New page on Puppy and the OLPC project

[ttuuxxx]

http://www.olpcnews.com/forum/index.php ... 384.0;wap2

http://www.olpcnews.com/forum/index.php ... 356.0;wap2



thanks, Barry, ....& good luck, team!

Aitch

When I read those links, and a few users were talking about DSL/Puppy, DSL would not have a chance, the kernel is too old, not enough developers, they use a really old version of FF, etc. It would be a lost cause. I'm still working on Xo, like a good wine, it takes time
ttuuxxx

[amigo]

I agree that the sugar interface was a terrible choice for a low-powered machine. But I also don't think that a run-from-RAM OS like Puppy is right for the job either. The XO has limited memory as well as limited CPU clocking, so running from RAM is not gonna be ideal either. That doesn't mean that Puppy has nothing to offer -it does have a lot of small utilities and some concepts which would help make such hardware more usable.
I think that any efforts to create an OS for such hardware should focus on fast-boot times, but not by using up the scarce RAM resources. Instead, using readahead, pre-linking and other such techiniques would achieve the desired result.

Besides the problems of using python or java for the (sugar) inetrface, the other projects which have built systems for the XO have all started with over-bloated systems from the start. Building an OS for specific hardware has the advantage of not needing to include support for hundreds/thousands of devices which might *possibly* be needed, so it really makes no sense to be running udev/HAL or other such services which are waiting for the user to connect nearly any kind of device.

[mavrothal]

Amigo
I'm not sure that Sugar is a "terrible choice" but I would agree that the "heavy" VM-based (python) implementation is far from desirable on a low-specs machine. Even SugarLabs realizes that other environments like Qt might be better for low-spec machines.
Regarding puppy and running from RAM in 256 machines, that's maybe the reason that "I fall in love" with it . When I first tried it in a practically unusable old P4 machine, was screaming. When I tried it on an old PentiumM laptop downgraded to 256MB Ram was blazing and since then I have tried all shorts of pupplets on VM always with 256BM and they are happy puppies as ever...

Running from RAM is even more important on SSD machines since random writes are really terrible on these systems. More than often the XO hangs for 1-3 sec doing these writes. I would actually suggest for the XOpup to do away even from swap and try compcache instead. People are reporting "success and happiness" when implemented on the XO.

Granted running OOo3, heavy python apps, flash or video editing is always going to be problem on this hardware, but these are not the target apps for the XO and even puppy I might add. There is no reason to pay a penalty for 99% or your time/users to have the chance to use something 1% of the time. And puppy's sfs-approach is very wise on that aspect.

Indeed, many kernel modules and drivers may be useless for the XO and a carefully crafted kernel might be the most important aspect of a speedy system, but that's were ttuuxxx and (hopefully) other puppy developers come in... And you can always provide additional modules separately that can be injected on a need bases in one's system. But that's for later...
However udev/HAL is something that I think should be there, there are always peripherals to be added (an external mouse is almost mandatory) and power-management without HAL is not really easy. So I wouldn't mess with it. Besides is not a big burden anyway.

[alejol]

My name is Alejandro Lavarello and I live in Uruguay, the first contry to give XO for all scholar childrens. My daughter Emilia has a XO, and I have used it. I have some knowledge of working with computers, since 1992 I have used Z80-clones, PDPs, VAXes, XTs and now I have a Pentium 4, running Puppy 4.3.1 and XP.

My point is: Sugar is a very bad interface. Copy files from Journal is horrible. When the child grow, he needs a REAL file management application, and a standard GUI.

I hope that Puppy can be ported to XO. Here in Uruguay, the LATU centralized all about OLPC and adds blocking features. They do not allow to install another operating system in the XO. It is a dictatorial behavior, but we live in democracy.

It will be great if Puppy can be burned in a SD card and booted from it.

[ttuuxxx]

My name is Alejandro Lavarello and I live in Uruguay, the first contry to give XO for all scholar childrens. My daughter Emilia has a XO, and I have used it. I have some knowledge of working with computers, since 1992 I have used Z80-clones, PDPs, VAXes, XTs and now I have a Pentium 4, running Puppy 4.3.1 and XP.

My point is: Sugar is a very bad interface. Copy files from Journal is horrible. When the child grow, he needs a REAL file management application, and a standard GUI.

I hope that Puppy can be ported to XO. Here in Uruguay, the LATU centralized all about OLPC and adds blocking features. They do not allow to install another operating system in the XO. It is a dictatorial behavior, but we live in democracy.

It will be great if Puppy can be burned in a SD card and booted from it.

It will Alejandro, I'm still working on it, just getting the base solid before compiling the kernel, It won't be quick, but It will happen.
ttuuxxx

[Aitch]

alejol

Thank you for letting us know of this problem with LATU

I do not think the EU will be very happy with this 'control' of a democratic freedom by LATU as they are funding the region quite heavily [18 million euros] through LATU management

see http://latu21.latu.org.uy/en/index.php? ... Itemid=260

Also, I do not think this is what was intended by OLPC, so they may not be happy, either....?

Perhaps googlebot/our posts/these pages will help to make them aware of this hindrance to your children's OLPC project, and the future for your countryfolk and bring pressure for change?

Good Luck

Forward Puppy! - thanks ttuuxxx

Aitch

[ttuuxxx]

Your right Aitch, I'm not for any sort of censorship. That will drive me even more to succeed in this project.
ttuuxxx

[alejol]

Hi folks. Sorry by my insistence, but I suffer the horrible Sugar interface.
When I tried to save the Journal's files from my daughter XO, we end with
400MB of obscure files. And I make this using command line, because in Journal you can not save multiple entries at once.
The childrens here in Uruguay are accostumed to delete all files in Journal and to start again, because when Journal is almost full, XO do not work.
It is equal to erase all the notebook. All of this work and his favourite songs, etc. will be erased regularly.
This is a shame. And a child of 10 or more years need a real GUI similar to real computers in the real world.
I hope that Puppy can work in the OLPC.
If I can help, please let me know at alejandro.lavarello (at) gmail . com

[alejol]

Yesterday, I have asked to official LATU's technical support about a second operating system in uruguayan's XO. The answer is:

"
Hello Alejandro,
The XO delivered in primary schools because of its security system
not allow the installation of another operating system.
Any question you have not feel free to communicate.
Greetings,
Natalia González
"

I think that is a sort of dictatorial behavior.

The response, in Spanish, is:

---------------------------------------------
de Apoyo Técnico <sitio.tecnico@plan.ceibal.edu.uy>
para Alejandro Lavarello <alejandro.lavarello@gmail.com>
fecha 23 de noviembre de 2009 08:18
asunto Re: Ceibal: Otro SO en las XO

Hola Alejandro,
Las XO entregadas en primaria debido a su sistema de seguridad
no permiten la instalación de otro sistema operativo.
Cualquier consulta que tengas no dudes en volver a comunicarte.
Saludos,


Natalia González
Apoyo Técnico - Plan Ceibal

Avda. Italia 6201 C.P.: 11500
Montevideo - Uruguay
-----------------------------------------------