olpc January 2010

olpc@lists.fedoraproject.org

19 participants
26 discussions

kernel memory leak
by Yioryos Asprobounitis 19 Jan '10

19 Jan '10

The kernel memory leak on XO-1 with Fedora 11 builds is a bug that is stagnate for a year now ( https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=487601 ). Understandably has a low priority since there are no F11 releases for the XO-1 and no deployments use it. However, I think with the builds maturing and deployments eager to use it, "losing" 10% of your limited memory with a more demanding OS version and desktop, is rather important. I just want to bring this issue back in case some work can be done on this before an F11-XO1 release. I know is "upstream" but apparently this stream is not going anywhere.

2 1

Re: OLPC does end run around IP addresses
by Mikus Grinbergs 13 Jan '10

13 Jan '10

> Surely all your machines can communicate quite happily using IPv6 > link-local addresses? Why this fascination with Legacy IP? Because none of my facilities (including my desktops) are set up to use IPv6. More to the point -- I have an emotional prejudice against IPv6 -- I am NOT looking forward to the day when my refrigerator has its own IPv6 address, and reports to third parties how much beer I have downed. mikus

2 1

OLPC does end run around IP addresses
by Mikus Grinbergs 11 Jan '10

11 Jan '10

I don't have wireless - my XOs are on ethernet (using interface eth1). Currently I am running without a DNS server - meaning that I need to issue explicit commands at each XO to set its eth1 IP address. Just now I've been testing with a deliberately non-customized XO-1 -- I have NOT issued any commands to it to set its IP address. It is running build 802B1, and has by default set IP addresses of 169.254... for its eth0 and msh0 interfaces (its ethernet eth1 interface has only a default IPv6 address). Netstat at that XO shows only the 169.254 routes. The other XOs on the ethernet have IPv4 IP addresses only on eth1, in the 192.168.1.. range. They have no IPv4 addresses for their radios. Netstat at those XOs shows only the 168.192.1 route. What I find interesting is that Neighborhood View at every XO shows *all* other XOs (plus their names) physically attached to the ethernet. 'olpc-xos' shows the non-customized XO with its eth0 (radio) IP address; the other XOs are shown with their eth1 (ethernet) IP addresses. My conclusion: The XOs are recognizing each other over the ethernet, despite having "non-pingable" IP address identities activated. mikus

2 1

New release of F11 for the XO-1 - Build11
by Steven M. Parrish 10 Jan '10

10 Jan '10

This is the first release created with a new build system created by Daniel Drake. This new system can create builds for the XO-1 and XO-1.5. Known issues: Keyboard and mouse will not wakeup from sleep. Can be fixed by disabling power management in Sugar. Camera still does not work You can get it here http://dev.laptop.org/~smparrish/XO-1/builds/OS11 Issues can be filed @ http://dev.laptop.org/newticket Steven -- ===================================================== Steven M. Parrish ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- gpg fingerprint: 4B6C 8357 059E B7ED 8095 0FD6 1F4B EDA0 A9A6 13C0 http://tuxbrewr.fedorapeople.org/ irc.freenode.net: Nickname: SMParrish Channels: #fedora-kde, #fedora-olpc, #fedora-edu, #sugar, #packagekit

3 2

Activity Tracking Bug and Reviews
by Sebastian Dziallas 10 Jan '10

10 Jan '10

Hi all, if anybody's up for a few reviews, I've packaged sugar-physics and the additionally required libraries [1] [2] [3]. When packaging activities from the list [4], please make sure to have them block our tracking bug [5], so that they can be taken care of. --Sebastian [1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=554090 [2] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=554089 [3] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=554088 [4] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Sugar_Activities [5] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=462625

1 0

Re: OLPC does end run around IP addresses
by Mikus Grinbergs 09 Jan '10

09 Jan '10

> IIRC Salut is using some multicast protocol. Multicast has its own set of IP addresses [1], > with Salut most likely using one from the link-local range (224./24). > So Salut should work IFF all machines are on the same ethernet segment. Thank you -- now it makes sense. mikus

