Devel Digest, Vol 29, Issue 122

[Greg Smith]

Hi Mikus,

Can you file a bug on this (dev.laptop.org) and include steps to 
reproduce and test?

Mark the milestone 8.2.0 and priority High (may be triaged higher if it 
affects a lot of cases). My impression is its a design improvement (e.g. 
hour glass cursor) we should target for 9.1.0 but we can spend 10 
minutes reviewing it in a bug scrub meeting first.

Thanks,

Greg S

**************
Date: Sat, 19 Jul 2008 05:32:16 -0400
From: Mikus Grinbergs <mikus at bga.com>
Subject: pacing oneself
To: sugar at lists.laptop.org, devel at lists.laptop.org
Message-ID: <4881B4A0.50500 at bga.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed

The "visual speed of operation" of palette opening/closing on the
screen is noticeably slower on the OLPC than on a workstation. When
the OLPC user fails to "slow down" with his actions, unintended
consequences can result.


Was working (Joyride 2177) in Terminal with a removable storage
device.  Issued an 'umount' command - it was rejected with "device
is busy".  Went to the Journal, selected that device's icon, and
(rapidly) invoked the pop-up palette to unmount that device.  But
(being spastic, and not pausing to make sure where the cursor was
positioned) I had managed to click on the 'base' of the palette
instead of on the 'Unmount' entry.

Not realizing what had happened, what I *did* notice was the XO
becoming extremely unresponsive.  Went (took a long time) back to
Terminal, and issued 'top'.  It showed Journal taking 100% of the
available CPU cycles.  Decided to wait out whatever was going on.
After two minutes or so, the high Journal usage stopped.  Went over
to Journal, and *now* I saw what I had done - Journal was showing me
the files on that device.  [Apparently it had taken Journal a couple
of minutes to "scan" that device.]  Switched what the Journal was
showing to "normal", clicked (more carefully) on the 'Unmount' of
the removable device, and all was back to what was supposed to be.


I am *not* posting for help.  But I *do* wish to point out that
(particularly when dissimilar functions are visually adjacent --
e.g., "unmount" vs. "show"), failure to 'pace oneself' on the OLPC
can bring on the unexpected.


mikus