[Sugar-devel] Zero-calorie bundles?
alsroot at member.fsf.org
Sat Dec 12 21:08:25 EST 2009
On Sat, Dec 12, 2009 at 01:48:19PM -0500, Wade Brainerd wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 8:00 PM, Aleksey Lim <alsroot at member.fsf.org> wrote:
> > Hi all,
> > I've coded initial implementation for "standalone" 0install mode,
> > w/o any support from shell. So, activity could bundle saccharin module
> > to .xo and maybe 0install pure python library as well(otherwise system
> > should have already installed zeroinstall-injector package, it could be
> > any version - saccharin will update it from the web on the first start).
> > So, any devs interested in such features are welcome to test it.
> > I'm planing to complete PackageKit integration to 0install and start
> > implementing feeds for ASLO activities that have bundled binary blobs.
> This is great - as a big user of binary blobs this will relieve a big
> headache for me. Nice to know it won't require a Sugar update too.
> Let me know what I need to do to get my activities ported over. I'd
> like to at least ship the 32bit py2.5 blobs with the activities if
In short terms, saccharin is just another UI for 0install
infrustracture, so you need just cook proper 0install feed(it could be
bundled to .xo or saccharin could use web link to your feed). See 
for 0install packaging tutorials.
There is only one difference - saccharin could use 0install feed not
to launch final application(the final target of feed is describing
how to install/launch such application) but using feed's dependencies
as a activity dependencies (saccharin will just fetch/build/install
dependencies and w/o launching feed's application, will run regular
activity). But saccharin could be used for launching regular 0install
applications as well (it depends on what arguments were passed to
More information about the Sugar-devel