[IAEP] [Sugar-devel] (Goals and Mission) with Microsoft in it?
James Cameron
quozl at laptop.org
Sun May 14 17:46:29 EDT 2017
Yes, that's why I asked. Installing VLC doesn't work out of the box
with 13.2.8, and there are different ways it could be done. I don't
know what Ibiam did. I need to know before I can reproduce.
On Sun, May 14, 2017 at 10:33:27PM +0100, Samson Goddy wrote:
> $> su -
> #> yum localinstall --nogpgcheck https://download1.rpmfusion.org/free/fedora/rpmfusion-free-release-$(rpm -E %fedora).noarch.rpm
> #> yum install vlc
> #> yum install python-vlc npapi-vlc (optionals)
>
> Can help, yum install vlc will not work until you use this. At least that how i
> got it working.
>
> Samson
> On Sun, May 14, 2017 at 9:58 PM, James Cameron <[2]quozl at laptop.org> wrote:
>
> Thanks. Are you using 13.2.8?
>
> The Fedora repositories for Fedora 18 moved, and this was fixed in
> 13.2.8, see here;
>
> [3]http://wiki.laptop.org/go/Release_notes/13.2.7#Fedora_
> Repositories_Missing
>
> If you are using 13.2.7 or earlier, please use the workaround on that
> page.
>
> I've just tested "sudo yum install vlc" on XO-1.5 with 13.2.8 and no
> problem seen, just "No package vlc available.", so I'm not sure how
> your system is configured; if the above workaround does not fix,
> please show me your changed yum.repos.d files.
>
> On Sat, May 13, 2017 at 08:48:54PM +0100, Chihurumnaya Ibiam wrote:
> > Hey James, since you're still maintaining fedora18, "sudo yum vlc" - any
> > activity- returns this error "Error cannot retrieve metalink for
> repository
> > fedora18/i386" , editing the *fedora.repo files in /etc/yum.repos.d/ and
> > changing
> > all "https" to "http" solves the problem.
> >
> > Ibiam Chihurumnaya
> >
> > On Sat, May 13, 2017 at 1:58 AM, James Cameron <[1][4]quozl at laptop.org>
> wrote:
> >
> > Composite reply to several posts, in context, see below;
> >
> > Samson wrote:
> > > I think we should really join the trend so that we can get more
> > > people using Sugar for Learning. So what are your thought on this
> > > development?
> >
> > I don't think it will work, as we don't have developers interested in
> > it. If you're interested in it and are happy to commit fully without
> > relying on others, go for it. But don't expect other resources to
> get
> > involved; as the argument from numbers is not compelling enough.
> >
> > There are more learning tools available for Windows.
> >
> > But the numbers are not the only reason why our customers choose
> > Linux.
> >
> > Sebastian wrote:
> > > Sugar barely runs [...]
> >
> > Yes, you're right.
> >
> > > committed releasing Sugar every six months [...] we have no release
> > > schedule.
> >
> > Yes, you're right.
> >
> > A new release of Sugar with the bug fixes since 0.110 would help
> solve
> > the "barely runs" problem.
> >
> > (also a release of the critical activities, not just the core;
> > newcomers to our community should note the term Sucrose has been in
> > our Taxonomy for many years, see the Wiki if you don't know what it
> > means.)
> >
> > [2][5]https://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Taxonomy
> > [3][6]https://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Glossary
> >
> > > I don't see Sugar Labs organization as capable of strategically
> > > funding Sugar development in any direction. Of course, volunteers
> > > can work in whatever they like, if it fits their principles.
> >
> > I agree, and that's the basis of my engagement; subject to also
> > stabilising Sugar for OLPC OS on Fedora 18 and Ubuntu 16.04 for
> > delivery to OLPC customers; as a custom system with all obvious (to
> > me) bugs fixed.
> >
> > Sugar Labs is heavily benefiting from my work for OLPC, and OLPC is
> > benefiting from other volunteers at Sugar Labs.
> >
> > Dave wrote:
> > > codebase could be returned to OLPC
> >
> > No thanks. Where would the Sugar Labs volunteers go who are focused
> > on this codebase?
