[Sugar-devel] Just wondering

[Jerry Vonau]

Hi Sam,

> On December 19, 2014 at 5:40 PM "Sam P." <sam.parkinson3 at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>
> Hi Jerry,
>
> I would guess that it does require X.  The rational for using
> BundleRegistry is that it emits all the right signals to the gui of
> sugar,
> which requires X.
>
> I havn't tested it against OOB, but maybe I could add a "--no-registry"
> option in sugar-install-bundle?  Would that fix the issue?
>

I'll defer that to quozl as he is the reporter and the current maintainer
of OOB. I haven't looked at other distros yet, but mktinycorexo would
suffer the same fate. Given the low priority assigned to the bug I'd revert
and not break other scripts that might be out in the wild.

Just my thoughts,

Jerry
 
> Thanks,
> Sam
>
> On Sat, Dec 20, 2014 at 10:18 AM, Jerry Vonau <me at jvonau.ca> wrote:
>
> >
> > Does the use of BundleRegistry()[1] require X to be started? I'm
> > thinking
> > yes as 'protected_activities' in the __init__ part is really a
> > dconf-service setting that is returned as a string. I'm asking as a
> > recent
> > commit was added[2] that just might break olpc-os-builder(OOB). OOB
> > relies
> > upon
> > sugar-install-bundle[3] running in a chroot'ed cli environment where
> > dconf
> > may not be running. Has this change been tested with OOB?
> >
> >
> > Jerry
> >
> > 1.
> >
> > https://github.com/sugarlabs/sugar/blob/master/src/jarabe/model/bundleregistry.py
> > 2.
> >
> > https://github.com/sugarlabs/sugar/commit/d0d045379f097e35c686e9f5dc7f1a0a231041bd
> > 3.
> >
> > http://dev.laptop.org/git/projects/olpc-os-builder/tree/modules/sugar/kspost.75.install_bundles.inc
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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