On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 8:01 PM, Daniel Drake wrote:
> For the upcoming XO-1.5 software build (which will hopefully make it
> onto XO-1 in the near future), do we want to ship olpc-update or use
> standard Fedora technologies?
Due to the fedora lists' draconian 'reply-to' settings, the thread has
Hi All,
David Farning has suggested agenda items for the ActivityTeam to
cover; I'm not sure we can realistically solve many, but it would at
least be good to see what page each of us is on, where we might be
able to pull in the same direction, and bounce about some ideas in
realtime :-)
Claudia Urrea writes:
> Congratulation on a great work. I look forward to the localization in
> Spanish. You will be hearing from me soon!!
And I look forward the translation in french! I looked into the code,
but wasn't able to find any po/ directory -- hope this will be available
soon...
On Tue, 23 Jun 2009, Daniel Drake wrote:
> Just a quick summary of a discussion and a decision that we reached on
> IRC, which will hold at least for now with our XO-1.5 software builds.
> Further input is welcome, although this is at risk of starting another
> huge discussion...
>
> Question: In
Hi Daniel,
On 23 Jun 2009, at 21:13, Daniel Drake wrote:
>> I proposed the following some times ago [1], but no one responded. I
>> would have loved for someone actually knowledgeable (i.e. not some
>> random guy like me throwing out ideas he can't even implement) to
>> explain how this would be
Den 2009-06-23 20:01, Daniel Drake skrev:
> Even though olpc-update isn't great for doing big distro updates
> (because of storing 2 copies of changed files, in this case almost all
> of them), it worked in those situations. I've never attempted an
> RPM-based update from e.g. Fedora 10 to Fedora
On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 10:07 PM, Martin
Langhoff wrote:
> A few other notes -- for completeness:
- olpc-update depends on a tricky bit of code at boot time that keeps
"OS install" 2 trees in different subdirs, and picks which one to run.
The OS install is kept pristine with hardlinks and variou
On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 10:19 PM, Mathieu Bridon
(bochecha) wrote:
> Have you tried the « yum-complete-transaction » tool ? It comes from
> the yum-utils package and might interest you :)
Discussed it a bit in fedora-devel. I didn't get the impression that
it's a very deep fix, but I might be wron
On Tue, 2009-06-23 at 21:52 +0200, Mathieu Bridon (bochecha) wrote:
> > - rpm-based packages cannot be updated with Sugar's updater utility,
> > which is the primary way for updating activities right now. There is no
> > upgrade path for activities installed by rpms (without updating the
> > whole
On Tue, 2009-06-23 at 21:10 +0200, Mathieu Bridon (bochecha) wrote:
> > Even though olpc-update isn't great for doing big distro updates
> > (because of storing 2 copies of changed files, in this case almost all
> > of them), it worked in those situations. I've never attempted an
> > RPM-based upda
On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 8:01 PM, Daniel Drake wrote:
> Any other thoughts/opinions one way or the other?
My (also inconclusive) thoughts on this. I dislike using a bespoke
update method profoundly and discussed this topic at length with
Scott.
The main point, where olpc-update wins without a shad
Thanks, Bert; that clears up a *lot*.
I will indeed migrate my queries to the Sugar development list.
It would be helpful for new developers like me if this migration of activity
development to Sugar Labs were thouroughly clear in the laptop.org wiki.
Developers could be pointed to Sugar Labs s
I did create my MANIFEST manually; I don't see anything awry or missing.
I note that the MANIFEST you reference doesn't include MANIFEST among the
files listed.
Is setup.py actually required either?
Art Hunkins
- Original Message -
From: "Gary C Martin"
To: "Art Hunkins"
Cc: ;
Sent
As mentioned in a previous message, I *was* able to build a bundle on my
WinXP system by zipping the Activity directory with its subdirectory, and
renaming the zip to OurMusic-1.xo (this is version 1).
Placing the file on a thumb drive, I was able to install the activity with
the sugar-install-
Very interesting; I get a response!
I tried python setup.py dist_xo, and that created the .xo distribution for
me as well - and without executable permission too.
I don't find anywhere in the various docs (especially the Activity Tutorial)
where you need "python" in front of "setup.py" on the O
Just a quick summary of a discussion and a decision that we reached on
IRC, which will hold at least for now with our XO-1.5 software builds.
Further input is welcome, although this is at risk of starting another
huge discussion...
Question: In the early XO-1.5 OS builds right now, we have a mix o
On 23.06.2009, at 20:19, Art Hunkins wrote:
> Thanks for this suggestion, Bert.
>
> Actually, I did the equivalent in Windows; I could install the
> resultant bundle from a USB drive using the sugar-install-bundle
> command (as described in the User Manual, p.117).
>
> Three little questions,
Thanks for this suggestion, Bert.
Actually, I did the equivalent in Windows; I could install the resultant
bundle from a USB drive using the sugar-install-bundle command (as described
in the User Manual, p.117).
Three little questions, given your scenario:
1) Is setup.py then needed in the bun
Hi,
We have a bug open here which is a difficult question, in my opinion:
http://dev.laptop.org/ticket/9349
For the upcoming XO-1.5 software build (which will hopefully make it
onto XO-1 in the near future), do we want to ship olpc-update or use
standard Fedora technologies?
My unconclusive tho
On 23 Jun 2009, at 17:28, Art Hunkins wrote:
> Thanks for the reply, Gary (Aaron as well!)
>
> Yes, execute permissions are set correctly for setup.py.
>
> My setup.py file reads exactly the same as yours.
>
> I'm still getting the same problemmatic results as below.
>
> I'm developing largely on
Paul Fox wrote:
> thank you. i was misled by the EC code that still looks at the
> (now-disconnected) lid signal, and by the (now-depopulated) connection
> to that gpio.
>
> > in Gen 1.5 we expect the gpio wakeups to work correctly (which is
> > someting we need to test soon) and lid wakeups
Thanks for the reply, Gary (Aaron as well!)
Yes, execute permissions are set correctly for setup.py.
My setup.py file reads exactly the same as yours.
I'm still getting the same problemmatic results as below.
I'm developing largely on the XO itself, with help from my Windows (XP)
computer and
smith wrote:
> Paul Fox wrote:
>
> > but what thinking about this has really made me realize is that i
> > don't fully understand how lid wakeups work, even for the
> > lid-open case that we do support. it seems that EC involvement
> > is required, even though it's clear from the code in ol
Paul Fox wrote:
> but what thinking about this has really made me realize is that i
> don't fully understand how lid wakeups work, even for the
> lid-open case that we do support. it seems that EC involvement
> is required, even though it's clear from the code in olpc-pm.c
> (and the history in #
Manu and team,
Congratulation on a great work. I look forward to the localization in
Spanish. You will be hearing from me soon!!
Cheers!!
Claudia
On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 10:00 AM, Manusheel Gupta wrote:
> We are delighted to announce the release of SocialCalc 0.8.3g activity
> version for the
On 23.06.2009, at 04:40, Art Hunkins wrote:
> I've got an XO Activity ready to go, and working perfectly in my (XO)
> Activities folder. (It's called OurMusic.activity.)
>
> I just can't seem to make an .xo bundle of it.
>
> From my activity's folder (OurMusic.activity) I run:
> ./setup.py dist_x
26 matches
Mail list logo
