Whats up in Puppy World

[dogcat]

I have said all that I wanted to say.
I'll leave it to the readers to make their own conclusion.
Thank you for your willingness to spar with me in the last 3 pages of this thread.
It has been very invigorating.

Me being a reader I can tell you that it was a forgone conclusion for anyone that has spent some months in this forum reading about rubbish and nutjobs.

[RSH]

@wiak

A year and a half after my initial MakePup release I began FirstRib and basically had to move on to concentrate on that per my last MakePup post in Mar 2019.

Is that FirstRib useful to create a new Puppy?
Or does it use WoofCE in background like MakePup?

[rockedge]

Is that FirstRib useful to create a new Puppy?

No not directly.

Or does it use WoofCE in background like MakePup?

FirstRib is not a Puppy Linux and uses a completely independent build system script(s) that were written from scratch.

It is a build script that uses a PLUG file which is a recipe of what to build in a text file. FirstRib uses it's own initrd

The closest I ever got was taking the FirstRib initrd and used a puppy_fossapup64_9.6.sfs as the root file system with it, which with some refinement works. I tend to stick with Void Linux builds though because of the ease of using it's xbps package manager to install the operating system around itself.

[RSH]

I was curious, so I tried to build a Puppy from Ubuntu Noble 64bit via WoofCE.
It exited with error to buid the kernel.

Code: Select all

Installing HUGE kernel to build/
wget: missing URL
Usage: wget [OPTION]... [URL]...

Try `wget --help' for more options.
Could not get kernel list

Would it be possible just to create the Noble's .sfs files manually and add another kernel manually?

[RSH]

Ok, I found 3 directories in sandbox3.
There was devx, fdrv and rootfs-complete.
I created .sfs files from these directories via PackIt.
For the ease of testing I renamed these files to fit to my Fossa64CE remaster.
Added the initrd, vmlinuz and the zdrv from my Fossa64CE remaster
to the install directory.
Rebooted the computer.

Booted into graphical desktop but no wallpaper.
Setting a wallpaper manually worked.
Could setup the first settings for language, country and keyboard.
Menu was there and programs from the menu were usable.
Though, most icons were missing from the categories.

Now the trouble started.

Rox filer did not catch mouse-clicks and also no keyboard action was caught by Rox filer.
Could also not mount the drives by drive icons at the desktop.
PMount worked fine. but this didn't help for open directories etc.pp.

So, here's my questions:

- is anyone able and willing to add all that kernel stuff to let 3builddistr-Z build the kernel for Noble Puppy?
- if not, is there a way to finish 3builddistr-Z without the kernel being built?

Thanks.

[rockedge]

Ok, I found 3 directories in sandbox3.
There was devx, fdrv and rootfs-complete.
I created .sfs files from these directories via PackIt.
For the ease of testing I renamed these files to fit to my Fossa64CE remaster.
Added the initrd, vmlinuz and the zdrv from my Fossa64CE remaster
to the install directory.

I have done the same thing! Only worked a little bit.

if not, is there a way to finish 3builddistr-Z without the kernel being built?

Yes there is. You can manually download an appropriate huge kernel that is put together in the usrmerge file structure scheme. So now there is a difference between the non-usrmerge (Bionicpup, Fossapup and earlier) and the newer Puppy's that are using usrmerge. Which is the /bin, /sbin and /lib are symlinks to /usr/bin or /usr/lib

Take the downloaded huge kernel you have picked and place it in the woof-out directory ->
/mnt/sdb1/woof-out_x86_64_x86_64_ubuntu_noble64/huge_kernel

the ./3builddistro script will use the kernel it finds in this directory. Make sure the huge kernel is built in the usrmerge scheme

[RSH]

@rockedge
Thanks.

But, where do I download such usrmerge kernel?
Wget was missing the url.

[rockedge]

@RSH I can recommend trying this one -> 6.6.25 64bit USRMERGE LOW-LATENCY Kernel Aufs/Overlayfs

[RSH]

Ok, I downloaded the kernel and ran 3builddistro-Z again.
The ISO was 71Mb only.
See Screenshot.

ISO-Content.jpg (29.92 KiB) Viewed 635 times

[RSH]

@rockedge

Ok, I created the .sfs files from devx, fdrv and rootfs-complete
again manually and copied to the install directroy. Added the files from within the ISO.

Booted again and hey, there I am!

Everything that failed last time is now working.
I'm immediately online, which failed last time also.

Screenshot:

NobleScreenshot.png (149.41 KiB) Viewed 623 times

Though, there's something annoying.
The fdrv .sfs is at 471 Mb.
I might try to build again from scratch...

