their behavior, > but this falls squarely under the big "make traditional X11 apps > work better under sugar" umbrella. We already have a Sugarized version of Firefox: Browse. But people complained the interface didn't look and behave like Firefox. So now we provide a Firefox activity, but people complain it's not sugarized enough!!! We can't win this game ;-) -- // Bernie Innocenti - http://www.codewiz.org/ \X/ Sugar Labs - http://www.sugarlabs.org/ ___ Sugar mailing list Sugar@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/sugar
Re: [sugar] notes on 8.2.0, specifically 767 (was 8.2.1)
On Thu, Nov 27, 2008 at 8:20 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I have had no trouble connecting both 767 and 656 to the XS .4 that anna is > running. > We have tested all sorts of activities using collaboration via the .4 XS. > On Nov 26, 2008, at 8:22 AM, Martin Langhoff wrote: Actually connecting to the XS with gabble works fine for us here at OLE. Sorry about my faillure to communicate on this point back to Bryan and wasting your time. I was put on the problem of gabble not working about a week ago, and initially sure enough gabble didn't work. So I turned logging on, and the files told me connecting was a success, but the next line of logging said GNUTLS discovered that to some packet wasn't of the right length, and the whole connecting process was unwound. This happened every time a connection was attempted. The behaviour was reproducible on every XO we tested. Then we got a scheduled power outage. After rebooting the server we fiddled a bit with the gabble config files, and presto, we had gabble working. Problem solved. But after I tried to reproduce the error yet again on other XO's with the initial configuration, it turned out I couldn't. So apparently we had problems for months here at OLE to get gabble working, but I can't say anything con- or destructive about that, because I wasn't involved at the time. When we build a 0.4 XS from scratch, we can connect to Gabble no problem atm. It didn't seem to be worth it to file a bug for a problem that I can't reproduce, and for which I lost the gabble log files, since they are overwritten every time sugar restarts. Funny that after months of apparent non-working gabble, a working gabble can be quite frustrating too. /Ties ___ Sugar mailing list Sugar@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/sugar
Re: [sugar] notes on 8.2.0, specifically 767 (was 8.2.1)
Bryan, As you requested I ran $ olpc-netstatus and get gabble returned as one of the values. /Robert H. On Nov 26, 2008, at 6:41 PM, Bryan Berry wrote: > Were you able to register properly w/ XS and were you able to > connect to > ejabberd? > > The best way to check is to run $ olpc-netstatus from the terminal > > You should see "gabble" listed and not "salut" > > If you only see salut you are not connected to ejabberd > > On Wed, 2008-11-26 at 18:33 -0800, Robert Howard wrote: >> I have had no trouble connecting both 767 and 656 to the XS .4 that >> anna is running. >> We have tested all sorts of activities using collaboration via the .4 >> XS. >> >> On Nov 26, 2008, at 8:22 AM, Martin Langhoff wrote: >> >>> On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 1:07 PM, Greg Smith >>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: * 767 can't connect to ejabberd on XS 0.4 because they >>> use incompatible versions of GNU TLS. >>> >>> H. All the XO 8.2 testing has been done againstXS 0.4 so >>> categorically we can assert: vanilla 767 interoperates with vanilla >>> XS 0.4 just fine. >>> >>> If you are seeing a problem, it's probably worthwhile to diagnose >>> with the fine crowd at [EMAIL PROTECTED] :-) >>> >>> btw, it seems that this list is getting shut down - move discussion >>> to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and [EMAIL PROTECTED] ? >>> >>> cheers, >>> >>> >>> >>> martin >>> -- >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- School Server Architect >>> - ask interesting questions >>> - don't get distracted with shiny stuff - working code first >>> - http://wiki.laptop.org/go/User:Martinlanghoff >>> ___ >>> Sugar mailing list >>> Sugar@lists.laptop.org >>> http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/sugar >> > > -- > Bryan W. Berry > Technology Director > OLE Nepal, http://www.olenepal.org > > ___ > Sugar mailing list > Sugar@lists.laptop.org > http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/sugar ___ Sugar mailing list Sugar@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/sugar
Re: [sugar] notes on 8.2.0, specifically 767 (was 8.2.1)
Were you able to register properly w/ XS and were you able to connect to ejabberd? The best way to check is to run $ olpc-netstatus from the terminal You should see "gabble" listed and not "salut" If you only see salut you are not connected to ejabberd On Wed, 2008-11-26 at 18:33 -0800, Robert Howard wrote: > I have had no trouble connecting both 767 and 656 to the XS .4 that > anna is running. > We have tested all sorts of activities using collaboration via the .4 > XS. > > On Nov 26, 2008, at 8:22 AM, Martin Langhoff wrote: > > > On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 1:07 PM, Greg Smith > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > * 767 can't connect to ejabberd on XS 0.4 because they > > use incompatible > > > versions of GNU TLS. > > > > H. All the XO 8.2 testing has been done againstXS 0.4 so > > categorically we can assert: vanilla 767 interoperates with vanilla > > XS 0.4 just fine. > > > > If you are seeing a problem, it's probably worthwhile to diagnose > > with the fine crowd at [EMAIL PROTECTED] :-) > > > > btw, it seems that this list is getting shut down - move discussion > > to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and [EMAIL PROTECTED] ? > > > > cheers, > > > > > > > > martin > > -- > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- School Server Architect > > - ask interesting questions > > - don't get distracted with shiny stuff - working code first > > - http://wiki.laptop.org/go/User:Martinlanghoff > > ___ > > Sugar mailing list > > Sugar@lists.laptop.org > > http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/sugar > -- Bryan W. Berry Technology Director OLE Nepal, http://www.olenepal.org ___ Sugar mailing list Sugar@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/sugar
