[Sugar-devel] Running sugar in a window

[James Simmons]

I do use Sugar running in a window when I develop Activities.  Granted it
doesn't work that well, and some kinds of keystrokes don't make it into the
window, but I find that it is a convenient way to test my Activities.  I
understand that you can have more than one X session going on a Linux box
and maybe that is an alternative but I can never remember how to do it.  So
I'd prefer to keep it as an option even if there are known problems.

James Simmons


On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 8:16 PM, Gonzalo Odiard <gonzalo at laptop.org> wrote:

> I use the option too.
> For me should be better keep it, just document where does not work.
>
> Gonzalo
>
>
> On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 9:34 PM, Manuel Quiñones <manuq at laptop.org> wrote:
>
>> As Walter said.  For me it is nice to have the window option, and I use
>> it.  But if it is a pain to maintain and takes time from you Daniel, I'm +1
>> for dropping it.
>>
>>
>> 2013/6/25 Walter Bender <walter.bender at gmail.com>
>>
>>> From the POV of developers, the only advantage I see for seeing a
>>> window size is to test how Sugar/Activities run at different screen
>>> sizes. But much of this can be accomplished by setting the resolution
>>> of the full-screen X display, so I would argue it is not a priority.
>>>
>>> regards.
>>>
>>> -walter
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 2:07 PM, Daniel Narvaez <dwnarvaez at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> > Hello,
>>> >
>>> > with sugar-emulator we used to run by default in a window. These days
>>> > sugar-runner defaults to full screen but it's still possible to make
>>> it use
>>> > a window by setting the resolution preference.
>>> >
>>> > I would like to understand how badly it would affect people if we only
>>> > allowed to run in fullscreen. Are you using the resolution preference?
>>> Would
>>> > it be a major problem if it went away?
>>> >
>>> > The issue is that at the moment there is no good solution for nesting X
>>> > inside X. Xephyr is buggy and pretty much unmaintained, and it's now
>>> > crashing at startup on unstable Ubuntu. Xvnc  might be an alternative
>>> but
>>> > last time I tried it was also crashy, it would be a bit complicated to
>>> setup
>>> > and it won't allow us to test hardware acceleration if we need that in
>>> the
>>> > future.
>>> >
>>> > Always running a full X session would probably simplify and make
>>> > sugar-runner more solid. There are challenges with that approach too
>>> with
>>> > systemd, but I believe those might be solvable.
>>> >
>>> > I'm probably not going to do anything about this until it becomes a
>>> problem
>>> > for sugar-build officially supported distros, but I'm thinking about
>>> the
>>> > issue and I'm interested in people feedback.
>>> >
>>> > --
>>> > Daniel Narvaez
>>> >
>>> > _______________________________________________
>>> > Sugar-devel mailing list
>>> > Sugar-devel at lists.sugarlabs.org
>>> > http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Walter Bender
>>> Sugar Labs
>>> http://www.sugarlabs.org
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Sugar-devel mailing list
>>> Sugar-devel at lists.sugarlabs.org
>>> http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> .. manuq ..
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Sugar-devel mailing list
>> Sugar-devel at lists.sugarlabs.org
>> http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Sugar-devel mailing list
> Sugar-devel at lists.sugarlabs.org
> http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.sugarlabs.org/archive/sugar-devel/attachments/20130626/81acfb11/attachment.html>