[retiredt00]

Dear all
after 15 pages I would like to say that we went from a situation in the old forum that non-puppy distributions were met with "skepticism" to a new forum that Puppylinux (the distribution) per se, is "questionable".
In the mean time puppy's popularity and more important releases is precipitating and a multitude of puppy-aspirred distribution are developed but hardly known outside the few hundred regulars of this forum.
I wonder who is really satisfied with the current status other than wiak that through the years succeeded to push everyone that he did not agree with, outside this forum and puppylinux.
And now that the war is won we are looking for a Puppylinux release to increase traffic in this forum so all the 'rubbish' here get some more exposure
However, wiak is NOT the problem. He certainly has a strong opinion and he has succeeded to dominate the place and become the second in line in this forum, but everyone is entitled to an opinion and has the right to fight for it.
The real problem is that Puppylinux has NO developer and No direction.
dimkr, the last prolific puppy developer, although he has some clear direction, never declared his vaniillas as puppylinux distributions to be announced outside this forum.
Before him another prolific developer, wdlkmpx/aaaaa, was bashed sufficiently and never released anything after half a million lines of code changed in woof-CE.
01micko the previous prolific developer was the last one to release something and gone for some time now from everything puppy/woof-CE and mavrothal that initiated this terrible idea of collaborative woof to continue Barry Kauler's work, is long gone from puppy and woof-ce after similar treatment
So there is a vacuum that many forum members aspire to fill but as clearly stated in the previous 15 pages with no clear idea/direction
However, linux users are usually knowledgable persons and can see half baked goods from a mile away and they are not going to approach this place for any reason other than observe the quarrel of a distribution demise.
Let's not forget that distrowatch still quotes S15pup as the lates release no matter how the top handful of forum dogs proceed with their psychotherapy.
So you may stop arguing and put something out beyond the mud walls of this forum, for the linux crowd to see, judge and appreciate.
Otherwise officially or not 'Rubbish Discussion Forum' will be the name of this forum if rockedge is still willing to pay for it

[RSH]

@rockedge

Ok, I started completely from scratch including
a new git clone of WoofCE.

The results are equal to here.

Edit:

It doesn't create an adrv .sfs.
Is this created manually using contents preferred by its developer?

Edit 2:

I had to download libblas3 and liblapack3 again to install to get mpv starting and working.
Now works fine.

Ok, don't want to destroy this topic, so I will continue this in my own topic.
I will see, how far I can get with that version to make a new LazY Puppy.
Since I don't need to remaster a Puppy there's no need to remove and modify stuff
by destroying the work of other developers.

I assume this must be done in Puppy Derivatives.

[dimkr]

The real problem is that Puppylinux has NO developer and No direction.

@peebee and zigbert push commits every once in a while but not frequently and it's mostly small changes from what I see. 'Change as little as possible' is a direction

[wiak]

I have said all that I wanted to say.
I'll leave it to the readers to make their own conclusion.
Thank you for your willingness to spar with me in the last 3 pages of this thread.
It has been very invigorating.

Me being a reader I can tell you that it was a forgone conclusion for anyone that has spent some months in this forum reading about rubbish and nutjobs.

In fact, if you do some forum reading you will see here one of the 'gang'; gangs are the antithesis to friendly cooperative social community. However, move on guys and end your nonsense, which has no further place on this thread or in this newer Puppy World where all forum projects are respected for their community-oriented value.

[wiak]

FirstRib is not a Puppy Linux and uses a completely independent build system script(s) that were written from scratch.

It is a build script that uses a PLUG file which is a recipe of what to build in a text file. FirstRib uses it's own initrd

And that is the point, @rockedge; the part of FirstRib build system that makes it easy and convenient and allows user overall build control and involvement is the PLUG file concept. The FirstRib build system starts by building a simple core system which includes simple package management, and then a plug file gets shell script sourced to use that package management to build the rest of the system.

I suggest that concept of FirstRib be copied and used by woof-CE. No need to use FirstRib itself. All you need is woof-CE tidied up and minimised to minimum build that includes package manager. That's what main firstrib build system does for Void Linux using static xbps package manager, but also for Debian-based system using debootstrap, and for Arch Linux using archstrap; thereafter, you simple add final stage, which is simply to shell script source a PLUG file (that basically using package manager commands and shell script configs to build the rest of the system per user individual design/choice, which takes power away from build system developer and puts most all of it into the hands of the user/creator/builder, which is how current KL distro design/build is done so well by whoever so chooses).

