Menu
▾
▴
morphix-devel
|
From: Michael B. <mb...@co...> - 2007-09-27 15:26:28
|
Hello, I'm interested in an up to date LiveKiosk and willing to help in development. Where is the best place to start? I have seen someone is working on that, but how is the progress, where are the problems? I have put the basemod-2.6.17-2007-09-27_0330.iso and morphix-livekiosk-2007-09-26_0018.mod autobuilds together. As you know, the kernel is not up to date. For the LiveKiosk, the R-Kiosk-Plugin installed is 0.3, which doesn't want to work with Firefox/Iceweasel 2.0. It asks for an upgrade upon start or disables itself. So I'll try to update the R-Kiosk at the minimod/mainmod level now, OK? Where or To whom to send the results in case I make it? Another issue: the link on http://www.morphix.org/wiki/index.php/MorphixDiagrams is broken. Best regards, -- Michael Bunk (Dipl.-Informatiker) Computer Leipzig G.-Schumann-Strasse 228/230 04159 Leipzig Germany Fon: +49 (0)341 / 5 90 24 50 Fax: +49 (0)341 / 5 90 24 55 in...@co... www.computer-leipzig.com Inhaber / Owner: David Guttmann Erfüllungsort, Gerichtsstand / Place of Performance: Leipzig Steuernummer / Tax Number: 232/226/05040 USt.-ID-Nr. / VAT Number: DE 206176921 Diese E-Mail kann vertrauliche und/oder rechtlich geschützte Informationen enthalten. Wenn Sie nicht der richtige Adressat sind oder diese E-Mail irrtümlich erhalten haben, informieren Sie bitte sofort den Absender und vernichten Sie diese Mail. Das unerlaubte Kopieren sowie die unbefugte Weitergabe dieser Mail ist nicht gestattet. This e-mail may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient (or have received this e-mail in error) please notify the sender immediately and destroy this e-mail. Any unauthorised copying, disclosure or distribution of the material in this e-mail is strictly forbidden. |
|
From: Alex de L. <al...@de...> - 2007-09-27 17:24:20
|
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Hi Michael, Michael Bunk wrote: > I'm interested in an up to date LiveKiosk and willing to help in > development. Where is the best place to start? I have seen someone is > working on that, but how is the progress, where are the problems? I'm not sure what the status is on LiveKiosk. I have been busy on a new kernel/basemod (before being side-tracked by other things), but there aren't any autobuilds of it yet, alas. > I have put the basemod-2.6.17-2007-09-27_0330.iso and > morphix-livekiosk-2007-09-26_0018.mod autobuilds together. As you know, > the kernel is not up to date. For the LiveKiosk, the R-Kiosk-Plugin > installed is 0.3, which doesn't want to work with Firefox/Iceweasel > 2.0. It asks for an upgrade upon start or disables itself. So I'll try > to update the R-Kiosk at the minimod/mainmod level now, OK? Where or To > whom to send the results in case I make it? If you place them online and inform this list, it will be picked up. > Another issue: the link on > http://www.morphix.org/wiki/index.php/MorphixDiagrams is broken. Fixed it, thanks! cheers, Alex -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFG++buQeuQA5TF/UsRAnL2AJ9fleYkspyGTrreX+WlV1mRiupa8ACgiUXy ymIZNoxbf1aEWCAdPvTKYo0= =5AkA -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
|
From: Brendan S. <me...@ba...> - 2007-09-27 20:34:12
|
Hi All, > > I'm interested in an up to date LiveKiosk and willing to help in > > development. Where is the best place to start? I have seen someone is > > working on that, but how is the progress, where are the problems? Have a look at the templates in SVN:- http://morphix.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/morphix/trunk/morphixlivekiosk/templates/ In particular:- http://morphix.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/morphix/trunk/mmaker/templates/morphix-livekiosk.xml?view=markup > > the kernel is not up to date. For the LiveKiosk, the R-Kiosk-Plugin > > installed is 0.3, which doesn't want to work with Firefox/Iceweasel > > 2.0. It asks for an upgrade upon start or disables itself. So I'll try > > to update the R-Kiosk at the minimod/mainmod level now, OK? Where or To > > whom to send the results in case I make it? As you can see from the current template I have been working on, it contains <packagereq>iceweasel-webconverger-morphixlivekiosk</packagereq> this solves the R-Kiosk problems above. [Webconverger is a nice project as well - http://webconverger.com/ I have swapped some ideas with Kia - the fun of FOSS - co-operation not competition] I have got MorphixLiveKiosk in to a state that is can be built nicely from a new MorphingMorphix. I had planned to release both of them at the same time (same as last release). I use MorphxLiiveKiosk as a tool to show-off the ease of building a liveCD using Morphix (MorphixLiveKiosk can be built when running MorphingMorphix). http://morphix.