DistroWatch needs a newer Puppy version listed for Puppy Linux!!!!!

[fredx181]

Regarding Distrowatch, my experience with them is always immediate response.
I didn't even have to tell them when EasyOS 6.0 was released; somehow they just picked up on it and announced it.

Perhaps because your name is BarryK ?

[BarryK]

Regarding Distrowatch, my experience with them is always immediate response.
I didn't even have to tell them when EasyOS 6.0 was released; somehow they just picked up on it and announced it.

Perhaps because your name is BarryK ?

If that's the case, I can help out.

I just looked at Distrowatch, the last pup announced on 2022-12-10, so you are trying to get them to announce the latest?

I haven't read all of this thread, so I don't know what the holdup is, but if I do carry some weight with Jesse and Ladislav at Distrowatch, then maybe I can get things moving.

@wanderer
Send me a pm, what it is that you want them to announce, keeping in mind that you need to provide all the info I listed, and I will review it then contact Distrowatch.

[wanderer]

hi barry k and everyone

i am posting this on this thread instead of sending a pm
because i want everyone to read it

i think what happened was
we sent in the information piecemeal
which entailed multiple emails
which as barry k said probably annoyed them
so they did some odd stuff probably to show they were annoyed

i think it is unwise to contact them for a while

the date of the submission is correct
the screenshot is correct
the link to the forum is correct
and the link to the homepage is correct

other things are in error or not updated
but we can live with that for a while

i think what we should do is
as barry k suggested

get absolutely everything together to submit to them before we contact them again

so until that is done i do not intend to do anything

and i dont think we should contact them until we have our next submission

we will then have new info for them to post
so they will not be messing with the same stuff
we have already sent them multiple emails about
that annoyed them in the first place

this is a good lesson for the future
next time we will do it right

wanderer

[dogcat]

hi barry k and everyone

i am posting this on this thread instead of sending a pm
because i want everyone to read it

i think what happened was
we sent in the information piecemeal
which entailed multiple emails
which as barry k said probably annoyed them
so they did some odd stuff probably to show they were annoyed

i think it is unwise to contact them for a while

the date of the submission is correct
the screenshot is correct
the link to the forum is correct
and the link to the homepage is correct

other things are in error or not updated
but we can live with that for a while

i think what we should do is
as barry k suggested

get absolutely everything together to submit to them before we contact them again

so until that is done i do not intend to do anything

and i dont think we should contact them until we have our next submission

we will then have new info for them to post
so they will not be messing with the same stuff
we have already sent them multiple emails about
that annoyed them in the first place

this is a good lesson for the future
next time we will do it right

wanderer

Hang in there wanderer! It has been proven that if you didn't step up then nobody would (at least nobody had yet, both times). Many people want to pitch in to help once the plan is set though, and that is a good thing.

As far as getting a recent Puppy listed on distrowatch you can consider it mission completed.
Thanks for keeping Puppy current on distrowatch.

[wiak]

It doesn't actually matter to me personally at all at this particular time, and I've said so, but I do wonder what all the fuss is about Puppy Linux getting all forum member attention to create a 'presence on Distrowatch', but the same isn't being done for any other distro featured in the forum... Okay, so I get it that FatDog is produced by a selected team, and EasyOS by BarryK, and DebianDogs primarily by fredx181.

So I've seen the view written that the distro "author" should create that presence if they so want to, which I thought sounded fine... at first glance. But thinking about it further: 'who' is the author of Kennel Linux distros???! Okay, so I admit what is known: I'm the author of the FirstRib build system that starts the whole KL build off (at least all KLs currently) by creating a (very very minimum) core version of what will become the KL distro, and I provide the key general purpose FR init component that gives current KL distros all the underlying overlayfs tricks that user-utilities (such as KL variant of save2flash) can take advantage of.

However, whilst I started many of these off via many early exemplars for Void Linux first releases and the likes of old WDL_Arch64 and some others, I really cannot claim 'ownership' of all of the current KL distros. It is the plug file (like a template) that the firstrib build system provides for creating most of the KL distro that determines most of the final result aside from the in-common frugal install features brought by the FR initrd component. It is @rockedge that primarily builds and maintains KLV-AIredale64, and it is @Sofiya that builds and maintains several Arch Linux and also Void Linux KL variants (including KLs based on Openbox, Hyperland, Spectr and others...). i.e. whilst I provide a build system and a special initrd as part of that (and a few less often developed KL distros of my own), the overall Kennel Linux section is community distro build oriented, so I don't see that I am likely any time soon to publish (don't have time anyway), for example KLA_Hyperland or KLV-Airedale onto Distrowatch.

