FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Ubuntu > Ubuntu Development

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 02-25-2009, 05:08 PM
 
Default During preseed unattend installation - set proxy in Network proxy preferences

I can set the proxy settings in the
preseed file to get to the mirror during unattended installation:



d-i mirror/http/proxy string http://proxy.server.com:XX



Is there a way to set the "network
proxy preferences" *as the default for the proxy configuration
for all users

during the attended installation as
well?



Thanks





Blane T. Baumbarger | GC US DPS Product
Development Quality Assurance | Document Imaging |

Graphic Communications Group | Eastman Kodak Company | 2600 Manitou Road
| Rochester, N.Y. 14653-4181 | USA |

blane.baumbarger@kodak.com | +1 (585) 726-5043 t | +1 (585) 726-1167 f
| (KNET/KMX: 236-5043) |

www.graphics.kodak.com










ubuntu-devel-request@lists.ubuntu.com


Sent by: ubuntu-devel-bounces@lists.ubuntu.com

02/25/2009 12:45 PM



Please respond to

ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com






To
ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com


cc



Subject
ubuntu-devel Digest, Vol 54, Issue 41













Send ubuntu-devel mailing list submissions to

* * * * * * * *
ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com



To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit

* * * * * * * *
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel

or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to

* * * * * * * *
ubuntu-devel-request@lists.ubuntu.com



You can reach the person managing the list at

* * * * * * * *
ubuntu-devel-owner@lists.ubuntu.com



When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific

than "Re: Contents of ubuntu-devel digest..."





Today's Topics:



* 1. Re: Need app-specific shutdown delay to allow saving state

* * *(Scott James Remnant)

* 2. Re: python2.6 related changes (Matthias Klose)

* 3. Re: Need app-specific shutdown delay to allow saving state

* * *(Ted Gould)

* 4. Re: Server Team 20090224 meeting minutes (Andreas Hasenack)

* 5. Re: Auto-launching of applications (Jordan Mantha)

* 6. Re: Auto-launching of applications (Bruce Cowan)

* 7. Re: Auto-launching of applications (Chow Loong Jin)

* 8. Notifications: uselessness of (Lars Wirzenius)

* 9. Re: Improving resume speed (Steve Langasek)





----------------------------------------------------------------------



Message: 1

Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2009 13:12:38 +0000

From: Scott James Remnant <scott@canonical.com>

Subject: Re: Need app-specific shutdown delay to allow saving state

To: james_avera@yahoo.com

Cc: ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com

Message-ID: <1235567558.6513.16.camel@quest>

Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"



On Thu, 2009-02-19 at 15:27 -0800, Jim Avera wrote:



> Hi, Does anyone know if work is being done to allow applications to

> control how much time they get to gracefully exit during system

> shut-down? * Currently it is 10 seconds, hard-coded

> in /etc/init.d/{sendsigs,killprocs} . *This is the max time between

> kill -15 and kill -9. * If so, please point me to the appropriate

> place.

>

This only applies to processes left running.



The simplest way to control an app's own shutdown is for that

application to install its own init script with a K* name.



Scott

--

Scott James Remnant

scott@canonical.com

-------------- next part --------------

A non-text attachment was scrubbed...

Name: not available

Type: application/pgp-signature

Size: 197 bytes

Desc: This is a digitally signed message part

Url : https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-devel/attachments/20090225/7c1d735e/attachment-0001.pgp




------------------------------



Message: 2

Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2009 14:54:33 +0100

From: Matthias Klose <doko@ubuntu.com>

Subject: Re: python2.6 related changes

To: ubuntu-devel <ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com>

Message-ID: <49A54D99.1090203@ubuntu.com>

Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1



Matthias Klose schrieb:

> python2.6 is now in the archive and is added as a supported python
version,

> python2.4 is dropped as a supported python version.



main is now built with python2.6 as an optional python version; there are
a few

remaining packages which need to be rebuilt after 2.6 becomes the default.
You

can find the remaining packages in



*https://edge.launchpad.net/~pythoneers/+archive/ppa



After an update, it should be possible to remove python2.5. Note, that
universe

still needs some work, but usually these are easy things:



- .install files in debian/ referencing usr/lib/python*/site-packages.
Make

* this usr/lib/python*/*-packages.



- debian/rules referencing site-packages. To help selecting the correct
name

* in shell snippets or wildcard rules, see some helper macros in

* /usr/share/python/python.mk.



- distutils based installations (setup.py install) go into /usr/local
by

* default now. Pass --install-layout=deb, or use the macro in python.mk.

* The packaging helper tools should handle the easy cases where one
single

* binary package is built.