1 0

Re: OLPC does end run around IP addresses
by Mikus Grinbergs 09 Jan '10

09 Jan '10

>> What I find interesting is that Neighborhood View at every XO shows >> *all* other XOs (plus their names) physically attached to the ethernet. >> 'olpc-xos' shows the non-customized XO with its eth0 (radio) IP >> address; the other XOs are shown with their eth1 (ethernet) IP addresses. >> >> My conclusion: The XOs are recognizing each other over the ethernet, >> despite having "non-pingable" IP address identities activated. > > The 169.x.x.x subnet is reserved for link-local addresses, which is > what these are. They are pingable from the local link. It's all > standards-compliant and kosher, be not afraid. > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Link-local_address I'm not afraid (nor am I looking for help). I understand whence the 169.x.x.x subnet comes from. My point is that ALL the XOs show up in each Neighborhood View, even though the other XOs (192.168.1..) cannot ping the non-customized XO (169.254...), nor can the non-customized XO ping the others. What I see the XOs doing is an "end run" around my concept of how remote nodes are supposed to be accessed. I believe 'ping' is behaving the standards-compliant way (192.168.1.0/24 does not access 169.254.0.0/16, and vice versa). Whereas what shows up in the XO Neighborhood View (and in 'olpc-xos') appears to ignore standards-compliance. As I said, I am not looking for help. I am sharing an observation, which I believe would not occur if I were not using XOs. mikus

1 0

New XO-1.5 10.2.0 build 107
by Chris Ball 08 Jan '10

08 Jan '10

http://wiki.laptop.org/go/F11_for_1.5 http://build.laptop.org/10.2.0/os107 Compressed image size: 702.57mb (+0.07mb since build 105) Description of changes in this build: * Remove kernel SD debugging code that I pushed accidentally. Package changes since build 105: +acl-2.2.47-4.fc11.i586 -acl-2.2.49-2.fc11.i586 -imsettings-0.107.3-1.fc11.i586 +imsettings-0.107.4-5.fc11.i586 -imsettings-libs-0.107.3-1.fc11.i586 +imsettings-libs-0.107.4-5.fc11.i586 -kernel-2.6.31_xo1.5-20100106.1110.1.olpc.76c32d5.i586 +kernel-2.6.31_xo1.5-20100108.1640.1.olpc.846ed3a.i586 -kernel-firmware-2.6.31_xo1.5-20100106.1110.1.olpc.76c32d5.i586 +kernel-firmware-2.6.31_xo1.5-20100108.1640.1.olpc.846ed3a.i586 +libacl-2.2.47-4.fc11.i586 -libacl-2.2.49-2.fc11.i586 -olpc-runin-tests-0.2-2.noarch +olpc-runin-tests-0.2.1-2.noarch

1 0

New XO-1.5 10.2.0 build 106
by Chris Ball 07 Jan '10

07 Jan '10

http://wiki.laptop.org/go/F11_for_1.5 http://build.laptop.org/10.2.0/os106 Compressed image size: 702.41mb (-0.09mb since build 105) Description of changes in this build: * potential fix for camera driver oops (#9958) * new runin tests release Package changes since build 105: -imsettings-0.107.3-1.fc11.i586 +imsettings-0.107.4-5.fc11.i586 -imsettings-libs-0.107.3-1.fc11.i586 +imsettings-libs-0.107.4-5.fc11.i586 -kernel-2.6.31_xo1.5-20100106.1110.1.olpc.76c32d5.i586 +kernel-2.6.31_xo1.5-20100107.1710.1.olpc.dcf1bc1.i586 -kernel-firmware-2.6.31_xo1.5-20100106.1110.1.olpc.76c32d5.i586 +kernel-firmware-2.6.31_xo1.5-20100107.1710.1.olpc.dcf1bc1.i586 -olpc-runin-tests-0.2-2.noarch +olpc-runin-tests-0.2.1-2.noarch

1 0

two review requests
by Tomeu Vizoso 06 Jan '10

06 Jan '10

Hi, could someone lend a hand reviewing these two packages? https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=551411 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=545039 Thanks, Tomeu -- «Sugar Labs is anyone who participates in improving and using Sugar. What Sugar Labs does is determined by the participants.» - David Farning

4 6

2026

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

olpc January 2010