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/morphix/trunk/morph-scripts/mmorphix/morphing-morphix-gui.sh?view=markup See lines 1376 to 1458 and sed commands for the newer improved way of setting homepages and if Navigation tool bar is visible. I have been busy updating MorphingMorphix ready for a release, but alas real-life is eating in to hacking-time (like Alex I have been side-tracked). There is a bug with pdf viewing in MorphixLiveKiosk that I not having much luck with and I even think it may be a bug upstream. http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=404402 > I'm not sure what the status is on LiveKiosk. I have been busy on a new > kernel/basemod (before being side-tracked by other things), but there > aren't any autobuilds of it yet, alas. Alex, There are not any autobuilds ? ;) Blimey I must stop testing the files here then:- http://www.morphix.org/autobuilds/mainmod/etch/?C=M;O=D Or making nice videos :- http://www.morphix.org/autobuilds/mainmod/etch/?C=M;O=D http://www.morphix.org/autobuilds/video/morphix-livekiosk-2007-09-26_0018.mod_basemod-2.6.17-2007-09-26_0330.iso.ogg Alex, Paul et al, Heck - now is a good time to mention it. I have been spending some time in #debian-live. So this is eating into my 'Morphix-Time'. There are alot of common features in both Morphix and Debian-live. For example:- http://svn.debian.org/wsvn/debian-live/people/bmsleight/autotesting/video-qemu-booting-iso.sh?op=file&rev=0&sc=0 http://morphix.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/morphix/trunk/mmaker/utils/auto-testing/video-qemu-booting-iso.sh?view=markup In a lot of ways Debian-live is starting to catch us (Morphix) up, autobuilding, autotesting .... I love Morphix, but I may have a Mistress in Debian-live. Hope this helps, Brendan (Sent with my subscribed email address) |
|
From: Alex de L. <al...@de...> - 2007-09-27 21:08:05
|
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Brendan Sleight wrote: >> I'm not sure what the status is on LiveKiosk. I have been busy on a new >> kernel/basemod (before being side-tracked by other things), but there >> aren't any autobuilds of it yet, alas. > > Alex, There are not any autobuilds ? ;) > Blimey I must stop testing the files here then:- There aren't any builds of a basemod with the newer kernel in our repository (2.6.22.5). I didn't say there weren't any builds at all :) > Alex, Paul et al, > Heck - now is a good time to mention it. I have been spending some > time in #debian-live. So this is eating into my 'Morphix-Time'. There > are alot of common features in both Morphix and Debian-live. For > example:- > http://svn.debian.org/wsvn/debian-live/people/bmsleight/autotesting/video-qemu-booting-iso.sh?op=file&rev=0&sc=0 > http://morphix.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/morphix/trunk/mmaker/utils/auto-testing/video-qemu-booting-iso.sh?view=markup > In a lot of ways Debian-live is starting to catch us (Morphix) up, > autobuilding, autotesting .... > I love Morphix, but I may have a Mistress in Debian-live. Well, Debian-live has one main 'pro': it's part of Debian. That you're trying to help them copy features from Morphix is something I can only encourage, development of Morphix has dropped to a crawl quite a few years ago so it's a good idea to let our good ideas not go to waste :) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFG/BuUQeuQA5TF/UsRAuF3AKCC94BL2Pd2Ym3o2Sr1XxcwUdmn6wCfUwwa +jXlJsL+ZqV5rlEL5uscQdg= =RGNO -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
|
From: Brendan S. <me...@ba...> - 2007-09-27 21:17:37
|
> There aren't any builds of a basemod with the newer kernel in our > repository (2.6.22.5). I didn't say there weren't any builds at all :) Sorry - I mis-read your email, I thought you meant no MorphxLiveKiosk Builds, not 2.6.22.5 builds, (Sleep!) |