Currently running a desktop installed without python2.5. I would be interested

in feedback, but be prepared to find some edges, which I didn't find yet.



*Matthias







------------------------------



Message: 3

Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2009 08:56:21 -0600

From: Ted Gould <ted@ubuntu.com>

Subject: Re: Need app-specific shutdown delay to allow saving state

To: Scott James Remnant <scott@canonical.com>

Cc: james_avera@yahoo.com, ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com

Message-ID: <1235573781.31992.2.camel@shi>

Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"



On Wed, 2009-02-25 at 13:12 +0000, Scott James Remnant wrote:

> On Thu, 2009-02-19 at 15:27 -0800, Jim Avera wrote:

>

> > Hi, Does anyone know if work is being done to allow applications
to

> > control how much time they get to gracefully exit during system

> > shut-down? * Currently it is 10 seconds, hard-coded

> > in /etc/init.d/{sendsigs,killprocs} . *This is the max time
between

> > kill -15 and kill -9. * If so, please point me to the appropriate

> > place.

> >

> This only applies to processes left running.

>

> The simplest way to control an app's own shutdown is for that

> application to install its own init script with a K* name.



Would it be possible to generically contact gnome-session and ask it to

shutdown the system? *I'm not sure how to get all the user's DBus

Session Buses, but it would seem if you could you'd get a more graceful

shutdown if done at the command line or by another user on the system.



* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * * *--Ted



-------------- next part --------------

A non-text attachment was scrubbed...

Name: not available

Type: application/pgp-signature

Size: 197 bytes

Desc: This is a digitally signed message part

Url : https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-devel/attachments/20090225/076f585a/attachment-0001.pgp




------------------------------



Message: 4

Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2009 11:59:21 -0300

From: Andreas Hasenack <andreas@canonical.com>

Subject: Re: Server Team 20090224 meeting minutes

To: ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com, ubuntu-server@lists.ubuntu.com

Message-ID: <49A55CC9.1000508@canonical.com>

Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1



-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

Hash: SHA1



Thierry Carrez wrote:

> ==== Open discussion ====

>

> Two subjects were raised during the open discussion. ivoks mentioned

> users complaining on our effort on supporting LTS. Bugs get fixed
in

> development releases but are only rarely the object of an LTS SRU.
Part

> of the problem is that bugs in Fix Released state tend to disappear
from

> default launchpad bug views, and that the nomination system doesn't



Possibly related to this ticket:

https://bugs.launchpad.net/malone/+bug/314432



- --

Andreas Hasenack

andreas@canonical.com



-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)

Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org



iEYEARECAAYFAkmlXMgACgkQeEJZs/PdwpCxEgCgv0OHXH+j08m8eL4qHdicyQwO

BnoAoKxQCC1oJSLIaHc966gxDD5HO32N

=DduR

-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----







------------------------------



Message: 5

Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2009 07:55:11 -0800

From: Jordan Mantha <laserjock@ubuntu.com>

Subject: Re: Auto-launching of applications

To: ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com

Message-ID:

* * * * * * * *
<82926f0e0902250755u3946d40fsb3fd5f40bd9a288c@mail .gmail.com>

Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8



On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 1:43 AM, Mark Shuttleworth <mark@ubuntu.com>
wrote:

> Oliver Grawert wrote:

>

> so why dont you wait until you got proper hard data and come up with
a

> real revolutionary new design for the problem based on this data and

> instead switch to an half thought through immature, resource hogging

> and user annoying mechanism, sorry if that sounds harch but for me
that

> new beahavior is a big step backwards in usability, software needs
to be

> out of the way of the user, i dont want my hammer to discuss with
me

> about the nail, i just want to use it to get the job done ...

>

>

> Oliver, this was not constructive feedback. If you think your email
sounds

> harsh, please sleep on it and reconsider it in the morning. The work
we are

> doing fundamentally depends on making changes to existing patterns.
That

> will be difficult, please don't make it more difficult by raising
the blood

> pressure of the discussion without providing clear suggestions for
ways to

> improve things.



While it might have been a bit stronger tone than you'd like I do

think there is definitely constructive feedback in what Oliver said.

That we are having this discussion this far into Jaunty's development

cycle should be saying something. While I'm very appreciative of your

emails today explaining a bit more about what's going on, a "opps,

pardon the mess" notice this late in the release after it's too late

to actually change course is not exactly reassuring.



I think what Oliver was saying was that it might have been wiser to

spend Jaunty nailing down the notification vision and implementation

and communicating that to the developer community for feedback, then

landing code earlyish in Karmic so people can play around with it.

