Difference between revisions of "Talk:Developing widgets for chumby"

From Chumby Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search
m (Reverted edit of 210.216.153.156, changed back to last version by Alimills)
(SSHD location)
 
(One intermediate revision by the same user not shown)
Line 7: Line 7:
 
Is that possible?
 
Is that possible?
  
 +
Yeah ;-)
  
 
== Leaks ==
 
== Leaks ==
Line 34: Line 35:
  
 
The difference in the two is that the first block points to an existing function reference while the second points to the creation of a new one.  The reason has to do with ActionScript's scope chain and activation objects.  The two are described in detail at: [http://timotheegroleau.com/Flash/articles/scope_chain.htm|Scope Chain and Memory waste in Flash MX]
 
The difference in the two is that the first block points to an existing function reference while the second points to the creation of a new one.  The reason has to do with ActionScript's scope chain and activation objects.  The two are described in detail at: [http://timotheegroleau.com/Flash/articles/scope_chain.htm|Scope Chain and Memory waste in Flash MX]
 +
 +
== SSHD location ==
 +
 +
On my chumby, I didn't have /bin/sshd, it was /sbin/sshd
 +
(I have a katimari chumby, I think /bin/sshd is for Foo)

Latest revision as of 09:39, 20 July 2007

Is it possible to use the USB storage AND also access chumby.com channels?

If I use the "USB mass storage device plugged into the back of the chumby", can the chumbly still use my account and the chumby.com channels?

Basically I want to develope a secure app that talks to my servers only to get private data in a secure mode (https: or ssh) and displays on my chumby, but accessible to no one else. However I would still like the clock, weather, and other stuff that is availabe on chumby.com.

Is that possible?

Yeah ;-)

Leaks

The snippet:
<snippet>

Even Flash can be subject to memory leaks - the most common way to create a memory leak is to allocate XML objects as local variables. For instance, the code

  function someFunction() {
    var x = new XML();
    x.onLoad = doSomething;
    x.load("http://some.url");
  }

...will result in a memory leak. XML objects should be assigned to movieclip properties, and assigned to undefined when no longer used.
</snippet>

isn't accurate. In actuality, the example demonstrates the way to not create a memory leak. Similar code that would cause a leak follows:

  function someFunction() {
    var x = new XML();
    x.onLoad = function(success:Boolean) {
         // doSomething
    };
    x.load("http://some.url");
  }

The difference in the two is that the first block points to an existing function reference while the second points to the creation of a new one. The reason has to do with ActionScript's scope chain and activation objects. The two are described in detail at: Chain and Memory waste in Flash MX

SSHD location

On my chumby, I didn't have /bin/sshd, it was /sbin/sshd (I have a katimari chumby, I think /bin/sshd is for Foo)