Whats up in Puppy World

[BologneChe]

@wanderer

You are very persistent in working in this shifting sand and that is a great quality.

[wanderer]

the other thing to think about is

if we refuse to accept any other build system besides woof-ce

we probably should not complain that we dont have any other build system besides woof-ce

wanderer

[wanderer]

thanks BalogneChe

thats the purpose of this thread

wanderer

[fredx181]

hi wiak
...

im just says that any distro created by members of the forum
can be considered as a distro created by members of the forum

I'd say that speaks for itself, it has been for years like that.

im not calling anything puppy

But you do talk about "nominees" and "votes". For what ?
My view is that if for example @rockedge and or @wiak or @Sofiya want to have a Kennel Linux version listed on Distrowatch, they can do it for themselves, probably without the need for votes or nominee.

[wanderer]

hi fredx181

you make a good point

and this is not big deal

this thread is just to discuss some issues that have been raised

one of the complaints was that we don't give all the systems on the forum equal consideration
so why not include all the distros as a group

another complaint was that woof-ce was not a system that everyone could use
so why not consider other alternatives which we already have on the forum

another complaint was that only woof-ce could be used to create an "official" distro
and that left a lot of people out
so why not let the forum decide what is an "official" distro

so there it is

wanderer

[dimkr]

so why not let the forum decide what is an "official" distro

If you ask members of this forum what should be promoted over other things, you'll get a high ratio of votes from strongly opinionated people - longtime users of a specific distro and the developers of this distro. Some users don't religiously follow a specific distro or a specific developer, some users won't see this poll, some don't care enough to vote and some just don't have an opinion. You won't get good representation of all opinions through "democracy".

[wiak]

this thread is just to discuss some issues that have been raised

one of the complaints was that we don't give all the systems on the forum equal consideration
so why not include all the distros as a group

another complaint was that woof-ce was not a system that everyone could use
so why not consider other alternatives which we already have on the forum

another complaint was that only woof-ce could be used to create an "official" distro
and that left a lot of people out
so why not let the forum decide what is an "official" distro

Well I think this is all true and correct.

However, if by "Puppy World" we really mean "this forum", or "the Kennels" as it has sometimes been called, then perhaps the problem is the "Puppy World" focus alluded to as being about one distro or another. A distro is just a platform, which is one type of forum "project" (as in fact is a build system, which itself is not a distro; FirstRib, for example has no distro released under that name and there is no distro called Woof-CE).

Isn't the "Puppy World", "The Kennels" actually always been a place where "Projects" (and kind of useful project) are imagined, discussed, and sometimes made? Certainly, these projects were on the whole designed to be run under, in the early days, Puppy Linux, and for over ten years now, to be used with Debiandog, or FatDog, or Puppy, or Kennel Linux, or EasyOS and so on.

I certainly have long thought it wrong to think of the forum as being focussed only on the distro "Puppy Linux"; this is a forum, it is not a distro, and many projects have been just as complex in terms of coding than the building of any distro such as Puppy or DebianDog and so on. Just as one example: sc0ttman's pkg was pretty complex code. Actually I suspect pkg could in modified form also be used in a special purpose Kennel Linux build (pity sc0ttman vanished, but that is an aspect of life in opensource world, so let's not cry).

Unfortunately, for a very... long time, some have tended to gang together in insisting on focussing on their favourite Puppy Linux and until relatively recently made it obvious they considered the other 'distros' featured in the forum as having some kind of invasion characteristic onto Puppy Linux turf and made a big endless deal about proclaiming what is "official" Puppy Linux, which as a concept almost seems to suggest that the likes of DebianDog and Kennel Linux were free-loading on top of Puppy Linux as some kind of counterfeit(!) It doesn't really matter though; neither DebianDog, nor current Kennel Linux "need" Puppy Linux (or vice versa), nor apparently care much about any Distrowatch presence or even greater usage by forum members - a hobby is just a hobby is just a hobby. They are just free to use and/or be involved in forum projects whose contributors don't appear to be particularly bothered if they are widely used or not... but certainly need sufficient forum space to allow the same kind of feedback, development discussions, and so on, as any other forum featured distro - it is otherwise painful to be limited artificially via insufficient forum allocation compared to distro users and developer needs.