What I mostly saw communicated to the development community was "trust

us, you're gonna love it!". My general experience is that development

communities don't like surprises, especially half-baked ones, for core

desktop experience systems.



So, how can we make sure that the development community at-large is

adequately notified, informed, and engaged about these sorts of

changes with sufficient time for feedback? I've seen quite a few "huh,

we discussed it at UDS, I don't know what you're complaining about"

type statements on IRC concerning various specs. I'm wondering if the

"results" of UDS are not being adequately communicated to the
rest of

the development (or say contributor) community. Also, as specs are

"tweaked" after UDS how does that information get disseminated?
Should

we perhaps have, for instance, an RSS feed for spec changes (on

approved specs anyway)? I would have surely enjoyed a set of

"Notification Roadmap" blog posts with some rough milestones.
There

were some mockups done and that's good, but I think timing was missing

for me at least. A set of "known issues but we're gonna land anyway"

emails may have helped. Any other thoughts?



-Jordan







------------------------------



Message: 6

Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2009 15:43:44 +0000

From: Bruce Cowan <lists@bcowan.fastmail.co.uk>

Subject: Re: Auto-launching of applications

To: Martin Pitt <martin.pitt@ubuntu.com>

Cc: ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com

Message-ID: <1235576624.3930.1.camel@Scooby-Dum>

Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"



On Wed, 2009-02-25 at 11:42 +0100, Martin Pitt wrote:

> Mark Shuttleworth [2009-02-25 *9:20 +0000]:

> > In this case, there are definitely things we can do which would
improve

> > both, and there are also things we can do which ensure that we
only pay

> > the price the user *wants* to pay, *when* they want to pay it.
For

> > example, deferring heavy lifting and parsing until we know the
user

> > actually wants to proceed.

>

> A considerable part of that price comes from firing up python, loading

> gtk, glade, and half a dozen other modules, etc. It's not easy to

> reduce that startup cost, short of rewriting u-m in C (which we don't

> really want IMHO).



Even taking Python into account, there's something wrong with a update

manager which uses ~70 MB of memory on start.

--

Bruce Cowan <http://launchpad.net/~bruce89>

-------------- next part --------------

A non-text attachment was scrubbed...

Name: not available

Type: application/pgp-signature

Size: 197 bytes

Desc: This is a digitally signed message part

Url : https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-devel/attachments/20090225/85765e24/attachment-0001.pgp




------------------------------



Message: 7

Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2009 00:04:30 +0800

From: Chow Loong Jin <hyperair@gmail.com>

Subject: Re: Auto-launching of applications

To: ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com

Message-ID: <1235577870.6993.8.camel@hyperair-laptop>

Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"



On Wed, 2009-02-25 at 11:42 +0100, Martin Pitt wrote:

> Mark Shuttleworth [2009-02-25 *9:20 +0000]:

> > In this case, there are definitely things we can do which would
improve

> > both, and there are also things we can do which ensure that we
only pay

> > the price the user *wants* to pay, *when* they want to pay it.
For

> > example, deferring heavy lifting and parsing until we know the
user

> > actually wants to proceed.

>

> A considerable part of that price comes from firing up python, loading

> gtk, glade, and half a dozen other modules, etc. It's not easy to

> reduce that startup cost, short of rewriting u-m in C (which we don't

> really want IMHO).

>

> > I very much want the work that comes from this initiative to
be

> > *stylish*, *fast* and *robust*, so any suggestions you have for
the

> > engineering team on the latter will be taken seriously, especially
if

> > they come with patches! We will have full test suites to address
the

> > latter point.

>

> Just for the record, ideas which were discussed yesterday:

>

> Security updates:

> -----------------

> Instead of immediately bringing up u-manager, u-notifier could just

> pop up a message box

>

> * ----------------------------------------------------------------

> * There are security updates available for your computer which
you

> * ought to install.

>

> * * [ Install now ] [ Details... ] [ Remind me later ]

> * ----------------------------------------------------------------

>

> "Install now" would forego the u-m list view and immediately
start

> updates. "Details" would open u-m as usual, but only when
the user

> actually acknowledges the dialog and wants to act on it. "Remind
me

> later" would just close the dialog.

>

> u-m should also provide an obvious path to enabling automatic updates.

>

> Bug fixes:

> ----------

>

> * ----------------------------------------------------------------

> * There are updates available for your computer which fix important

> * problems and errors.

>

> * * [ Install now ] [ Details... ] [ Remind me later ]

> * ----------------------------------------------------------------

>

> So this looks and works similar, just with a different rationale.

> Here, update-notifier should provide an obvious path how to disable

> notifications about bug fixes entirely, since not all users want them

> (but at the same time we don't want them to disable update-notifier

> entirely, to retain security updates and reboot notifications).