But why are we being asked to only care about Puppy Linux when these forum-community-produced KL efforts do not have any Distrowatch presence at all?!!!??? Suit yourselves, but makes no sense to me nowadays in the overall scheme of things here. Or am I simply being the Devil's advocate in the mind of some dogs and cats?

Yes, as I said above, I get it that FatDog is produced by a selected team, and EasyOS by BarryK, but KL is community-oriented (isn't it?) like Puppy is (I've heard woof-CE is supposed to be anyway), even though current KL examples use my creation "the FirstRib build system" to organise the build. Over to wanderer...

[williwaw]

But why are we being asked to only care about Puppy Linux when these forum-community-produced KL efforts do not have any Distrowatch presence at all?!!!???

by having distrowatch link to puppylinux.com as the homepage instead of directly to https://puppylinux-woof-ce.github.io/, there is an easy way to call the attention of distrowatch users to various other projects.
dirstrowatch does this for suse and fedora etc.....

puppylinux.com can be anything the community chooses at any time without having to frequently submit small edits to the distrowatch site maintainers

[rockedge]

It is @rockedge that primarily builds and maintains KLV-Airedale......

and because I was interested in working with a tiling window manager and it was easy to take KLV-Airedale's core PLUG and replace XFCE4 with Spectrwm and it developed into KLV-Spectr-rc2 and my favorite KLV-Spectr-RT. I used @Sofiya's polish plus bar design and @geo_c's key bindings. I found that KLV using the Spectrwm window manager and desktop environment and a huge full real time kernel turned out to be the fastest lightest operating system I've encountered. Excellent for audio, video production and software synthesizers and digital equipment. Super low latency with the RT kernels.

Runs LinuxCNC and ZoneMinder very well.

Works well with the same kernels as KLV-Airedale including Void Linux kernels.

Spectrwm was chosen at first based on that the configuration is a text file with relatively easy syntax with intuitive parameters.

[dimkr]

puppylinux.com can be anything the community chooses at any time

As long as changes are submitted to https://github.com/puppylinux-woof-CE/p ... .github.io by somebody with permissions

[peebee]

As long as changes are submitted to https://github.com/puppylinux-woof-CE/p ... .github.io

Pull requests welcomed:
https://puppylinux-woof-ce.github.io/faq.html
from
https://github.com/puppylinux-woof-CE/p ... ter/faq.md

About other Puppy Linux-like distributions
Q: Is DebianDog considered as Puppy Linux?
A: No. The maintainer itself has said so. Further more it is not built from Woof-CE. But it seeks to emulate most if not all of Puppy Linux features and behaviours; that if you are familiar with Puppy you would be right at home about it.

Q: If DebianDog is not Puppy, why do you support them, or even mention them here?
A: DebianDog is considerd as a member of Puppy Linux family of operating systems.

Q: Is Quirky Linux considered as Puppy Linux? It is also made by Barry.
A: No, Barry himself has stated multiple times that Quirky is not Puppy. Just like DebianDog, Quirky is a member of Puppy Linux family.

Q: Is Fatdog64 considered as Puppy Linux?
A: No. It was originally forked from Puppy Linux 4.0, but it has since took a different path (of doing the same thing). Like DebianDog and Quirky, however, it is considered as part of Puppy Linux family.

[wanderer]

yes

they are all members of the puppy linux family

i like that

wanderer

[retiredt00]

Dear all
at least it looks like that this 3-month long discussion may have helped some puppy family "members" even if puppylinux per se is going down without a formal distrowatch announcement.
Maybe is time to play by distrowatch rules and do an announcement as Barry Kauler indicated above and maybe solicit his support, since trying to convince DW to conform with the forum ideas does not appear to be working

[wiak]

Dear all
at least it looks like that this 3-month long discussion may have helped some puppy family "members" even if puppylinux per se is going down without a formal distrowatch announcement.
Maybe is time to play by distrowatch rules and do an announcement as Barry Kauler indicated above and maybe solicit his support, since trying to convince DW to conform with the forum ideas does not appear to be working

Have you considered the possibility that in the Linux world more generally the design/ideas embodied in easyOS may simply be of wider interest nowadays than the traditional Puppy Linux design?