|
From: Brendan S. <me...@ba...> - 2007-10-03 19:03:35
|
Hello Michael, Rudi, et al, On 27/09/2007, Michael Bunk wrote: > I have put the basemod-2.6.17-2007-09-27_0330.iso and > morphix-livekiosk-2007-09-26_0018.mod autobuilds together. As you know, > the kernel is not up to date. For the LiveKiosk, the R-Kiosk-Plugin > installed is 0.3, which doesn't want to work with Firefox/Iceweasel > 2.0. It asks for an upgrade upon start or disables itself. So I'll try > to update the R-Kiosk at the minimod/mainmod level now, OK? Where or To > whom to send the results in case I make it? I have updated the templates and the manual page. All the base, MainModule and MiniModules all fit nicely together. I done a couple of test build and I am happy with the results. http://www.morphix.org/doc/how_tos/docbook_html/ar01s05.html Like I said before - I plan to a release when I have finished updating MorphingMorphix. Alas the kernel is only 2.6.15, but Alex is playing with the base module. Thanks to Jure for pointing me in the direct of webconverger package. It means that I have got ridden of the horrible tar-ball I was using. All Debian -type packages now apart from the two lines to set navbar on/off and homepage. Guess I be buying Jure a beer next week :) http://tinyurl.com/2lguyr http://tinyurl.com/38o6rt On 29/09/2007, Rudi van Drunen wrote: > If I do not need to do a complete rebuild and doing things an more easy > way (which for sure must exist, only I do not get the merits) to get > from a 0.0.3 iso for the kiosk to an version that has custom home page > and custom background an easy step by step guide would be highly > appreciated. As I have moved away from the tar-ball, an upgrade from 0.0.3 is no longer possible. Full rebuilt at the moment. [But hey its only two lines :) ]. The plan is to have an option in MorphingMorphix to download MorphixLiveKiosk_0.0.4_MainModule, then ask the following:- * Do you want the the navigation bar visible ? * What homepage url ? * Which Graphics Files to be used for re-branding ? Then out spits a shinny customized MorphixLiveKiosk. But if anyone has got an idea how to help with the pdf problem, please point me in the right direction. http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=404402 Regards, Brendan |
|
From: Michael B. <mb...@co...> - 2007-10-05 16:00:30
|
Hello Brendan, I only get to work on this once a week, so here comes my late reply. > I have updated the templates and the manual page. All the base, > MainModule and MiniModules all fit nicely together. I done a couple > of test build and I am happy with the results. > http://www.morphix.org/doc/how_tos/docbook_html/ar01s05.html My machine is still following your procedure, but I blieve that you tested it and that it will succeed. I had solved the out-of-date R-Kiosk problem last week by updating the tar file, but using a debian package instead is more nice, because is simplifies the morphix xml files. > Like I said before - I plan to a release when I have finished updating > MorphingMorphix. Alas the kernel is only 2.6.15, but Alex is playing > with the base module. Do you or Alex have the status on a recent kernel? I have seen there is a basemod for 2.6.22: http://morphix.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/morphix/trunk/mmaker/templates/basemod-2.6.22.xml?view=markup Does it work? Yes, I could try it out by myself but no time now... :) If it works, why are there no autiobuilds of it? If it doesn't work: What is broken? Also, why does Morphix need a custom kernel at all? Can't we use some Debian kernel? Don't the current kernels have cloop and unionfs as modules in the .deb? > But if anyone has got an idea how to help with the pdf problem, please > point me in the right direction. > http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=404402 Will look at that next week, when my .iso and me are ready to reproduce the bug. Best regards, Michael |
|
From: Alex de L. <al...@de...> - 2007-10-05 22:30:21
|