>

> Martin

>

> --

> Martin Pitt * * * * * * * *
* * * *| http://www.piware.de

> Ubuntu Developer (www.ubuntu.com) *| Debian Developer *(www.debian.org)

>

This brings to mind some issue that was mentioned earlier in this thread

about how having these dialogs could encourage an influx of fake dialogs

on websites that entice you to just click on it without looking.



While I don't really think of this as a good idea, perhaps it would be

good for first-time discovery of the software updates feature, so I'm

not completely against it. However, it could get irritating in the long

run, so how about having a checkbox "Don't show this update again"
and a

dialog that says "You can access this window via _______" or
something?



Regards,

Chow Loong Jin

-------------- next part --------------

A non-text attachment was scrubbed...

Name: not available

Type: application/pgp-signature

Size: 197 bytes

Desc: This is a digitally signed message part

Url : https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-devel/attachments/20090226/732c1558/attachment-0001.pgp




------------------------------



Message: 8

Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2009 19:14:30 +0200

From: Lars Wirzenius <lars@ubuntu.com>

Subject: Notifications: uselessness of

To: ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com

Message-ID: <1235582070.29628.19.camel@dorfl>

Content-Type: text/plain



ke, 2009-02-25 kello 09:43 +0000, Mark Shuttleworth kirjoitti:

> Oliver, this was not constructive feedback.



I'm going to give some more harsh-ish feedback. I'll try to formulate it

politely, but I apologize beforehand for failing to do so.



Notifications are always interruptions. When something new pops up on

the screen, it interrupts my thought and my work, and if I'm "in the

zone" (also known as "in hack mode"), that interruption
may cost about

fifteen minutes of effective work time.



It doesn't matter what it is that pops up on the screen: be it a

notification bubble (old or new design), a new window that causes the

task bar to change, or an application that causes its task bar button to

blink. Or something else.



I don't like it when those things happen. All applications should, in my

opinion, strive to interrupt the user as little as possible, especially

by default. If the user really wants to be notified of every incoming

e-mail, that's fine, but by default, in my opinion, the Ubuntu desktop

should consider the vast numbers of people who use their computer as a

tool, rather than as a toy. (I'm sure more people use computers as toys,

but they should then be happy to go through the menus to enable all

sorts of notifications.)



The notifications I would like to see are for serious things: when I'm

about to lose data, or cause a security breach to happen, or endanger

someone's health or property. Trivial stuff like new e-mail or IM

messages or highlighted lines on IRC should be turned off by default.



Most applications don't have a way to configure off notifications. For

example, Epiphany always notifies me when it has downloaded a file. Most

of the time, this happens within five seconds of when I initiated the

download, making the notification useless. Other times, the download

will take a while, perhaps up to hours, and I don't care exactly when it

ends. I would prefer to ask to be notified in specific instances when I

do care, rather than be uselessly notified all the time.



Because of this, I find all the work that is going into making

notifications prettier to be misdirected.









------------------------------



Message: 9

Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2009 09:45:07 -0800

From: Steve Langasek <steve.langasek@ubuntu.com>

Subject: Re: Improving resume speed

To: ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com,

* * * * * * * *
ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com

Message-ID: <20090225174507.GI26570@dario.dodds.net>

Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1



On Sat, Feb 21, 2009 at 02:48:18PM -0500, Mackenzie Morgan wrote:

> On Saturday 21 February 2009 11:23:32 am (``-_-??) -- BUGabundo wrote:

> > Jaunty had/has the objective to have a fast startup (<25 secs),

> > But the current technique to resume hibernated machines (using
the kernel

> mode) is too slow, and doesnt use compression.

> > pm-utils (pm-hibernate via s2disk) currently does this, and have
a much

> nicer UI (it shows progress), but unfortunately it got broken last
weekend on

> jaunty [1].



> Kernel modesetting for graphics was mentioned as a possibility for
Karmic. *

> That should make the flicker time for graphics after resuming from
suspend

> shorten considerably.



I believe he's talking about hibernate rather than suspend, where the

largest cost is reading the kernel image back from disk.



--

Steve Langasek * * * * * * * *
* Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS

Debian Developer * * * * * * * *
* to set it on, and I can move the world.

Ubuntu Developer * * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * * * *http://www.debian.org/

slangasek@ubuntu.com * * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * * * * vorlon@debian.org







------------------------------



--

ubuntu-devel mailing list

ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com

Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel





End of ubuntu-devel Digest, Vol 54, Issue 41

********************************************



--
ubuntu-devel mailing list
ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 05:20 AM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org