Anyway, times change, but keeping actual Puppy Linux alive (albeit just as one of many forum projects/distros) is important so I don't like all this talk/suggestion of making some other distro "official" - there is no such thing as "official" Kennel Linux anyway. But there might well be, today or tomorrow or whenever, some other forum project that is much more interesting, or useful, or important, than any distro featured here.

Personally, I would not myself thus vote to promote any distro above any other; indeed, if the forum has always had a fault that has been it.

[bigpup]

Now you are back to the question.

What is Puppy Linux operating system?

To me it is an operating system(OS) that operates in specific ways.

All the OS is provided in different SFS files.

The SFS files are parts of a Linux file system, inside a file.
Together they are the complete Puppy Linux operating file system.

An install of the OS, is putting all the SFS files in a folder (frugal install) or a live install, which is possible by also providing a boot loader in the Puppy version ISO.

Because a frugal install is a folder. It can be located on any drive partition, any format, even inside another installed OS.

These different SFS files are configured to provide specific parts of the overall OS.
Together they provide the complete OS.

In operation.
All the different SFS are loaded into RAM and layered into a complete operating OS.
The OS's SFS files are always read only.

First boot it uses a save ramdisk (section of RAM) to store any changes.
This is pupmode 5 operation.

On first shutdown a save file/folder can be made.

All changes to the OS are stored in a save fie/folder. that is always read/write. (permanent storage)
The save does not load into RAM, but is layered into the OS's operating file system.

On next boot, using the save file/folder. (pupmode 12)
There is no save ramdisk.
Only the save file/folder to directly store changes in, as they happen.

It is possible to run in a different pupmode 13, using a save file/folder.
A save ramdisk is made and the save file/folder is loaded (layered) into the operating file system.
Any changes first go into the save ramdisk.
Options are provided for how and when changes get into the save file/folder.
(If shutdown not updating the save with changes in the save ramdisk).
All changes are lost and next boot is the same as last one, because nothing was updated in the save file/folder.

As best as possible Puppy Linux should try to stay as small in size as possible.
But still provide a completely usable OS.
With many of the programs already in it, that will allow people to do anything they may want to.

New abilities is something to implement, but only if there is really a need for them. They provide something useful.
Example of a couple of them:
zram as the method for having swap and no longer needing a swap file/folder.

Providing something other than Puppy Package Manager(PPM) for installing added software.

Having support for some of the newer formats (file systems), like f2fs, exfat, but only ones that people, are maybe wanting to use.

Etc.............

[wiak]

Now you are back to the question.

What is Puppy Linux operating system?

To me it is an operating system(OS) that operates in specific ways.

All the OS is provided in different SFS files.

The SFS files are parts of a Linux file system, inside a file.
Together they are the complete Puppy Linux operating file system.

An install of the OS, is putting all the SFS files in a folder (frugal install) or a live install, which is possible by also providing a boot loader in the Puppy version ISO.

Because a frugal install is a folder. It can be located on any drive partition, any format, even inside another installed OS.

These different SFS files are configured to provide specific parts of the overall OS.
Together they provide the complete OS.

Unfortunately, distros tend to not be particularly unique beasts. Really they are just variants of the same Linux beast.

The above statements about what is Puppy Linux operating system would mean that, just as a couple of examples, Porteus Linux, AntiX and Slax are versions of Puppy Linux, but not "official" since not built using woof-CE

Also, Puppy Linux is not an "operating system"; it is simply a "distro", which like all these other distros use the operating system "Linux" and all the features of that and various software projects developed for it, including overlayfs and aufs and squash filesystems and so on and so forth. Distros are not very "unique" at all - that is just a myth being propagated here as, well..., propaganda, which is not to say that all distros are the same in total in terms of the way they are put together and what component parts they include, but certainly not so different from each other either... not even technically (bog standard Debian can, for example, use overlayfs if any Debian user so chooses - it doesn't then become Kennel Linux!!!). As an end result to be used, there really isn't a lot of difference at all between using DebianDog, or any Kennel Linux distro, or Puppy Linux, or Slax, or blahblahblah - just different assembly/component parts used, including the repos and package managers involved and, particularly, the design of the initrd (but not so much the end effect of that - hence they all can achieve layering tricks with sfs files and save on demand and so on...). Even a full-install type distro can be easily modified to be a frugal install type distro with suitable initrd (in face KL_full2frugal script does exactly that for mainstream distro full to frugal conversion).

However, the above does not mean that this "forum" is not an extremely useful Linux community asset for promoting a certain style of Linux distro assembly (but any claim about "uniqueness" is rubbish).

