[IAEP] Sugarized binaries? was Re: users doing python in XOs

Yama Ploskonka yamaplos at gmail.com
Mon Dec 3 14:31:27 EST 2012

Thank you, Martin and Bert

if I still felt these issues were a big deal-breaker, I would keep 
begging until someone had pity on me or did it just to quiet me down :-)
As things stand, I will just keep it in the warmer. The kids I want to 
reach in Uruguay likely can access an Ubuntu Classmate, and outside of 
UY the concept of "open" is still somewhat on.  Yes, a shame, a crying 
shame. (Have they ever released those GNU-compliance sources? oh well, 
who cares by now)

#1, yes, that seems to be the consensus

#2, I have read some comments when doing due diligence googling that 
required root to access mspdebug might be a "user" and "group" thing.  
That might be fixable with little pain

For now, I better focus in my C code to work reliably and universally.

What happened was that as I got the more canonical binaries to work, it 
turns out some code I had "optimized" (and published...) for the very 
old binaries that yum pulls actually breaks now...

On 12/03/2012 12:37 PM, Martin Langhoff wrote:
> Hi Yama,
> what you outline in #1 is generally doable. Just a bit of elbow grease
> to put the files in the Sugarized "activity" and have a wrapper to set
> the appropriate *PATH variables.
> #2 is generally not doable. As you say, there may be a way to do
> without superuser privs...
> You just have to find someone both motivated and skilled to get you
> through with #1 and investigate #2. Both are very specific to the
> program at hand, so can't give you precise advise.
> cheers,
> m
> On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 12:50 PM, Yama Ploskonka <yamaplos at gmail.com> wrote:
>> You are right, Bert, sorry, got carried away. The main point was not
>> compiled vs. interpreted, that was just a point of theology.
>> The main point for me :-) is
>> 1)  stuff that currently lives as RPMs be usable by Uruguayan XO users, who
>> are no allowed /sudo/
>> I hoped some kind of Sugarization or wrapper or something could do it
>> msp430-libc and dependencies, and mspdebug
>> 2) one of those binaries, mspdebug, also currently needs to be run as sudo
>> again, maybe there was a way to do it without.
>> I really don't have the skills or knowledge. Also, due to Uruguay going to
>> Classmates for Middle School onwards, this sort of becomes a moot point.
>> On 12/03/2012 11:23 AM, Bert Freudenberg wrote:
>>> On 2012-12-03, at 18:08, Yama Ploskonka <yamaplos at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> The main point
>>> The main point is that you can write Sugar activities in any language that
>>> suits you, as long as it can connect to D-Bus and provide an X11 interface.
>>> "Sugarizing" means implementing the interfaces Sugar expects - adding some
>>> window properties so Sugar can find your window, loading state from / saving
>>> to the Journal, sharing on the network. It's not that much, really, and it
>>> is described here:
>>> http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Development_Team/Low-level_Activity_API
>>> In Python, there are already libraries that help you with these tasks
>>> (called the Sugar toolkit). When using another language, you have to do that
>>> on your own, and the best way to do it of course depends on your
>>> application. But it's entirely feasible, as the fact demonstrates that there
>>> are non-Python activities shipping on XOs.
>>> - Bert -
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!)
>>> IAEP at lists.sugarlabs.org
>>> http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
>> _______________________________________________
>> IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!)
>> IAEP at lists.sugarlabs.org
>> http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep

More information about the IAEP mailing list