Difference between revisions of "Testing/Reports/Sweets on Raspberry pi armhf raspbian"

From Sugar Labs
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(update)
(review progress)
Line 52: Line 52:
  
 
xulrunner-1.9.2
 
xulrunner-1.9.2
 +
 +
'''Review progress'''
 +
 +
So I believe I can fulfill all the dependencies of the four <sweets> options, sdk: 0.88, 0.94, and dextrose: 0.88, 0.94, so far as is revealed by:
 +
 +
sweets status --deps <those four sweets>
 +
 +
1. This error message keeps appearing:
 +
 +
ls: cannot access /usr/lib*/xulrunner-1.*: No such file or directory
 +
 +
''- is xulrunner fundamental to the task?''
 +
 +
These are the remaining problem dependencies for -S option.
 +
 +
2. error status "dr" sdk/pyabiword (0.8.0-11).
 +
 +
Aptitude shows python-abiword 0.8.0-11 installed.
 +
 +
3. error status "dr" sdk/hulahop (0.8.2-7)
 +
 +
E: Package 'python-hulahop' has no installation candidate
 +
 +
Package: python-hulahop (0.8.1-1) is shown in Debian package search as unavailable in armhf
 +
 +
4. error status "dr" sdk/pyxpcom (1.9.2-15) (<2)
 +
 +
Package: python-xpcom (1:9.0~hg20111212-2 and others)
 +
 +
Aptitude shows python-xpcom 1:9.0~hg20111212 ''but it is out of specified range.''
 +
 +
https://developer.mozilla.org/en/Building_PyXPCOM ''refers''
 +
 +
5. error status "er" http://sweets.sugarlabs.org/sdk/xulrunner (>=1.9.2, <1.9.3)       
 +
 +
Package, squeeze: xulrunner-1.9.1 (1.9.1.16-16) [security]
 +
 +
Package, sid: xulrunner-1.9.1 (1.9.1.19-2 and others)
 +
 +
Package, wheezy, xulrunner-10.0 ''Is available, armhf: testing in progress''.
 +
 +
''All are out of specified range.''
 +
 +
https://developer.mozilla.org/en/XULRunner_1.9.2_Release_Notes ''Refers, attempted and failed to install, (i686 source)''
 +
 +
 +
 +
  
 
'''As a known issue''' (for Debian), suggested dependencies, i.e., -S sweets command argument, don't work for now. The reason why the -S option does not work in Debian is probably fundamental to making the above process more easy to complete.
 
'''As a known issue''' (for Debian), suggested dependencies, i.e., -S sweets command argument, don't work for now. The reason why the -S option does not work in Debian is probably fundamental to making the above process more easy to complete.

Revision as of 08:31, 12 July 2012

Sugar on a Raspberry pi is functional, stable, and testable unsupervised by children (in progress).

Method

Using a Raspberry pi, running OS from http://www.raspbian.org/ (pisces image) on a SanDisk 4 GB, class 4, SDHC card. The Raspian install should be fully updated as per their pages. Take care to obtain the most accurate possible configuration of locales, keyboard and sound.

The Sugar via Sweets installation process instructions are here:

Platform Team/Guide/Sugar via Sweets

and the method follows the walkthrough here:

Testing/Reports/Sweets on Debian Wheezy

Refer to #Still to Fix and attempt to install those items straight after:

sudo apt-get install gnome-packagekit

Test report Sugar 0.94

All Function keys, F1 to 6, work fine All Views and avatars seen correctly, without error. Software Updates fully functional. The list of working Activities (and limitations) is very similar to those reported here Testing/Reports/Sweets on Debian Wheezy


GUI Activity install

This method is useful if a working browser is not available in Sugar. We can use the host browser, Midori, and pcmanfm unzip tool.

Select a new Activity from ASLO, http://activities.sugarlabs.org//en-US/sugar/ . (Packages selected to run in Sugar 0.94.1 can be identified in ASLO, using "Advanced Search"). Using Midori, download chosen Activities to, say, ~/downloads. Open ~/downloads with pcmanfm, select the NewActivity.xo, right click, chose extract to, enter ~/Activities, press Save. The Activity will unzip ready to use. You can check in ~/Activities that you have NewActivity.activity



Still to Fix

The current Sweets installer does not pick up all of the dependencies first time in Debian and Raspbian.

The dependencies that will require manual installation are listed in the steps below.

They are listed in order of ease. The latter items are probably more fundamental to the process. The best fix is still required.

sudo apt-get install python-vte python-gst0.10 python-pygame python-webkit
sudo apt-get install oss-compat python-gst0.10-dev python-gst0.10-dbg timidity


The following assets may also be required, but not yet fully resolved.

python-xpcom

xulrunner-1.9.2

Review progress

So I believe I can fulfill all the dependencies of the four <sweets> options, sdk: 0.88, 0.94, and dextrose: 0.88, 0.94, so far as is revealed by:

sweets status --deps <those four sweets>

1. This error message keeps appearing:

ls: cannot access /usr/lib*/xulrunner-1.*: No such file or directory

- is xulrunner fundamental to the task?

These are the remaining problem dependencies for -S option.

2. error status "dr" sdk/pyabiword (0.8.0-11).

Aptitude shows python-abiword 0.8.0-11 installed.

3. error status "dr" sdk/hulahop (0.8.2-7)

E: Package 'python-hulahop' has no installation candidate

Package: python-hulahop (0.8.1-1) is shown in Debian package search as unavailable in armhf

4. error status "dr" sdk/pyxpcom (1.9.2-15) (<2)

Package: python-xpcom (1:9.0~hg20111212-2 and others)

Aptitude shows python-xpcom 1:9.0~hg20111212 but it is out of specified range.

https://developer.mozilla.org/en/Building_PyXPCOM refers

5. error status "er" http://sweets.sugarlabs.org/sdk/xulrunner (>=1.9.2, <1.9.3)

Package, squeeze: xulrunner-1.9.1 (1.9.1.16-16) [security]

Package, sid: xulrunner-1.9.1 (1.9.1.19-2 and others)

Package, wheezy, xulrunner-10.0 Is available, armhf: testing in progress.

All are out of specified range.

https://developer.mozilla.org/en/XULRunner_1.9.2_Release_Notes Refers, attempted and failed to install, (i686 source)



As a known issue (for Debian), suggested dependencies, i.e., -S sweets command argument, don't work for now. The reason why the -S option does not work in Debian is probably fundamental to making the above process more easy to complete.