> >
> > OLPC already maintains a fork with the fixes, and the changes that
> > Sugar Labs has not accepted. All fixes have been pushed back to
> Sugar
> > Labs, but there has been no release, hence the exceedingly low
> quality
> > of the Fedora, Debian and Ubuntu experience at the moment.
> >
> > OLPC fork version numbers are like 0.110.0.olpc.12
> >
> > > Sugar Labs could focus on the JS Sugarizer codebase.
> >
> > Sugarizer isn't integrated into Sugar Labs; the repositories are
> > split, cooperation is minimal, and the code for activities isn't
> > portable to execution environments other than Sugarizer; such as
> > sugar-web-activity.
> >
> > So I'm certainly not inclined to support any activity development on
> > Sugarizer; because that development won't pay back for OLPC.
> >
> > I'm probably going to have to port the Moon activity from GTK+ 2 to
> > GTK+ 3 unless someone can make the JavaScript version work on
> desktop.
> > ;-) I did get half way through.
> >
> > Zeeshan Khan also has the task for GsoC, so we might do it together.
> >
> > I'd like to hear from Ignacio, Sam Parkinson and Abhijit what they
> > think of the port of Moon vs the JavaScript port; it may be simpler
> to
> > port the JavaScript version back to Sugar.
> >
> > Samuel Cantero wrote:
> > > We should work to find out a new release manager [...]
> >
> > Ignacio is the release manager at the moment, but my guess is that
> > he'd welcome someone else taking the job. Hopefully he'll speak up.
> >
> > Dave wrote:
> > > Do those xo run the latest release?
> >
> > For mass deployment in Paraguay, they can run Sugar 0.110 plus all
> bug
> > fixes from OLPC by using our 13.2.8 as-is or by using it as basis of
> > custom build.
> >
> > For individuals in Paraguay, they might run "yum update" to get Sugar
> > 0.110 plus fixes, unless there's some problem with clock, proxy, or
> > yum.repos.d induced by environment of my bugs.
> >
> > Samuel Cantero wrote:
> > > we're going to try to build a new ASLO in GSoC which must ease
> > > activities management, for both image builders and developers.
> >
> > Please also consider Sugar Network, which Sebastian knows about, and
> > is used heavily, judging by the hit counts on the Sugar Labs servers.
> > Laura recently asked asking Sugar Labs for assistance with Sugar
> > Network and bringing a new deployment onto it may be helpful.
> >
> > German wrote:
> > > At Dominican Republic, ~750 XO are running latest version of Sugar.
> >
> > Good to get such positive feedback! ;-)
> >
> > --
> > James Cameron
> > [4][7]http://quozl.netrek.org/
> > _______________________________________________
> > IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!)
> > [5][8]IAEP at lists.sugarlabs.org
> > [6][9]http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
> >
> > References:
> >
> > [1] mailto:[10]quozl at laptop.org
> > [2] [11]https://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Taxonomy
> > [3] [12]https://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Glossary
> > [4] [13]http://quozl.netrek.org/
> > [5] mailto:[14]IAEP at lists.sugarlabs.org
> > [6] [15]http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
>
> --
> James Cameron
> [16]http://quozl.netrek.org/
> _______________________________________________
> Sugar-devel mailing list
> [17]Sugar-devel at lists.sugarlabs.org
> [18]http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
>
> References:
>
> [1] https://download1.rpmfusion.org/free/fedora/rpmfusion-free-release-$(rpm
> [2] mailto:quozl at laptop.org
> [3] http://wiki.laptop.org/go/Release_notes/13.2.7#Fedora_Repositories_Missing
> [4] mailto:quozl at laptop.org
> [5] https://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Taxonomy
> [6] https://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Glossary
> [7] http://quozl.netrek.org/
> [8] mailto:IAEP at lists.sugarlabs.org
> [9] http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
> [10] mailto:quozl at laptop.org
> [11] https://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Taxonomy
> [12] https://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Glossary
> [13] http://quozl.netrek.org/
> [14] mailto:IAEP at lists.sugarlabs.org
> [15] http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
> [16] http://quozl.netrek.org/
> [17] mailto:Sugar-devel at lists.sugarlabs.org
> [18] http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
--
James Cameron
http://quozl.netrek.org/
More information about the IAEP
mailing list