[retiredt00]

Dear wiak
I consider a lot of things that help me go by easier at this stage of my life
But then there is the real world providing evidence and I strongly think that the wider linux world checks more often the new announcements in distrowatch rather than scanning the countless forums for new fresh ideas.

[pp4mnklinux]

Dear all
at least it looks like that this 3-month long discussion may have helped some puppy family "members" even if puppylinux per se is going down without a formal distrowatch announcement.
Maybe is time to play by distrowatch rules and do an announcement as Barry Kauler indicated above and maybe solicit his support, since trying to convince DW to conform with the forum ideas does not appear to be working

Have you considered the possibility that in the Linux world more generally the design/ideas embodied in easyOS may simply be of wider interest nowadays than the traditional Puppy Linux design?

My summary:- "Actions, not words." (edited - Fully agree with @retiredt00 ~ @BarryK is doing while others are talking.... +14 pages and 403 posts)

Dear wiak
I consider a lot of things that help me go by easier at this stage of my life
But then there is the real world providing evidence and I strongly think that the wider linux world checks more often the new announcements in distrowatch rather than scanning the countless forums for new fresh ideas.

My summary and explanation with an image, +282 versus -282

And the general perception is that EasyOs is alive, simply consider this: viewtopic.php?p=121966#p121966

Version 6.0.4, July 7, 2024
Discussion starts on page 7:
viewtopic.php?p=125239#p125239

Version 6.0.2, June 24, 2024
Discussion starts on page 6:
viewtopic.php?p=124049#p124049

Version 6.0, June 18, 2024
See post on page 4:
viewtopic.php?p=123310#p123310

[wiak]

My summary:- "Actions, not words." (edited - Fully agree with @retiredt00 ~ @BarryK is doing while others are talking.... +14 pages and 403 posts)

Of course, but for some of us 'talking' is just a way of socialising or filling in time whilst relaxing prior to getting on with 'doing' again.

I don't disagree at all that the likes of Distrowatch encourages new users to try distros, nor that lack of development results in a distro (or any project for that matter) becoming more 'dead'. However, I do not understand anyone feeling the need to criticise others for lack of 'action'; if you want to continue making some project or other no one stops anyone from simply getting on with it, but at same time why criticise anyone who has no interest in developing their own projects? Nor does everyone even want to use the same things, be that project utility apps, or distros for that matter. Fine that some want to use DebianDog, some want to use Puppy Linux, some want to use KL distros, some want to use EasyOS, some want to use FatDog, or whatever??? But so what? Just because someone else uses, say FatDog, doesn't mean I want to! Matter of personal choice at the end of the day.

[pp4mnklinux]

My summary:- "Actions, not words." (edited - Fully agree with @retiredt00 ~ @BarryK is doing while others are talking.... +14 pages and 403 posts)

Of course, but for some of us 'talking' is just a way of socialising or filling in time whilst relaxing prior to getting on with 'doing' again.

I don't disagree at all that the likes of Distrowatch encourages new users to try distros, nor that lack of development results in a distro (or any project for that matter) becoming more 'dead'. However, I do not understand anyone feeling the need to criticise others for lack of 'action'; if you want to continue making some project or other no one stops anyone from simply getting on with it, but at same time why criticise anyone who has no interest in developing their own projects? Nor does everyone even want to use the same things, be that project utility apps, or distros for that matter. Fine that some want to use DebianDog, some want to use Puppy Linux, some want to use KL distros, some want to use EasyOS, some want to use FatDog, or whatever??? But so what? Just because someone else uses, say FatDog, doesn't mean I want to! Matter of personal choice at the end of the day.

Ahhh... sorry, @wiak, my error thinking that you are looking for solutions when you are talking as a way of socialising or filling time.

Excuse my missunderstood, sorry.

I do not understand anyone feeling the need to criticise others for lack of 'action'

Neither do I (My comment is not a criticism but an explanation of the reason why perhaps the use of Puppy Linux is not advancing, it is locked because there is no action and... "If it doesn't move, it's standing still."