Michael Bunk wrote: > Do you or Alex have the status on a recent kernel? > > I have seen there is a basemod for 2.6.22: > http://morphix.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/morphix/trunk/mmaker/templates/basemod-2.6.22.xml?view=markup > > Does it work? Yes, I could try it out by myself but no time now... :) > > If it works, why are there no autiobuilds of it? > > If it doesn't work: What is broken? > > Also, why does Morphix need a custom kernel at all? Can't we use some > Debian kernel? Don't the current kernels have cloop and unionfs as > modules in the .deb? Ooo, lots of questions. No, the new basemod template doesn't work, I've still to add the unionfs and cloop packages compiled against the kernel in the repository. I actually do use the debian kernel source packages, but for the whole livecd-thingy to work well the kernel configuration has to be modified, thus separate kernel image packages. It used to be a bigger deal than it is today. I'll see what I can do over the weekend. Last time I tried it cloop and unionfs weren't compiling against the kernel. cheers, Alex |
|
From: Brendan S. <bm...@ba...> - 2007-10-06 22:25:40
|
On 05/10/2007, Alex de Landgraaf wrote: > No, the new basemod template doesn't work, I've still to add the unionfs > and cloop packages compiled against the kernel in the repository. > I'll see what I can do over the weekend. Last time I tried it cloop and > unionfs weren't compiling against the kernel. This just popped up in another mailing list:- "If you are interested in using unionfs with 2.6.22 kernels I have made some patches. I'm running thin clients with unionfs+squashfs with 2.6.22-2-486 without problems." http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/debian-live-devel/2007-October/002327.html BMS |
|
From: Brendan S. <me...@ba...> - 2007-10-06 22:26:04
|
On 05/10/2007, Alex de Landgraaf wrote: > No, the new basemod template doesn't work, I've still to add the unionfs > and cloop packages compiled against the kernel in the repository. > I'll see what I can do over the weekend. Last time I tried it cloop and > unionfs weren't compiling against the kernel. This just popped up in another mailing list:- "If you are interested in using unionfs with 2.6.22 kernels I have made some patches. I'm running thin clients with unionfs+squashfs with 2.6.22-2-486 without problems." http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/debian-live-devel/2007-October/002327.html BMS |
|
From: Michael B. <mb...@co...> - 2007-10-12 16:22:52
|
Hello Paul, Brendan and Alex, > As I understand it, cloop is deprecated in favour > of squashfs, and unionfs Paul, do you mean in general or in morphix? Brendan Sleight schrieb: > On 05/10/2007, Alex de Landgraaf wrote: >> No, the new basemod template doesn't work, I've still to add the unionfs >> and cloop packages compiled against the kernel in the repository. > >> I'll see what I can do over the weekend. Last time I tried it cloop and >> unionfs weren't compiling against the kernel. > > This just popped up in another mailing list:- > > "If you are interested in using unionfs with 2.6.22 kernels I have made > some patches. > > I'm running thin clients with unionfs+squashfs with 2.6.22-2-486 without > problems." > > http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/debian-live-devel/2007-October/002327.html At least the compiled packages are not for 2.6.22-5 ... I didn't get time to build my own. But I worked on the cloop kernel module: In http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=436090 a new version of it is pointed out that has not entered unstable yet. Since I didn't get along with Klaus Knopper's debian/rules I copied compressed_loop.c and compressed_loop.h from his new package into the unpacked Debian source package and rebuilt... the result should be a brand new morphix-suitable cloop kernel module package, which I didn't get to try out yet... Did you make any progress? Michael |
|
From: Alex de L. <al...@de...> - 2007-10-13 22:39:55
|
