[Sugar-devel] Performance issues on XO 1 (Re: TamTamMini)

[Gonzalo Odiard]

cc: Daniel Drake.

He backported changes to F18 in rpms we are using [1], but don't know if
this is included.

Gonzalo

[1]
http://dev.laptop.org/~dsd/public_rpms/f18/gobject-introspection-1.34.2-1.fc18.olpc2.src.rpm

http://dev.laptop.org/~dsd/public_rpms/f18/pygobject3-3.4.2-6.fc18.olpc2.src.rpm


On Tue, Nov 19, 2013 at 3:14 PM, Daniel Narvaez <dwnarvaez at gmail.com> wrote:

> On 19 November 2013 12:44, Manuel Quiñones <manuq at laptop.org> wrote:
>
>> I think this thread could be enhaced pointing to these other threads
>> opened by Daniel Drake in PyGObject mailing list:
>>
>>
>> https://mail.gnome.org/archives/python-hackers-list/2013-August/msg00003.html
>>
>
> Thanks a lot for the links. What puzzles me there is how gi regressed
> compared to pygtk... As Johan Dahlin pointed out pygtk2 was registering
> everything.
>
> I agree with Tomeu that we should get rid of the overrides. It might take
> more time than we can afford to happen upstream of course :/
>
> But that brings me back to the previous point... why did we regress
> compared to pygtk2? Can we do anything about it?
>
>
>>
>> https://mail.gnome.org/archives/python-hackers-list/2013-August/msg00002.html
>
>
> Has this landed?
>
> --
> Daniel Narvaez
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20131119/4f72523a/attachment.html>