The fact that this forum no longer solely discusses Puppy Linux, but is multi-project/distro supporting, makes it a much more useful forum than the likes of any other distro "forum" I know about. It's not at all just a generic Linux forum though - it is particularly attractive as a forum because it is the place where imagination, via discussion, results in actual member created projects; it is that overall powerful style of forum that is important really, not any particular distro or other project on it.

[bigpup]

Nothing in Linux is just simple statements.

But if you are going to call a Linux distro Puppy Linux.

There must be something about it, that is not the same as any other Linux based distro.

So what?

Is style the the only thing different between different Linux based distros?

What really is style?

[wiak]

Nothing in Linux is just simple statements.

But if you are going to call a Linux distro Puppy Linux.

There must be something about it, that is not the same as any other Linux based distro.

So what?

Is style the the only thing different between different Linux based distros?

What really is style?

All distros featured here are different in a similar sense to different models of car are different to each other - but that is not just a matter of different "style" - it involves different/alternative component selection and sometimes alternative technologies involved.

Puppy Linux (though not set in concrete) tends to be built using certain system-level scripts. The assembly of Puppy Linux as a distro could be done using the same system-level scripts via a different build system than current woof-CE.

[wiak]

Insisting the distro Puppy Linux should only be built via woof-CE (or not regarded as "official") is an unfortunate mistake/limitation conceptually.

However, that does not mean some other distro should be called "Puppy Linux" (no matter that it may behave similarly). Puppy Linux is Puppy Linux - it uses certain system-scripts/code/initrd - not set in stone, but somewhat a characteristic (that can evolve of course - all distros tend to get developed over time). Note how dimkr has claimed that his fork of woof-CE (used to produce Vanilla Dpup) only contains a relatively tiny percentage of official woof-CE... yet the result appears to most Puppy users as definitely a type of Puppy Linux.

[jamesbond]

... some have tended to gang together ...

Who are these "some" people? Can you name them?

... until relatively recently made it obvious they considered the other 'distros' featured in the forum as having some kind of invasion characteristic onto Puppy Linux turf

I saw this in the old murga-forum. I never saw anything like this in the new forum since it started in 2020. Can you provide a reference, a link to a post, maybe, that this still happens here? Even better if you can point out the member propagandising this idea.

and made a big endless deal about proclaiming what is "official" Puppy Linux, which as a concept almost seems to suggest that the likes of DebianDog and Kennel Linux were free-loading on top of Puppy Linux as some kind of counterfeit(!)

This is an interesting statement.

I don't think anyone ever say, or even think, that DebianDog or Kennel Linux are "counterfeit" Puppy. Not here, not in the old murga forum either. DebianDog is DebianDog, Kennel Linux is Kennel Linux, and neither are Puppy - the authors have said this much, multiple times. How can something which are clearly not-Puppy can be called as "counterfeit" Puppy?

I don't think anyone ever says that they are riding on Puppy Linux's popularity either. Can you provide the reference?

Finally, the word "official" in regards to Puppy Linux was never meant to say that any other distros were not official. It simply does not make sense to say that KLV is not "official" Puppy Linux, well, again, because it isn't Puppy Linux in the first place.

Explanation: The world "official" in Puppy Linux means a few particular Puppy Linux distro families, which have been selected/agreed on as being "representative" of what Puppy Linux is. One obvious example is the very distro we put on distrowatch. Whatever is being promoted in distrowatch is the "official" Puppy Linux; as when new users search, look, and want to test Puppy Linux, that linked distrowatch distro will be then one that they try first. If the experience is bad, they won't say "BookwormPup64 is bad", they will say "Puppy Linux is bad"; hence "BookwormPup64" is representing Puppy Linux distro family as a whole - hence, it is "official".

You may not like the word "official", but every time we have a discussion of what distro to put on distrowatch to represent Puppy Linux, we are in fact choosing an "official" Puppy. You can use "representative" if you don't want to use the word "official" - but the meaning behind is the same.

Which again, as no bearing whatsoever with other non-Puppy distros featured in this forum, as when we talk about "official" or "representative", it only concerns Puppy Linux distro families, not the other non-Puppy distros and doesn't reduce their worth in anyway.

but certainly need sufficient forum space to allow the same kind of feedback, development discussions, and so on, as any other forum featured distro - it is otherwise painful to be limited artificially via insufficient forum allocation compared to distro users and developer needs.