Hi all, Michael Bunk wrote: > At least the compiled packages are not for 2.6.22-5 ... I didn't get > time to build my own. > > But I worked on the cloop kernel module: In > http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=436090 a new version of > it is pointed out that has not entered unstable yet. Since I didn't get > along with Klaus Knopper's debian/rules I copied compressed_loop.c > > and compressed_loop.h from his new > package into the unpacked Debian source package and rebuilt... the > result should be a brand new morphix-suitable cloop kernel module > package, which I didn't get to try out yet... Thanks for this information, I've built the same cloop packages and uploaded them into the repository. unionfs is patched into the kernel. I've added the basemod-2.6.22.xml template to the base-autobuilds, we'll know how well this worked tomorrow. cheers, Alex PS. moving to squash might indeed be a better idea in the long run. |
|
From: Paul <pa...@tu...> - 2007-10-05 21:52:50
|
On Friday 05 October 2007 16:59, Michael Bunk wrote: > Do you or Alex have the status on a recent kernel? I have a *very* experimental 2.6.20 based base mod - Not suitable for gener= al=20 use as it was produced as a "proof of concept" and includes some unusual=20 patches.. > I have seen there is a basemod for 2.6.22: > http://morphix.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/morphix/trunk/mmaker/templates/= ba >semod-2.6.22.xml?view=3Dmarkup > > Does it work? =A0Yes, I could try it out by myself but no time now... :) Don't know - If Alex has a package ready, we can set Zathras up to autobuil= d=20 it. > Also, why does Morphix need a custom kernel at all? =A0Can't we use some > Debian kernel? =A0Don't the current kernels have cloop and unionfs as > modules in the .deb? As I understand it, cloop is deprecated in favour of squashfs, and unionfs = can=20 only be found in the -mm patchset - Some users also like the eyecandy=20 provided by the bootsplash patch. For my part, I have a couple of experimental patches that I try to sneak i= n=20 that would never be considered for a mainstream Debian build. Regards, Paul. |
|
From: Brendan S. <me...@ba...> - 2007-10-06 07:46:33
|
On 05/10/2007, Paul wrote: > only be found in the -mm patchset - Some users also like the eyecandy > provided by the bootsplash patch. Indeed. It is an unique selling point of Morphix, it has boot-splash and it is _easy_ to change. I really appreciate this being kept in the base. 2p, Brendan |
|
From: Michael B. <mb...@co...> - 2007-10-15 14:39:55
|
Hello Alex, Alex de Landgraaf schrieb: > Thanks for this information, I've built the same cloop packages and > uploaded them into the repository. unionfs is patched into the kernel. > > I've added the basemod-2.6.22.xml template to the base-autobuilds, we'll > know how well this worked tomorrow. Unfortunately it doesn't work :( You can disable the autobuild again. It seems cloop not working with recent kernels was an obstable for Knoppix distribution itself: http://lists.debian.org/debian-knoppix/2007/09/msg00012.html Klaus Knopper found the bug, but didn't publish the source code yet (at least I didn't find it). I asked him on debian-knoppix to publish the source code ( My mail is not archived yet, so here is only a link to the October Index of the mailing list archive http://lists.debian.org/debian-knoppix/2007/10/maillist.html ). > PS. moving to squash might indeed be a better idea in the long run. Why? Is the compression ratio better, because it doesn't have to compress file system data? How much better? Best regards, Michael |
|
From: Paul <pa...@tu...> - 2007-10-15 17:08:59
|
Hi Michael On Monday 15 October 2007 15:39, Michael Bunk wrote: > Klaus Knopper found the bug, but didn't publish the source code yet (at > least I didn't find it). =A0I asked him on debian-knoppix to publish the > source code Reading the archives, I see you are now in possession of the latest source= =20 code.. ;) > > PS. moving to squash might indeed be a better idea in the long run. > > Why? =A0Is the compression ratio better, because it doesn't have to > compress file system data? =A0How much better? http://kerneltrap.org/files/PERFORMANCE.README.txt provides some illustrati= ve=20 figures to compare - Perhaps in time, when squashfs and/or cloop are merged= =20 in to the mainline kernel tree, maintainance & development will keep up to= =20 date rather than continually lagging behind (I see 2.6.23 is now "out"). Regards, Paul. |
×
Want the latest updates on software, tech news, and AI?
Get latest updates about software, tech news, and AI from SourceForge directly in your inbox once a month.
Thanks for helping keep SourceForge clean.
X