Do you have any old file format images?

I’m specifically looking for:
OS/2 Metafile (.met)
PICT (Mac’s precursor to PDF)

Also useful might be:
PCD – Kodak Photo CD
RAS – Sun Raster Image

I’m trying to evaluate if LibreOffice should keep support for them (specifically if the support is good). Unfortunately I can only generate the images using LibreOffice (or sister projects) which doesn’t really provide a great test.

Please either:
* Provide a link in a comment below
* Email me B @ (If emailed, please mention if I can share the image publicly)

If I find the support works great I’d try to integrate a few of them into LO tests so we make sure they don’t regress.

Thank you!  [Update, files are now part of LibreOffice’s test server]


Debug performance issues with strace

Have you ever been asked why is this program running so slowly?  Or why does it take 15 seconds to startup?

Strace might be the tool for you.  It’s a system call tracer which let’s you see what this program is requesting from the system. For example, if you run ls to a directory some key thins will be:
getdents(3, /* 47 entries */, 32768)    = 1928  (Get entries from a directory)
write(1, ..   (write out to stdout the output of ls)

You can add timing information to get more of an idea of what’s happening, I usually add:
-tt  (print absolute timestamps in usecs, very useful for comparing to nmap output for instance)
-T  (print time in each syscall)
-ff (follow forks, if it spawns other processes this will you separate them out to different files)

So run it all `strace -tt -T -ff ls’ and now it looks like:
14:09:10.747357 getdents(3, /* 48 entries */, 32768) = 1952 <0.000056>
14:09:10.747724 write(1, .....) = 57 <0.000031

Absolute time  syscall 

When using this on anything non-trivial, I suggest exporting it to a file (-o file).  You can also try analyzing it live as the long delays should cause strace output to stop.

I’ve got the strace output, it’s huge!  Now what?

Let’s start at the first one, which will be the lowest number, output_name.10001 for example. Check the time stamp at the top and the bottom, does it cover the time frame where you are investigating?  If so, dig in and find where the jump in time was.

In this example it was:
09:13:32.329980 write(1, "[2]... ", 7)  = 7 <0.000033>
09:13:32.330041 wait4(-1, [{WIFEXITED(s) && WEXITSTATUS(s) == 4}], 0, NULL) = 14963 <4512.975521>
10:28:45.305644 --- SIGCHLD {si_signo=SIGCHLD, si_code=CLD_EXITED, si_pid=14963, si_status=4, si_utime=0, si_stime=0} ---
10:28:45.305907 write(1, "[1]... ", 7)  = 7 <0.000036>

Or in other words, it’s really in that child process 14963 so let’s open up output_name.14963
Scroll throw to the first jump in time and we see:
09:13:20.418886 connect(5, {sa_family=AF_INET, sin_port=htons(80), sin_addr=inet_addr("")}, 16) = -1 ETIMEDOUT (Connection timed out) <127.317319>
... about 30 lines...
09:15:28.738327 connect(5, {sa_family=AF_INET, sin_port=htons(80), sin_addr=inet_addr("")}, 16) = -1 ETIMEDOUT (Connection timed out) <127.253925>
... many more lines here ...
10:26:37.977564 connect(5, {sa_family=AF_INET, sin_port=htons(80), sin_addr=inet_addr("")}, 16) = -1 ETIMEDOUT (Connection timed out) <127.326639>

So it’s timing out trying to connect to an IP address and then trying again over 10 times.  Using strace will help you the most when the wait is caused by something on the system level (disk, networking, etc).

Would you crowdfund a $500 Ubuntu “open to the core” laptop?

UPDATE 2 (11/28) – We’re 77% of the way to 1000.  I guesstimate we would have raised at least $300,000 if this we’re a live campaign.

UPDATE – I’ve removed the silly US restriction.  I know there are more options in Europe, China, India, etc, but why shouldn’t you get access to the “open to the core” laptop!
This would definitely come with at least 3 USB ports (and at least one USB 3.0 port).

Since Jolla had success with crowdfunding a tablet, it’s a good time to see if we can get some mid-range Ubuntu laptops for sale to consumers in as many places as possible.  I’d like to get some ideas about whether there is enough demand for a very open $500 Ubuntu laptop.

Would you crowdfund this? (Core Goals)

  • 15″ 1080p Matte Screen
  • 720p Webcam with microphone
  • Spill-resistant and nice to type on keyboard
  • Intel i3+ or AMD A6+
  • Built-in Intel or AMD graphics with no proprietary firmware
  • 4 GB Ram
  • 128 GB SSD (this would be the one component that might have to be proprietary as I’m not aware of another option)
  • Ethernet 10/100/1000
  • Wireless up to N
  • HDMI
  • SD card reader
  • CoreBoot (No proprietary BIOS)
  • Ubuntu 14.04 preloaded of course
  • Agreement with manufacturer to continue selling this laptop (or similar one) with Ubuntu preloaded to consumers for at least 3 years.

Stretch Goals? Or should they be core goals?

Will only be added if they don’t push the cost up significantly (or if everyone really wants them) and can be done with 100% open source software/firmware.

  • Touchscreen
  • Convertible to Tablet
  • GPS
  • FM Tuner (and built-in antenna)
  • Digital TV Tuner (and built-in antenna)
  • Ruggedized
  • Direct sunlight readable screen
  • “Frontlight” tech.  (think Amazon PaperWhite)
  • Bluetooth
  • Backlit keyboard
  • USB Power Adapter

Take my quick survey if you want to see this happen.  If at least 1000 people say “Yes,” I’ll approach manufacturers.   The first version might just end up being a Chromebook modified with better specs, but I think that would be fine.

Link to survey –

Ubuntu 14.04 LiveCD Memory Usage Compared


I did a comparison when 14.04 was first released on the memory usage of different Ubuntu flavors.   Some takeaways:

  • Lubuntu has zRam (automatically compress memory to save space) enabled by default making it hands down the most usable version with low-memory.  It’s the only flavor to have it enabled on the LiveCD.
  • The real cost of 64 vs 32 bit is usually only 128 MB.
  • Lubuntu (32-bit) still boots with just 160 MB of RAM!
  • The Ubuntu kernel can’t boot with only 128 MB of RAM.

All testing was done in virtual machines (Virtualbox) and obviously with different hardware you’re results will vary.   You can infer some of my methodology from the notes below.   This was done months ago and I don’t remember all of the details.  The results may have changed with software updates, especially to Firefox.


Raw testing notes

New Rasperry Pi performance benchmarks…

Lazy follow up to my previous post on the Raspberry Pi.  Here are some more recent benchmarks using a more up-to-date image:

Take aways:  Performance has improved greatly.   Still get’s crushed by a P4, but performance per watt is now clearly in the Pi’s favour.

Some of the tests failed because I don’t have a monitor hooked up to me Pi.  (Like GTK perf).  With the Wayland changes, I guess I might have to review this again with one..