This was a valid feedback from the days of the old murga-forum. But today, since the new forum started in 2020, this wasn't an issue anymore. @rockedge has been more than generous in accommodating forum members / distro developers (sometimes conflicting!) requests; re-structuring the forum multiple times.

Insisting the distro Puppy Linux should only be built via woof-CE (or not regarded as "official") is an unfortunate mistake/limitation conceptually.

But you disagree when people want to use a different build system to build Puppy. So which way do you stand, then?

@fredx181 uses the DD build script to build a distro. No question about what the final product: it is a DebianDog, and not a Puppy. Because @fredx181 says so.

But @wanderer can use the same DD build script and make another distro. He may even tweaked it in the process, so the end result isn't identical to @fredx181's build. And now he wants to call it a Puppy. What's wrong with that? Who is to say that he cannot do that? And why?

However, that does not mean some other distro should be called "Puppy Linux" (no matter that it may behave similarly). Puppy Linux is Puppy Linux - it uses certain system-scripts/code/initrd

Interesting. So is this what Puppy Linux is? A "certain system-scripts/code/initrd"? And since you also say:

not set in stone, but somewhat a characteristic (that can evolve of course - all distros tend to get developed over time).

Then how much of these "certain system-scripts/code/initrd" have to remain unchanged for the final distro to be worth called as Puppy Linux? 90%? 50%? 10%? What if the scripts are re-implemented / re-written, but the end-user behaviour and appearance are still the same? Can the distro still carry Puppy Linux banner, or not?

Note how dimkr has claimed that his fork of woof-CE (used to produce Vanilla Dpup) only contains a relatively tiny percentage of official woof-CE... yet the result appears to most Puppy users as definitely a type of Puppy Linux.

So what's stopping @wanderer or anyone else, to use DD or FR build scripts, and insert that remaining "tiny percentage" into it? They should be able to call their final product as Puppy Linux too, don't they?

[wiak]

wiak:"but certainly need sufficient forum space to allow the same kind of feedback, development discussions, and so on, as any other forum featured distro - it is otherwise painful to be limited artificially via insufficient forum allocation compared to distro users and developer needs."

jamesbond: "This was a valid feedback from the days of the old murga-forum. But today, since the new forum started in 2020, this wasn't an issue anymore."

Really?

Puppy Linux distro sections:

General Information
Mainline Puppy Linux Distros
Puppy Derivatives
All of the big House Training section
Most of Advanced Topics (all except Programming...)
All of the big Puppy Linux International section

Not a fault of rockedge, however (clever trick using his name in that manner to deflect criticism): rockedge as forum owner/admin has inevitably had a delicate job of diplomacy to cope with in following on from the old murga forum organisation and worked well in doing so. Also, it is a lot of work changing a forum organisation and no one here expects rockedge to waste more of his time on such matters when he already has the burden of keeping the overall place up-to-date

Sorry I can't be bothered answering the rest of the ramblings right now.

[dimkr]

Note how dimkr has claimed that his fork of woof-CE (used to produce Vanilla Dpup) only contains a relatively tiny percentage of official woof-CE... yet the result appears to most Puppy users as definitely a type of Puppy Linux.

This is inaccurate - you omit the dimension of time, I forked woof-CE twice, not once.

There are two forks:
- One for the stable 9.3.x and 10.0.x releases - https://github.com/vanilla-dpup/woof-CE ... pup-10.0.x
- Another one for 11.0.x - https://github.com/vanilla-dpup/woof-CE ... pup-11.0.x

The left part of your sentence talks about the second one, while the right part talks about the first one.

The stable 9.3.x and 10.0.x releases are built from a fork of woof-CE without any major changes, it's pretty much only bug fixes. I forked woof-CE around the .0 release to insulate Vanilla Dpup from changes that go into woof-CE and break things: I fix bugs, submit them to https://github.com/puppylinux-woof-CE/w ... %3Aclosed+ and cherry-pick into the fork (or fix in the fork first, if my changes are rejected, ignored or responded with "??"), but don't pull big untested changes from upstream and push them to users. It's a "soft fork" that's very close to upstream woof-CE at the time of forking - feel free to look at the commit log and see for yourself. The thing this fork builds looks like a Puppy because it's so close to upstream woof-CE.