In other words, if I was doing this my approach would be to use minimised (any old rubbish code removed) woof-CE up to the stage of package management (different function for alternative distro package managers, which is how it is done in FirstRib) and then simply shell script source a PLUG file. Yes, that could be added into FirstRib build script - would include a function that simply made a call to the minimise woof-CE build (using it like debootstrap) and then thereafter like all FirstRib builds the PLUG file gets sourced and takes over the rest of the build.

End result is the the PLUG file becomes key to how the final system will look, feel, and operate. That is how and why it is not necessary to be hard-core developer to begin building via FirstRib build system, yet most of the work does in fact become the design of the user/builder since it is their PLUG file that is under their own copyright.

So, for above FirstRIb approach to become Puppy build system you need Puppy dev(s) to simply slim down and fix woof-CE to minimised build system up to whatever package manager stage you want, and thereafter simply shell script source PLUG file (the FirstRib approach). Then all you need to do is acknowledge FirstRib for showing the way hahaha

[Clarity]

@RSH and @rockedge

Does this work by @peebee help in explanation toward your efforts in WoofCE?

If helpful, run with it.

[dimkr]

Then all you need to do is acknowledge FirstRib for showing the way hahaha

I admire the logical flow that leads your argument towards this inevitable, big and bold conclusion.

[dogcat]

I have said all that I wanted to say.
I'll leave it to the readers to make their own conclusion.
Thank you for your willingness to spar with me in the last 3 pages of this thread.
It has been very invigorating.

Me being a reader I can tell you that it was a forgone conclusion for anyone that has spent some months in this forum reading about rubbish and nutjobs.

In fact, if you do some forum reading you will see here one of the 'gang'; gangs are the antithesis to friendly cooperative social community. However, move on guys and end your nonsense, which has no further place on this thread or in this newer Puppy World where all forum projects are respected for their community-oriented value.

A little searching through the forum would prove you have been the single biggest contributor to most forum "disharmony" since this new forum was enacted. But hey, don't let the facts get in the way of your lies or your agenda.

[rockedge]

or your agenda.

glad for the deflection! I was worried you'd wonder what my "agenda" might be.

one might think I was a front runner in the conspiracy theories.....never mind all those quotes I've made about Global Domination....it's only that slight bit of Americanization. I'm sure you have a picture in your mind now.

a dogcat, is that a result of genetic engineering? One of my brothers works with CRISPR...asking for a friend (as they say downtown)

[wiak]

A little searching through the forum would prove you have been the single biggest contributor to most forum "disharmony" since this new forum was enacted. But hey, don't let the facts get in the way of your lies or your agenda.

It is possible that I have been a major contributor (perhaps the major, I don't know) in the posted observation that Puppy Linux no longer rules everything in this forum and has not done so since at least 2013 when DebianDog appeared in puppy-like form, but full apt compatible and full-multi-user capable. I became a little involved with DebianDog, but had a very minor role in that event, which as a distribution undoubtedly steered some forum members away from using Puppy Linux as their go-to forum distro. However it is ridiculous that any comments by any individual or individuals could lead to people deserting Puppy or its forum and certainly not the cause of hardly anyone left developing woof-CE. If I predicted any part of this Puppy future then what I warned of long ago should have been addressed to prevent its occurrence, which you painfully all face today; there is nothing negative about being warned early on that there were problems with old-timers insisting on sticking to an old traditional look-and-feel, unsatisfactory package management and build system code base.

The alternative to developing the distro is inevitably for that distro to decline and for users to move elsewhere including to other forum featured distros. I've generally always myself touted DebianDog as the go-to distro of this forum, and I definitely continue to do so despite some of the great work being done on some Kennel Linux distro work. For anyone who wants to have fun building their own distro creation, I certainly do suggest they take a look at FirstRib as a reasonably simple way to get into that, but I don't myself care if they do or not or prefer to try their hand at woof-CE, but good luck to them in that latter case.

Anyway, like it or not, this "Kennels forum", which in this thread is being referred to as the "Puppy World", is far now from being only the domain of one distro, and it seems that many here now also feel that Puppy Linux itself is in a bit of trouble in terms of its development. Did I cause that as some part of black magic agenda? Of course not. FirstRib as a project was in fact voluntarily withdrawn by myself into the Off Topics - Other distros area, but I accepted that the likes of @rockedge were using it for their Kennel Linux builds, and assured them that I'd continue to support the build system for anyone who wished to use it. But they didn't have to use if they didn't want to; I did not at all stop rockedge or Sofiya or geo_c or whoever from concentrating instead on Puppy Linux development, and I doubt they will say "it was all wiak's fault cos he hypnotised us with propaganda and we are all now drugged".