Re: [sugar] notes on 8.2.0, specifically 767 (was 8.2.1)
I have had no trouble connecting both 767 and 656 to the XS .4 that anna is running. We have tested all sorts of activities using collaboration via the .4 XS. On Nov 26, 2008, at 8:22 AM, Martin Langhoff wrote: On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 1:07 PM, Greg Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > * 767 can't connect to ejabberd on XS 0.4 because they use incompatible > versions of GNU TLS. H. All the XO 8.2 testing has been done againstXS 0.4 so categorically we can assert: vanilla 767 interoperates with vanilla XS 0.4 just fine. If you are seeing a problem, it's probably worthwhile to diagnose with the fine crowd at [EMAIL PROTECTED] :-) btw, it seems that this list is getting shut down - move discussion to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and [EMAIL PROTECTED] ? cheers, martin -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- School Server Architect - ask interesting questions - don't get distracted with shiny stuff - working code first - http://wiki.laptop.org/go/User:Martinlanghoff ___ Sugar mailing list Sugar@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/sugar ___ Sugar mailing list Sugar@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/sugar
Re: [sugar] notes on 8.2.0, specifically 767 (was 8.2.1)
On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 1:07 PM, Greg Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > * 767 can't connect to ejabberd on XS 0.4 because they use incompatible > > versions of GNU TLS. H. All the XO 8.2 testing has been done againstXS 0.4 so categorically we can assert: vanilla 767 interoperates with vanilla XS 0.4 just fine. If you are seeing a problem, it's probably worthwhile to diagnose with the fine crowd at [EMAIL PROTECTED] :-) btw, it seems that this list is getting shut down - move discussion to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and [EMAIL PROTECTED] ? cheers, martin -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- School Server Architect - ask interesting questions - don't get distracted with shiny stuff - working code first - http://wiki.laptop.org/go/User:Martinlanghoff ___ Sugar mailing list Sugar@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/sugar
Re: [sugar] notes on 8.2.0, specifically 767 (was 8.2.1)
Greg Smith wrote: > > * 767 won't connect via WEP to an AP > GS - Should be possible. Which AP do you have? I think you have > documented your stuff so RTFM to your web site works. > > Dan, Are you out there? If Bryan gets the AP info and config details, > can you buy one and try to reproduce/debug his issue? > > I know you're not on the clock anymore but I hope I can still reach out > across "the pond" instead of across the desk to get your help... If you purchase it for me or give me the money then I can do so, as long as the AP gets into my hands quickly (within the next month). Daniel ___ Sugar mailing list Sugar@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/sugar
Re: [sugar] notes on 8.2.0, specifically 767 (was 8.2.1)
greg wrote: > Hi Bryan, > ... > > > * 767 seems to enforce rainbow more strictly than 703. This has given > > me major headaches when trying to make our new flash-based activities > > run properly on 767. > GS - I think you submitted the details. Did you get an answer? I believe > that Michael is out for Thanksgiving. > > Can someone comment on this point? > http://lists.laptop.org/pipermail/sugar/2008-November/010070.html ... > > * Firefox 2 and 3 are only slightly sugarized. > GS - True. It is what it is and no plans to make big changes here AFAIK. greg -- i think you answered your own question. the issues raised in that linked email are a result of firefox not being fully sugarized. it might be possible to improve their behavior, but this falls squarely under the big "make traditional X11 apps work better under sugar" umbrella. paul =- paul fox, [EMAIL PROTECTED] give one laptop, get one laptop --- http://www.amazon.com/xo ___ Sugar mailing list Sugar@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/sugar
Re: [sugar] notes on 8.2.0, specifically 767 (was 8.2.1)
Hi Bryan, I think you have some movement on some of these. I added some more comments below. > * Why is 767 noticeably slower than 703? GS - We believe that its "faster" than 703 but its hard to prove. Activity launch time is one variable. Since we put up an image now, that may seem slower but hopefully the time from click on activity icon to enter data in activity is lower in 767. Let me know if that is your metric or in general what makes it feel slower for you? > * 767 won't connect via WEP to an AP GS - Should be possible. Which AP do you have? I think you have documented your stuff so RTFM to your web site works. Dan, Are you out there? If Bryan gets the AP info and config details, can you buy one and try to reproduce/debug his issue? I know you're not on the clock anymore but I hope I can still reach out across "the pond" instead of across the desk to get your help... > * 767 seems to enforce rainbow more strictly than 703. This has given > me major headaches when trying to make our new flash-based activities > run properly on 767. GS - I think you submitted the details. Did you get an answer? I believe that Michael is out for Thanksgiving. Can someone comment on this point? http://lists.laptop.org/pipermail/sugar/2008-November/010070.html Bryan, if you can't wait until next week, just keep poking the list until you get an answer. If you can wait, poke again on Mondaty anyway :-) > * 767 can't connect to ejabberd on XS 0.4 because they use incompatible > versions of GNU TLS. GS - Can you ask this on the server list too? How do you know they "can't connect". Unless Martin et al recognize this right away you probably need to explain exactly what you did and how it failed. > * Firefox 2 and 3 are only slightly sugarized. GS - True. It is what it is and no plans to make big changes here AFAIK. > * It is still a pain to open access a pdf from browse and wait for the > Read activity to load it, a real pain. GS - I think Sayamindu commented on this. If its not a satisfactory answer let us know. HTHs. Thanks, Greg S ___ Sugar mailing list Sugar@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/sugar