Have a nice day u all.-

[wiak]

My summary:- "Actions, not words." (edited - Fully agree with @retiredt00 ~ @BarryK is doing while others are talking.... +14 pages and 403 posts)

Of course, but for some of us 'talking' is just a way of socialising or filling in time whilst relaxing prior to getting on with 'doing' again.

Ahhh... sorry, @wiak, my error thinking that you are looking for solutions when you are talking as a way of socialising or filling time.

Excuse my missunderstood, sorry.

Perhaps it is a problem in communication between different cultures, but I have to say that you come across to my ears as being somewhat sarcastic. I mean that is fine - I really don't mind, but just to clear any misunderstanding up about my own communication: when I talk about socialising or filling in time whilst relaxing prior to getting on with 'doing' again, my strategy for filling in that time (and socialising) is indeed an attempt to look for 'solutions' during the conversations - this is a technical forum afterall, not a rave party per se.

Have you considered the possibility that the distro Puppy Linux is just getting a bit 'old' and perhaps needs a bit of a redesign. I think you were supporting XFCE frontend, which seems like a good idea to me (along with anything Wayland of course).

[dimkr]

Have you considered the possibility that the distro Puppy Linux is just getting a bit 'old' and perhaps needs a bit of a redesign.

That depends on your goals and the solutions you choose, I guess. If your main problem with Puppy is boot time, there are many ways to reduce boot time and some of them don't require big changes or redesign. I find it hard to understand the 'why' part of many ideas or proposals in this thread.

[peebee]

The BookwormPup64 build recipe is now available on Github Woof-CE and BookwormPup64 can be built using Github Actions:
https://github.com/puppylinux-woof-CE/w ... n/dpupbw64

(Note: the .sfs are larger due to the Github run environment providing an older version of zstd)

[retiredt00]

Excelent!!!
So there is a github/woof-ce build code and action, a disto/version page provided by rockedge and all is missing is the developer's announcement page pointing to all these things so can finally settle the distrowatch story.
Hopefully we (radky/you/whoever is the puppylinux custodian these days) manage this last hop.

[peebee]

Excelent!!!
So there is a github/woof-ce build code and action, a disto/version page provided by rockedge and all is missing is the developer's announcement page pointing to all these things so can finally settle the distrowatch story.
Hopefully we (radky/you/whoever is the puppylinux custodian these days) manage this last hop.

https://distro.ibiblio.org/puppylinux/p ... ement.html

[dimkr]

You can't find this page even if you search Google for "Announcement and release notes for BookwormPup" (with the quotes). If nothing indexed by Google leads to this page, this page doesn't really exist.

In addition, if puppylinux.com doesn't link to this announcement, why would distrowatch trust its legitimacy? Anyone can upload an announcement like this to a random site.

[retiredt00]

Is a pity that the puppylinux blog has taken down but I doubt that distrowatch is guided by google.
Is guided by trust to a developer. Barry Kauler and Mick Amadio (and maybe others, they should know who they are) have all been trusted in the past.
Maybe one of them can just send that e mail now!

[rockedge]

Maybe one of them can just send that e mail now!

Already has been offered. We just need to gather the exact documentation required so we have all of it at once, inform Barry and he will email them

[dimkr]

Providing proof that the new maintainer has control over the homepage, by adding a link to the release notes in the homepage, is not good enough?

[rockedge]

Providing proof that the new maintainer has control over the homepage, by adding a link to the release notes in the homepage, is not good enough?

should be enough!

[sonny]

Current Puppy flavors according to Perplexity (July 31, 2024)

puppy-on-perplexity.png (80.09 KiB) Viewed 1064 times

[Chelsea80]

@sonny

Perplexity, ah yes Perplexity

It buggered the result that it gave me. See this Thread https://www.forum.puppylinux.com/viewto ... 93#p127593 Page 23 - 3rd post down by me.

Then @Jasper reply.

Very embarrassing!!

[sonny]

@Chelsea80
But these results are about right, don't you think?

[williwaw]

You can't find this page even if you search Google for "Announcement and release notes for BookwormPup" (with the quotes). If nothing indexed by Google leads to this page, this page doesn't really exist.

In addition, if puppylinux.com doesn't link to this anouncement, why would distrowatch trust its legitimacy? Anyone can upload an announcement like this to a random site.

I have noticed quoting your search term doesnt make much difference with Google anymore, but still works with DDG