Well at least now, since FIrstRib introduced Void Linux creations to the forum back in 2019, Puppy Linux later came out with VoidPup, and after FirstRib brought out an sfs for Puppy of apt/dpkg, Puppy development moved to using apt/dpkg Debian release too, and after FirstRib led the way with overlayfs here, Puppy finally jumped on that bandwagon too, and similarly with moving away from only using alsa for sound system (maybe I can be cursed for that too???). No I do not take credit for these changes in the Puppy world, but I wouldn't be too surprised if some of the work appearing in Kennel Linux area influenced some of these Puppy Linux efforts, and is that a negative thing? At least I did develop something and didn't just talk about it.

[rockedge]

it was all wiak's fault cos he hypnotized us with propaganda and we are all now drugged

Awwww man.......I thought it was the good weed and knowing a great idea when I see one.........I advocated a lot for FirstRib...still do......

can always distract a DebianDog.......watch...............SQUIRREL.........

[dimkr]

it is ridiculous that any comments by any individual or individuals could lead to people deserting Puppy or its forum and certainly not the cause of hardly anyone left developing woof-CE.

Describing the work of Puppy developers as pointless, deprecated and inferior rubbish certainly doesn't attract new contributors, and FR isn't going to replace woof-CE anytime soon because they're very different and build different things with advantages and disadvantages for different kinds of users.

There are ways to be more constructive than this when talking about the future of Puppy: we need more contributors, ones that can lay out a vision based on what users want and available development capacity, then do the work. Discouraging potential contributors and proposing unrealistic or irrelevant ideas definitely doesn't help, even if you're right and this attitude is not the primary reason we reached this state of affairs in Puppy development.

[wiak]

I wonder who is really satisfied with the current status other than wiak that through the years succeeded to push everyone that he did not agree with, outside this forum and puppylinux.
And now that the war is won we are looking for a Puppylinux release to increase traffic in this forum so all the 'rubbish' here get some more exposure
...
Let's not forget that distrowatch still quotes S15pup as the lates release no matter how the top handful of forum dogs proceed with their psychotherapy.
So you may stop arguing and put something out beyond the mud walls of this forum, for the linux crowd to see, judge and appreciate.
Otherwise officially or not 'Rubbish Discussion Forum' will be the name of this forum if rockedge is still willing to pay for it

That was an amusing post. I enjoyed it, despite some ridiculous assertions.

[wiak]

There are ways to be more constructive than this when talking about the future of Puppy: we need more contributors, ones that can lay out a vision based on what users want and available development capacity, then do the work. Discouraging potential contributors and proposing unrealistic or irrelevant ideas definitely doesn't help, even if you're right and this attitude is not the primary reason we reached this state of affairs in Puppy development.

Well you need to focus on that, so why don't you get on with that in a Puppy Linux thread; this is a more generic thread about general "What's up" matters in the overall forum.

I think most all of us know that you chose not to put Vanilla Dpup latest release forward as a version of Puppy Linux, which some might say was not particularly helpful of you in terms of the future of Puppy Linux itself; but not my call - up to you.

[wiak]

Then all you need to do is acknowledge FirstRib for showing the way hahaha

I admire the logical flow that leads your argument towards this inevitable, big and bold conclusion.

Logical flow? Inevitable conclusion? Doesn't matter any of that, but actually the idea works in practice as Kennel Linux distros well evidence, and would for woof-CE Puppy building too...

As said way back in May 2019:

https://oldforum.puppylinux.com/viewtopic.php?t=116212

FirstRib build rootfs is defined by its key design feature of "busybox static plus native package manager" with extension via plugin module (firstrib00.plug). Best is when native package manager is usable on its own in FirstRib, such as Void xbps can be, otherwise latest FirstRib obtains it, either as native package manager (preferred, and as in current version), or via some kind of bootstrap skeleton, such as debootstrap or arch-bootstrap.

Or, obviously I'd say, the bootstrap skeleton could be a minimised woof-CE, and the resulting Puppy Linux could become an optional build of FirstRIb, which pretty clearly, would be painful to some. Of course it would still require woof-CE (in minimised form) but, let's face it, latest Puppy fork Vanilla Dpup itself relies on a bootstrap skeleton script system (debootstrap from Debian - yes, same one as DebianDog uses...).

So, for above FirstRIb approach to become Puppy build system you need Puppy dev(s) to simply slim down and fix woof-CE to minimised build system up to whatever package manager stage you want, and thereafter simply shell script source PLUG file (the FirstRib approach). Then all you need to do is acknowledge FirstRib for showing the way hahaha

But if no one wanting to develop woof-CE in this matter, that's up to them; I'm not myself intending becoming a Puppy Linux dev since I have enough to do already.

