headers
Mike Hearn | 1 Dec 2006 02:09
Gravatar

Re: autopackage problems and suggestions

On 11/30/06, Christopher <macguyvok@...> wrote:
> There's a simple solution, imho. Add an advanced button (and I would assume
> a corresponding command in autopackage) that has a few options for
> powerusers.

I disagree with Hongli that the two goals are in opposition. We
already provide this option implicitly - perhaps it should be clearer
what the consequences of hitting "no password" are the first time
around but a label change can fix that. I don't see any reason for
additional UI here.

The real issue of course is that some people feel the need to install
as user (or install as root). Both options are broken, really, so what
I'd like to find eventually is some way to eliminate the concept
entirely.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: autopackage-dev-unsubscribe@...
For additional commands, e-mail: autopackage-dev-help@...
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Robert Staudinger | 1 Dec 2006 17:33
Picon

Fwd: Abiword with Linspire

Hi,

here is the log a user sent me. It looks like he's got enchant 1.1
installed but it's not detected correctly. My logfile fu is weak,
unfortunately and i'd be greatful for any advice. If you find out
about something please add the user's email to the reply.

Thanks!

PS: abiword apkg 2 packages soon.


---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: David Gonterman <daveykins-QCOICpQnqqqMkNG7/oLkIKxOck334EZe <at> public.gmane.org>
Date: Nov 29, 2006 9:01 PM
Subject: Re: Abiword with Linspire
To: Robert Staudinger <robert.staudinger-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w <at> public.gmane.org>



>
> Hmm, let's try something else.
> 1) open terminal
> 2) go to the place you downloaded the package to
> 3) install the package, using the command
>    DEBUGLEVEL=3 ./abiword-2.4.4.x86.package
> (make sure to adapt the filename if needed)
> 4) send in the file called "autopackage.log" generated in the same
> directory.
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Thomas Leonard | 2 Dec 2006 22:07
Picon
Gravatar

Zero Install feeds for Autopackages

Hi guys,

In the interest of greater interoperability between our projects, I've
created a script to make Zero Install XML feeds from .package files (the
feed just gives the URL of the autopackage; no new archive is created).

This brings several benefits on top of the binary compatibility you get
from the autopackage:

- The feed is signed, and contains a digest of the .package (to detect
  tampering).

- Zero Install will check for new versions from time-to-time.

- A single link can provide access to multiple versions of a program, or
  to binaries for different architectures.

I was wondering whether you're interested in going the other way too:
generating a .package from an XML feed. This should be much easier and
more reliable (the XML feeds, being declarative, can always be converted
to a script, whereas a script cannot always be converted to the XML).

We have 93 packages (not counting test packages or the 12 feeds created
from autopackages using the script above ;-), and many are actively
maintained by their upstream authors. They are also all binary relocatable
and designed to be used on many systems.

My post to the zero-install devel list contains more information,
including a list of most .package files on autopackage.org and whether they
converted successfully. If nothing else, there were a few broken links you may
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 3 comments |
headers
Mike Hearn | 3 Dec 2006 22:27
Gravatar

Re: Zero Install feeds for Autopackages

Hey Thomas,

I admit this idea interests me although I don't really have the
time/energy to work on this myself right now.  It sounds like the Zero
Install XML feeds solves quite a few of the remaining open problems
autopackage has - like auto-update, better UI for handling multi-arch
etc.

Is anybody on the list up for exploring this some more? This week is
going to be way busy for me - I'm doing a talk for the LSB packaging
summit in Berlin via phone (at 6am <gulp>), and then visiting the OSDL
desktop meeting in Portland on Thurs/Friday.

Generating autopackages from the ZeroInstall feeds could work, though
there'd have to be a very small impedence mismatch for it to work
/well/ which is the usual issue with converting between packaging
systems. At the very least it could probably be used to generate a
template that could then be customised further.

thanks -mike

On 12/2/06, Thomas Leonard <talex5@...> wrote:
> Hi guys,
>
> In the interest of greater interoperability between our projects, I've
> created a script to make Zero Install XML feeds from .package files (the
> feed just gives the URL of the autopackage; no new archive is created).
>
> This brings several benefits on top of the binary compatibility you get
> from the autopackage:
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 2 comments |
headers
Mike Hearn | 3 Dec 2006 22:30
Gravatar

Re: Zero Install feeds for Autopackages

Incidentally the list of packages you tried is very interesting.
That's the most comprehensive surveys of packages done lately.

I wonder how many of the fails were due to misconversions vs buggy
packages vs buggy autopackage tools :)

On 12/3/06, Mike Hearn <mike@...> wrote:
> Hey Thomas,
>
> I admit this idea interests me although I don't really have the
> time/energy to work on this myself right now.  It sounds like the Zero
> Install XML feeds solves quite a few of the remaining open problems
> autopackage has - like auto-update, better UI for handling multi-arch
> etc.
>
> Is anybody on the list up for exploring this some more? This week is
> going to be way busy for me - I'm doing a talk for the LSB packaging
> summit in Berlin via phone (at 6am <gulp>), and then visiting the OSDL
> desktop meeting in Portland on Thurs/Friday.
>
> Generating autopackages from the ZeroInstall feeds could work, though
> there'd have to be a very small impedence mismatch for it to work
> /well/ which is the usual issue with converting between packaging
> systems. At the very least it could probably be used to generate a
> template that could then be customised further.
>
> thanks -mike
>
> On 12/2/06, Thomas Leonard <talex5@...> wrote:
> > Hi guys,
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Mike Hearn | 4 Dec 2006 01:44
Gravatar

Various website things

Firstly, the forum actually seems to have got worse with the new
captcha (which looks very easy to solve). Defending this thing against
spam has IMHO become more trouble than it's worth. I suggest:

a) Freezing the forum so it can no longer be posted to
b) Either moving it to some hosted forum service like google groups or
c) Replacing it entirely with a private contact form

Or we could try yet another captcha module.