It's 11.0.x that will be built from a fork of woof-CE that aggressively removes old code, adds new stuff and makes big changes, but it's still in early development. It's very different from Puppy (even looks different), but it does have the features @bigpup and others see as defining features of Puppy (some with limitations compared to Puppy, some with improvements - see the README).

https://vanilla-dpup.github.io/ and other places will keep describing Vanilla Dpup as a derivative of Puppy, an alternative or something based on it, but never as Puppy itself, as a successor or as a replacement or whatever. If anyone wants to take my fork of woof-CE, build something and call it 'Puppy' or 'official', or even merge my fork back into upstream (to continue development from this point) - feel free to do that.

[jamesbond]

Also, Puppy Linux is not an "operating system"; it is simply a "distro"

Your definition, your opinion.

Others do define it differently. Puppy Linux is both a "distro" and an "operating system"; they're not mutually exclusive. "distro" is a short of "distribution", it came from the days where in other to have a proper working "operating system", people have to bundle "Linux" kernel with some "extra fluff" (=the userland programs).

The "Linux" kernel in itself is not an operating system. The "extra fluff" in itself is not an operating system. The combination of both - the "distribution" / "distro" __is__ and operating system. Obviously, there many permutations of which userland software/packages that one can include in a "distro"; hence, there are many "distros".

Hence Puppy Linux is an operating system (and also a distro), and so are KLV, DebianDog, Debian, Arch, ArchPup, Manjaro, and any other Linux distros out there.

which like all these other distros use the operating system "Linux"

"Linux" is not an operating system. It is a kernel. And this is not my opinion. This is a definition that is accepted by many people, including Linus Torvalds himself.

Distros are not very "unique" at all

Your opinion.

- that is just a myth being propagated here as, well...,

So you're saying that anyone who disagree with your opinion that "distros are not very unique", are spreading propaganda?

but certainly not so different from each other either... not even technically (bog standard Debian can, for example, use overlayfs if any Debian user so chooses - it doesn't then become Kennel Linux!!!).

And why not? What's the definition of "Kennel Linux"? Does it have to be built from FirstRib to be called "Kennel Linux"? Does it have to be produced by @rockedge or @Sofiya? What makes a "Kennel Linux" a "Kennel Linux"?

As an end result to be used, there really isn't a lot of difference at all between using DebianDog, or any Kennel Linux distro, or Puppy Linux, or Slax, or blahblahblah - just different assembly/component parts used, including the repos and package managers involved and, particularly, the design of the initrd (but not so much the end effect of that - hence they all can achieve layering tricks with sfs files and save on demand and so on...).

Maybe that's true from the developer point of view. From the end-user point of view, however, a distro that use JWM + ROX will be completely foreign to people a distro that uses Hyprland, for example. For they, they might think that they're dealing with two different operating systems, and they're not wrong.

(but any claim about "uniqueness" is rubbish).

If uniqueness is rubbish, then why not build KLV or DebianDog and call it Puppy Linux?
Because they're the mostly more of the same anyway, right?

[dimkr]

As an end result to be used, there really isn't a lot of difference at all between using DebianDog, or any Kennel Linux distro, or Puppy Linux, or Slax, or blahblahblah

I have to disagree with this one. Very few distros have something similar to PUPMODE 13, and the various distro that do have something like this implement it very differently - some are faster, some are more reliable, and that's a very good reason to pick one distro over others (no matter if saving is implemented using an "upstream" tool like rsync, a tool developed in-house, etc'). Same goes with other 'Puppy features'. If uniqueness is 'rubbish', all attempts to implement mostly the same thing but better are also 'rubbish' and we're all wasting our time (but maybe having fun).

[wiak]

Takes a lot of time better lived than done finding the kind of irrelevant references I was asked to post of course. So won't be followed up despite there being several actually and more direct (riding on back statements) than this one as many already know:

Anyone want to create a poll with regards to whether this forum should be a general forum where all distro's should have "equal standing" to Puppy? Personally, I would vote against it. For me this is primarily a Puppy Linux forum which was created after the previous Puppy forum went down, the intellectual capital transferred and the legacy is continued here. I think there is a place for other distro's here but in my view should be featured as "sideline business" (attractions or distractions however you want to view it). Rockedge has graciously allowed space for these other ventures. My question would be why some may want to actively promote/favor other distributions to Puppy on a Puppy forum? Why not create your own forum,blog or whatever to promote and boost your own distro, etc. If this becomes a general linux discussion forum (and most agree with it), all specific references to Puppy LInux (like the name of the forum) should be changed. I think it will be a sad day if that happens...