[BologneChe]

@wanderer

Consensus is far away. The debate is more and more sterile and goes in circles.

[wiak]

@wanderer

Consensus is far away. The debate is more and more sterile and goes in circles.

If it is a "debate", what is the debate?

Though I've been asked to provide references and links and to answer various resulting attacks after kindly doing so, I continue to believe this thread shouldn't require any of these things but instead is intended to be

...
a more generic thread about general "What's up" matters in the overall forum.
...

That's why I ask those who have turned the topic into an interrogation (which simply wastes their time and mine) to take their thoughts about Puppy Linux distro future to an appropriate Puppy Linux development thread instead.

[dimkr]

I think most all of us know that you chose not to put Vanilla Dpup latest release forward as a version of Puppy Linux, which some might say was not particularly helpful of you in terms of the future of Puppy Linux itself; but not my call - up to you.

It's the only currently maintained Puppy derivative that's fully reproducible by an open-source and freely available build system. Others are built from a private fork of woof-CE or contain prebuilt packages. This is what made BookwormPup64 and eventually BookwormPup32 possible. In addition, many bug fixes and optimizations that went into BookwormPup64 but also most other recent releases originally came from my work on Vanilla Dpup. Just look at the commit log if you don't believe me. If this is not helpful for Puppy, I don't know what is.

The reason I refused to call Vanilla Dpup "Puppy Linux" is simple: there are debates about what Puppy is and many want the successor to the latest 'official' release to have the same set of features they're used to or more, but not less, and my dpup builds are relatively plain, boring, minimalistic and 'unorthodox' (they're big, use overlay, etc'). I don't want to prevent others from becoming a new project lead or BDFL for Puppy, and build the next 'official' Puppy that doesn't upset anyone and looks like a natural upgrade path for most existing users.

In addition, I see no reason to do this: I can call it 'official Puppy Linux', but why? To fool users that this is what they should use when I know they're used to a larger set of preinstalled applications?

the idea works in practice as Kennel Linux distros well evidence, and would for woof-CE Puppy building too...

Anyone who tries to implement this idea of replacing big parts of woof-CE with a thin wrapper around debootstrap will hit big problems like how to support Slackware or Void packages, how make legacy .pet packages work, etc'. This idea worked in other contexts, but it's not necessarily a good idea for something advertised as a new version of Puppy.

[wiak]

I think most all of us know that you chose not to put Vanilla Dpup latest release forward as a version of Puppy Linux, which some might say was not particularly helpful of you in terms of the future of Puppy Linux itself; but not my call - up to you.

It's the only currently maintained Puppy derivative that's fully reproducible by an open-source and freely available build system. Others are built from a private fork of woof-CE or contain prebuilt packages. This is what made BookwormPup64 and eventually BookwormPup32 possible. In addition, many bug fixes and optimizations that went into BookwormPup64 but also most other recent releases originally came from my work on Vanilla Dpup. Just look at the commit log if you don't believe me. If this is not helpful for Puppy, I don't know what is.

The reason I refused to call Vanilla Dpup "Puppy Linux" is simple: there are debates about what Puppy is and many want the successor to the latest 'official' release to have the same set of features they're used to or more, but not less, and my dpup builds are relatively plain, boring, minimalistic and 'unorthodox' (they're big, use overlay, etc'). I don't want to prevent others from becoming a new project lead or BDFL for Puppy, and build the next 'official' Puppy that doesn't upset anyone and looks like a natural upgrade path for most existing users.

In addition, I see no reason to do this: I can call it 'official Puppy Linux', but why? To fool users that this is what they should use when I know they're used to a larger set of preinstalled applications?

the idea works in practice as Kennel Linux distros well evidence, and would for woof-CE Puppy building too...

Anyone who tries to implement this idea of replacing big parts of woof-CE with a thin wrapper around debootstrap will hit big problems like how to support Slackware or Void packages, how make legacy .pet packages work, etc'. This idea worked in other contexts, but it's not necessarily a good idea for something advertised as a new version of Puppy.

Well, I don't disagree with any of the above, but something is needed put forward for Puppy Linux future and as Vanilla Dpup diverges from the woof-CE Bookworm Pup uses, the future becomes somewhat doubtful with no one taking over woof-CE development (even if a few contributions are occasionally still made to it - like to Pmusic, for example...).

[rockedge]

'Rubbish Discussion Forum' will be the name of this forum if rockedge is still willing to pay for it

I'm not happy with this statement.....rubs me the wrong way somehow....matter of fact the entire discussion has me question (again) what I'm doing here.

All of it is giving me a stressful feeling....not good, people not good......I must react or no?