[IAEP] ANNOUNCE: F11 for the XO-1 build 140py released
bernie at codewiz.org
Fri Apr 16 18:52:06 EDT 2010
On Thu, 2010-04-15 at 18:55 -0300, Daniel Drake wrote:
> I'd be surprised if there is any significant saving of space. As for
> build time, that would also surprise me but I'm not so familiar with
> the technicalities of mkfs.jffs2 - perhaps it does take a lot longer
> for lots of links.
You're right: the saving in space is just 5MB (compressed). The build
time overhead is about 2 minutes on a total runtime of 13 minutes;
bearable even for the impatient buildmaster :-)
> olpc-update-query is the component in question. You need to point it
> at the mothership like was done in the 801 image, not the school
> server. If there is an update available, the mothership will ask
> olpc-update-query to run olpc-update using rsync from the local school
> The new olpc-update-query version will look on the school server
> first, then a server configured in /etc. (make sure you're using
> olpc-update-2.22 then you can use the oats_cfg module of
> olpc-os-builder for this configuration).
> There is also the option to make it bypass the school server and use
> the other one directly -- thats what I'd suggest for Paraguay.
I had to pull your recent additions to olpc-os-builder and rebase my
changes on top of it. The new modules open the opportunity for me to
cleanup a few kludges, but I'm afraid of changing too many things just 3
days before release.
> Regardless of whether you use the updates bit or not, you'll want to
> reinstate that server configuration so that the laptops can receive
> lease updates before expiration (Raul told me that they have switched
> this feature on a while back when school holidays were approaching).
I'd say this is still working fine, because laptops perform activation
from wifi just after being flashed with the new OS. Is there anything
else I should check for? I have very little understanding of the
internals of OATS.
> I agree with the idea of using a more standard system, but I'd say
> that yum is not yet a suitable replacement based on a discussion that
> I started based on this exact question in the beginning of the XO-1.5
> development cycle. It's in the archives.
Interesting. Do you remember the subject?
// Bernie Innocenti - http://codewiz.org/
\X/ Sugar Labs - http://sugarlabs.org/
More information about the IAEP