User support thanks to above included Wiz57, who has made several similar statements in this forum, which is fine - each to their own opinion of course.

The Puppy Linux Forum has been around for many years and has survived the transfer to a new server and other changes. I'm not too worried that it will become "irrelevant" soon. As for the promotion of other distro's/ventures of other developers, I think you may be underplaying this forum's role in this. I think the distro's of other developers are indeed promoted and benefited in a way by having their ventures exposed on this forum to an existing user base. Wouldn't be that easy if they had to establish their own forum, promote it themselves and build their own "client base".

But enough of answering ramblings. Time to sleep here.

[jamesbond]

Really?

Puppy Linux distro sections:

General Information
Mainline Puppy Linux Distros
Puppy Derivatives
All of the big House Training section
Most of Advanced Topics (all except Programming...)
All of the big Puppy Linux International section

All you need to do is ask @rockedge to re-structure the forum. He has been very attentive and very accommodating with changes. So instead of making accusation that Puppy Linux is unfairly exposed, just raise a request to him to make the change, I'm sure he doesn't mind.

It's just a bit funny enough to claim "Puppy Linux" is over exposed when the name of the forum is "Puppy Linux Forum" and the domain name is puppylinux.com, and the other distros here have loudly and vehemently state that they are not Puppy Linux ...

Not a fault of rockedge, however (clever trick using his name in that manner to deflect criticism): rockedge as forum owner/admin has inevitably had a delicate job of diplomacy to cope with in following on from the old murga forum organisation and worked well in doing so.

As I said before, this may be true in 2020 during the transition.
Today, not so much. @rockedge can do any re-org as much as he wants, and nobody will leave. Where else would they go?

Also, it is a lot of work changing a forum organisation and no one here expects rockedge to waste more of his time on such matters when he already has the burden of keeping the overall place up-to-date

You claim that this forum is unfairly structured.
I suggested that you ask @rockedge to make the change (because he's the only one who can do so).
Then you said let's not bother @rockedge.
Then what's the point of highlighting this unfairness if you don't want people to fix it?

[bigpup]

I am probably the one to talk about this forum having too many different Linux distros on it.

It is no longer possible to try and use, read about, and understand all the different Linux distros, and keep up with all in them.

Too many of them.

I do not even try too.

I just know that they are not all the same.

If you are someone that can follow everything posted on this forum.
You are in a different mental place than I am.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes it is confusing what section of the forum is about what.

The forum is titled forum.puppylinux
The main sections are about Puppy Linux.

The forum started out only about Puppy Linux and it's versions.

But has turned into a general forum for many other Linux distros.

Those other Linux distros have been given their own sections in the forum.
Talking about them needs to be in their own sections.

If nothing else, sectioning off discussion areas will make it easier to follow what is it being talked about.
If you are not using some version of Puppy Linux.
The specific distro section is the place to look for info and help.

This forum even now has a section to talk about other Linux distros out there, that are not even provided on this forum.

Maybe something on the first page of the forum needs to point this out.
That this a a forum of a collection of different Linux distros.
That the different sections are used for what.

I would think that the more space needed for the forum on the server that it is on.
The more it will cost to pay for the server service.

[jamesbond]

Takes a lot of time better lived than done finding the kind of irrelevant references I was asked to post of course. So won't be followed up despite there being several actually and more direct (riding on back statements) than this one as many already know:

Thank you for finding out the references.
But I would argue that these are outliers rather than the general sentiment.

I wouldn't put words into @bigpup's mouth, but in my opinion even his post right above mine isn't a post attacking all the non-Puppy Linux distros here. He's just advocating for better structure so that people can find what they need to find and get support from the distro they're using, Puppy Linux or not.

[jamesbond]

As an end result to be used, there really isn't a lot of difference at all between using DebianDog, or any Kennel Linux distro, or Puppy Linux, or Slax, or blahblahblah

I have to disagree with this one. Very few distros have something similar to PUPMODE 13, and the various distro that do have something like this implement it very differently - some are faster, some are more reliable, and that's a very good reason to pick one distro over others (no matter if saving is implemented using an "upstream" tool like rsync, a tool developed in-house, etc'). Same goes with other 'Puppy features'. If uniqueness is 'rubbish', all attempts to implement mostly the same thing but better are also 'rubbish' and we're all wasting our time (but maybe having fun).