Secondly, since aMSN started using us as their official/recommended
way of installing the software, our support code downloads per day
have more than tripled. Hurray for us! And hurray for aMSN! :)

However, this suspiciously co-incides with a bout of unreliability
from sunsite, which is now *going down* every day at a particular time
(perhaps co-inciding with the download peak).

I'd really like to see better website statistics .... Isak has put in
Google Analytics (hurray!) but I don't remember how to view them :( We
also might as well remove the statcounter.com thing and speed up the
page loads. No point using both services, given that Analytics is
probably better.

Anyway we're looking at the possibility of moving entirely to plan99.
It'd probably be an additional 30GB/month of traffic and I'm not 100%
sure it can take the load. Alternatively, Taj could host us on
wildgardenseed.com, however it's not a dedicated box and we'd lose
some flexibility. The Third Way would be to run the website off plan99
and host the setup code off wgs.
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 8 comments |
headers
Tobias Gerschner | 4 Dec 2006 02:12
Picon
Gravatar

Re: Various website things

2006/12/4, Mike Hearn <mike@...>:
> Firstly, the forum actually seems to have got worse with the new
> captcha (which looks very easy to solve). Defending this thing against
> spam has IMHO become more trouble than it's worth. I suggest:
>
> a) Freezing the forum so it can no longer be posted to
> b) Either moving it to some hosted forum service like google groups or
> c) Replacing it entirely with a private contact form
>
> Or we could try yet another captcha module.
>
> Secondly, since aMSN started using us as their official/recommended
> way of installing the software, our support code downloads per day
> have more than tripled. Hurray for us! And hurray for aMSN! :)
>
> However, this suspiciously co-incides with a bout of unreliability
> from sunsite, which is now *going down* every day at a particular time
> (perhaps co-inciding with the download peak).
>
> I'd really like to see better website statistics .... Isak has put in
> Google Analytics (hurray!) but I don't remember how to view them :( We
> also might as well remove the statcounter.com thing and speed up the
> page loads. No point using both services, given that Analytics is
> probably better.
>
> Anyway we're looking at the possibility of moving entirely to plan99.
> It'd probably be an additional 30GB/month of traffic and I'm not 100%
> sure it can take the load. Alternatively, Taj could host us on
> wildgardenseed.com, however it's not a dedicated box and we'd lose
> some flexibility. The Third Way would be to run the website off plan99
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Curtis L. Knight | 4 Dec 2006 03:13

Re: [patch] autopackage-launcher-gtk: exec package with a path

> On 11/30/06, Damjan Jovanovic <damjan.jov@...> wrote:

Patch applied, thanks Damjan.

Curtis

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: autopackage-dev-unsubscribe@...
For additional commands, e-mail: autopackage-dev-help@...
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Isak Savo | 4 Dec 2006 08:32
Picon
Gravatar

Re: Various website things

On 12/4/06, Mike Hearn <mike@...> wrote:
> Firstly, the forum actually seems to have got worse with the new
> captcha (which looks very easy to solve). Defending this thing against
> spam has IMHO become more trouble than it's worth. I suggest:
>
> a) Freezing the forum so it can no longer be posted to
> b) Either moving it to some hosted forum service like google groups or
> c) Replacing it entirely with a private contact form
>
> Or we could try yet another captcha module.

I like the idea of moving to a hosted service. Apart from the spam
problems, phpBB is a pain in the ass to administer (delete posts one
by one, and it takes like 3-4 page loads / post to do it). Also, it's
an increasing target for hackers and I don't think we're really that
good in upgrading/patching it, something that can be explained by
their awkward upgrade mechanism.

> I'd really like to see better website statistics .... Isak has put in
> Google Analytics (hurray!) but I don't remember how to view them :( We
> also might as well remove the statcounter.com thing and speed up the
> page loads. No point using both services, given that Analytics is
> probably better.

I'm the only one who can view them now, but give me your google login
name (... <at> gmail.com) and I'll add you to the list of authorized
viewers.

Isak
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 4 comments |
headers
Hongli Lai | 4 Dec 2006 09:06
Gravatar

Re: Various website things

Mike Hearn wrote:
> I'd really like to see better website statistics .... Isak has put in
> Google Analytics (hurray!) but I don't remember how to view them :( We
> also might as well remove the statcounter.com thing and speed up the
> page loads. No point using both services, given that Analytics is
> probably better.

It's not. Statcounter.com is better for page statistics. I've tried both.

And the site for Google Analytics is www.google.com/analytics/

> Anyway we're looking at the possibility of moving entirely to plan99.
> It'd probably be an additional 30GB/month of traffic and I'm not 100%
> sure it can take the load. Alternatively, Taj could host us on
> wildgardenseed.com, however it's not a dedicated box and we'd lose
> some flexibility. The Third Way would be to run the website off plan99
> and host the setup code off wgs.

I don't think plan99 is powerful enough to handle the load. Even right 
now plan99 is slow. From time to time the system load becomes very high 
(though CPU usage is low), so I have to manually restart httpd, which 
magically solves the problem.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: autopackage-dev-unsubscribe@...
For additional commands, e-mail: autopackage-dev-help@...
Permalink | Reply | 1 comment |

Gmane