Agreed. The most important part I suppose is "having fun", since @wiak keep reminding us that this is just a hobby and we shouldn't get too serious with it

[fredx181]

I agree that things have changed very much since @rockedge put online this new forum.
There were many objections in the old murga forum about the entrance of Debiandog, things said like "it's the enemy" (as if it's a war ) .
At that time there was also confusion as Debiandog topics were posted in "Puppy Projects", now there shouldn't be that sort of confusion anymore.

I've said it before, DebianDog is not Puppy and I consider the allowed section space here as being "guest", no more no less, thanks @rockedge .

[wiak]

Takes a lot of time better lived than done finding the kind of irrelevant references I was asked to post of course. So won't be followed up despite there being several actually and more direct (riding on back statements) than this one as many already know:

Thank you for finding out the references.
But I would argue that these are outliers rather than the general sentiment.

I wouldn't put words into @bigpup's mouth, but in my opinion even his post right above mine isn't a post attacking all the non-Puppy Linux distros here. He's just advocating for better structure so that people can find what they need to find and get support from the distro they're using, Puppy Linux or not.

Actually I've never quite understood why rockedge insisted on still calling it the Puppy Linux forum.

Why do you insist on putting non-Puppy stuff in this forum, when you can have your own forum? If you move your stuff to a separate forum that doesn't say "Puppy" everywhere you won't have to complain about that "obsession" you see.

Why don't you move your Vanilla stuff to a different forum. You can stay here if you want though - doesn't bother me; no threat at all.

First distro discussed on this forum. Let me see... oh, it was FirstRib. The others came over to this new forum later. Always check history before you ask someone to leave.

Outliers?

However, it wasn't me that wanted to bring up old references or even re-discuss the matter. My own comments were about my opinion that no other forum-distro should be published as the new official Puppy since that is nonsense and I'm totally against Puppy not being maintained and developed (though I'm not fond of woof-CE itself).

[dimkr]

@wiak @rockedge Do you strongly dislike the idea of renaming this forum from "Puppy Linux Discussion Forum" to something more inclusive? I think I'm 60-40 on this, mostly because "Puppy Linux" is currently more googleable than any alternatives we can think of.

I'm totally against Puppy not being maintained and developed

(Maybe I don't understand you correctly, but you you also say that nothing should be developed, so if Puppy should be developed then I don't understand why)

[wiak]

@wiak @rockedge Do you strongly dislike the idea of renaming this forum from "Puppy Linux Discussion Forum" to something more inclusive? I think I'm 60-40 on this, mostly because "Puppy Linux" is currently more googleable than any alternatives we can think of.

I'm totally against Puppy not being maintained and developed

(Maybe I don't understand you correctly, but you you also say that nothing should be developed, so if Puppy should be developed then I don't understand why)

When did I say "nothing should be developed"; sounds strange to me or maybe you misunderstood my meaning or context? BTW, I have no wish to discuss old matters like forum renaming here - that has all been discussed with answers given by rockedge. Of course there is the Puppy google-ability to take into account and lots of work trying to change domain and everything associated with all of that. It's a matter of history so not practical to change anyway (unless a parallel forum distro started, but not likely to succeed since hardly enough members of this one it seems). No, I was just in tiniest amount answering a bit of what jamesbond said - and yes, it is indeed "just a hobby" as far as I'm concerned, though some of it is very useful and interesting so I shouldn't be read wrongly there either.

[fredx181]

@wiak @rockedge Do you strongly dislike the idea of renaming this forum from "Puppy Linux Discussion Forum" to something more inclusive?

Theoretical, better could be perhaps something like "Puppy Linux Discussion Forum and more" (not requesting that, btw)
But I'd say too much talk in this thread is focused on theoretical, better focus on intuitive, for example Fatdog has always? had it's own topic in the old forum, is Fatdog a Puppy ? Did it belong there ? Theoretical I'd say perhaps not, but intuitively, of course yes.

[rockedge]

Does it have to be produced by @rockedge or @Sofiya?

I have written this so often since 2019 my fingers are numb. To be perfectly clear -> just about ANYONE with even limited knowledge can build a FirstRib. I personally have included recipe after recipe with PLENTY of encouragement and HELP to do just that. I just added a name to it I thought was cool.

@Sofiya has offered many, many recipes and one click scripts that will assemble the complete distro with NO user input needed.
She has encouraged anyone interested to give it try.......no experience necessary.

I dare anyone on this forum to find me right now equivalents to what she has created. Show me a system using Hyperland, sway, pipewire and the very latest components based on Arch Linux and Void Linux.

What she has made are absolutely unique, are fully equipped and both using upstream package management and have no substitutes.
All of what the rest of us are doing is based on ancient stuff. No matter what some say, she leads the pack.

But no one seems to care other than 2 or 3 of us.

Very few distros have something similar to PUPMODE 13

True. Lucky all of the Kennel Linux's including Sofiya's Hyprland creations have the same as does DebianDog since KLV directly borrowed the save2flash script from it.

It is no longer possible to try and use, read about, and understand all the different Linux distros, and keep up with all in them.

When was it ever? I have, among the living, the most knowledge of what is in the the Murga forum (oldforum) and even with the most dedicated, built using Google search engine technology, web site (psearch.puppylinux.com), accompanied with improved forum software search features, it's close to impossible to find specific information quickly. Despite going through the efforts to build a topic index feature, it seems it is not really used much. If it was these complaints wouldn't be posted as much.

Like any other database, it's all about the queries that are designed to extract information.

What makes a "Kennel Linux" a "Kennel Linux"?

Uses a FirstRib initrd. Is composed of ideas and actual software shamelessly "borrowed" (stolen?) and like the Dog and Cat Kennel I once worked in, took an animal from cage 1 and combined that out on the lawn with the contents of kennels 2 through to 15 to form a functioning Pack. But since there are also cats....and I'm a cat guy.....so lets give a couple of select cats that can hang with dogs out on the lawn. All kinds of dynamics there my friends..........

Kennel Linux takes lots of existing ideas and tries to put a operating system together that #1 works, #2 works for me.

I was a Kennel worker in another life........thinking back most of those "clients" wanted to rip my face off most of the time....and most of the time that was their owners or better put, "family".

@dimkr Don't worry, you work is also outstanding and is going in good directions while being cutting edge.

[jamesbond]

But I'd say too much talk in this thread is focused on theoretical, better focus on intuitive, for example Fatdog has always? had it's own topic in the old forum,

Correction: Fatdog did not have its own topic on the old forum, and we never asked for it either. Fatdog posts were located in Puppy Projects, and we tried to contain discussions about Fatdog in those particular posts only and not elsewhere.

When we moved to this forum we were pleasantly surprised that we were given our own topic presence - and I must thank both @rockedge and @wiak that made that happen.

is Fatdog a Puppy ?

Short answer: Originally, yes, but not anymore. Fatdog started live as a puplet (=remaster, literally, a modified version of a released Puppy). Then it became a derivative, built from Woof (the original Woof from Barry, not Woof-CE, because Woof-CE didn't exist back then) using own self-built packages. Then finally, it went on separate ways and became independent, separate from Puppy, sharing nothing except ideas and ideals, though we still acknowledge our heritage (or shall I say "pedigree" ). Personally I'd like to call Fatdog as a "grown-up puppy" (note small "p" in "puppy" not capital "P")

Long answer: http://distro.ibiblio.org/fatdog/web/history.html

Did it belong there ? Theoretical I'd say perhaps not, but intuitively, of course yes.

Well if the question is "does it belong here in the forum today"? Then the answer would be up to @rockedge as the forum owner. We can only thank him for his generosity to let us camp here in our own little corner (I try not to talk about Fatdog in threads and posts outside Fatdog topic, unless started/asked by others - e.g. in this post).

What makes a "Kennel Linux" a "Kennel Linux"?

Uses a FirstRib initrd.

Thank you for the succint, yet clear, answer.

There you go guys, as the one who coined the name "Kennel Linux", @rockedge has provided a definitive definition that anything that uses FirstRib initrd can be called as "Kennel Linux". It's not the build system. It's not the creator of the distro. It's initrd that matters: if it is FirstRib then it is Kennel.

Don't we all hope that we have similar clarity when it comes to the question of "What makes Puppy Linux a Puppy Linux"?

[rockedge]

Well if the question is "does it belong here in the forum today"?

Yes it does. FatDog, it's like Puppy Linux's 1st cousin with a University degree.

Do you strongly dislike the idea of renaming this forum from "Puppy Linux Discussion Forum" to something more inclusive?

I am open to the idea. We do have the original still operating.