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

Moderator: Forum moderators

User avatar
wiak
Posts: 4082
Joined: Tue Dec 03, 2019 6:10 am
Location: Packing - big job
Has thanked: 65 times
Been thanked: 1208 times
Contact:

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

Post by wiak »

retiredt00 wrote: Fri Aug 02, 2024 8:48 am

[
Puppylinux maybe the first one where the users in spite of their best intentions, will manage to bring it down!
Looks like that the "let a hundred flowers blossom" forum movement, as the original may be destined to fail. :(

If I wasn't Scottish I might have cried reading that. Lack of developers and thus development is what brings down distros. It isn't user comments, sorry. If development of other useful distros is feared as 'competition', I think such fear is a waste of time. All development work encourages more activity all around. Doesnt actually spread out the resource referred to as developers who generally have their main area(s) of interest well!-established. But that's why on purpose sharing is so overall beneficial to all the flowers - even to any Flower of Scotland.

https://www.tinylinux.info/
DOWNLOAD wd_multi for hundreds of 'distros' at your fingertips: viewtopic.php?p=99154#p99154
Αξίζει να μεταφραστεί;

dimkr
Posts: 2423
Joined: Wed Dec 30, 2020 6:14 pm
Has thanked: 53 times
Been thanked: 1202 times

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

Post by dimkr »

wiak wrote: Fri Aug 02, 2024 5:50 pm

All development work encourages more activity all around.

When you have very few developers and they're all busy building distinct but still very similar things, there's lots of wasted effort. In addition, competing for recognition as 'official' or 'built by a superior build system' status and inability to collaborate with others easily (through collaboration tools like git and standard procedures like pull requests) is nothing but a waste of developer time. This variety of similar projects also makes it harder for contributors to decide what to work on and where, because it looks like a mess.

If you're building your own thing (and doing your best not to incorporate code written by others or copy code from projects you consider to be inferior) despite your awareness of NIH syndrome, because you find it fun, then it's fine. But if you're trying to build something useful and wasting your time on 'competing' with other projects, then you're just wasting time and not building the best you can build.

User avatar
fredx181
Posts: 3074
Joined: Tue Dec 03, 2019 1:49 pm
Location: holland
Has thanked: 374 times
Been thanked: 1311 times
Contact:

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

Post by fredx181 »

dimkr wrote: Fri Aug 02, 2024 6:02 pm
wiak wrote: Fri Aug 02, 2024 5:50 pm

All development work encourages more activity all around.

If you're building your own thing (and doing your best not to incorporate code written by others or copy code from projects you consider to be inferior) despite your awareness of NIH syndrome, because you find it fun, then it's fine.

But if you're trying to build something useful and wasting your time on 'competing' with other projects, then you're just wasting time and not building the best you can build.

Would be a bit weird if you are assuming that these two intentions/motivations you mention above are the only ones possible !

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Btw, this thread is about Puppy listed on Distrowatch, so I can't see how a discussion about the 'other' projects (not Puppy) belongs here.

dimkr
Posts: 2423
Joined: Wed Dec 30, 2020 6:14 pm
Has thanked: 53 times
Been thanked: 1202 times

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

Post by dimkr »

fredx181 wrote: Fri Aug 02, 2024 6:49 pm

Would be a bit weird if you are assuming that these two intentions you mention above are the only ones possible !

I didn't assume that. But I wonder why would you want to waste your time as a developer, on things like convincing others to recognize your work as 'official' or convincing others to merge important bug fixes. Waste of time is waste of time, regardless of the reasons why you're developing something.

fredx181 wrote: Fri Aug 02, 2024 6:49 pm

Btw, this thread is about Puppy listed on Distrowatch, so I can't see how a discussion about the 'other' projects (not Puppy) belongs here.

All projects here are 'other' projects. Puppy Linux as a single distro with a single branch of development history is long gone, and IMO it's time we stop pretending that 'Puppy Linux' is still a single thing and wasting time on keeping it alive on distrowatch. At the same time, I also think we should stop wasting the few development resources we have on building multiple, similar things.

sonny
Posts: 725
Joined: Mon Feb 15, 2021 4:50 pm
Has thanked: 486 times
Been thanked: 173 times

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

Post by sonny »

dimkr wrote: Fri Aug 02, 2024 6:59 pm

All projects here are 'other' projects. Puppy Linux as a single distro with a single branch of development history is long gone, and IMO it's time we stop pretending that 'Puppy Linux' is still a single thing and wasting time on keeping it alive on distrowatch. At the same time, I also think we should stop wasting the few development resources we have on building multiple, similar things.

1. Which Puppy Linux version were you referring to when it was still a single thing?
2. Which of the "multiple, similar things" exactly to which we are wasting our resources are you referring?

I'm kinda new here and quite intrigued. Seriously...

dimkr
Posts: 2423
Joined: Wed Dec 30, 2020 6:14 pm
Has thanked: 53 times
Been thanked: 1202 times

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

Post by dimkr »

sonny wrote: Fri Aug 02, 2024 11:02 pm

1. Which Puppy Linux version were you referring to when it was still a single thing?

Until 4.3.1

sonny wrote: Fri Aug 02, 2024 11:02 pm

2. Which of the "multiple, similar things" exactly to which we are wasting our resources are you referring?

Look at all current Puppy releases and make a list of features for each. You'll see, for example, that the vast majority use the same kernel versions (sometimes even the same kernel package), include JWM and ROX-Filer, include PPM, include the same browser and so on.

In terms of issues, they're mostly the same: many things are unmaintained so they have the same bugs, resource consumption is very similar, boot time is slow and similar, they all use plain ALSA instead of PipeWire, etc'.

They all use aufs instead of overlay. With overlay, you can use an old but stable kernel branch that still receives fixes, but aufs breaks often. The kernel is upgraded every time aufs breaks, making these Puppy releases less stable and suitable for old hardware.

In terms of vision for the future, they're all stuck with X.Org, aufs, ROX-Filer, GTK+ 2 and many other unmaintained things and there's no plan B to replace these things with modern components. The current plan seems to be 'change as little as possible', which is a bad development strategy when the Linux graphics stack and audio stack change so rapidly.

Even if the build process is automated, I'm struggling to understand why we're forcing users to choose between so many options when they're basically getting the same OS, albeit with slightly newer or older packages, on top of the same kernel (which is the primary factor when it comes to old hardware support).

sonny
Posts: 725
Joined: Mon Feb 15, 2021 4:50 pm
Has thanked: 486 times
Been thanked: 173 times

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

Post by sonny »

I feel you, Dim.

PUPPY USER: Here, try Puppy Linux flashed on this USB :)
DISTRO HOPPER: Thanks! Lemme try tonight.
The next day...
DISTRO HOPPER: Liar! You gave me BookwormPup, not Puppy Linux.
PUPPY USER: My bad. TBH, I'm just a Puppy Hopper :oops:

My thoughts:

Unlike Puppy Linux Forum, other forums like MX and Mint, FOCUS SOLELY on MX Linux and Linux Mint (and LMDE).

Puppy is aging, as are its users/hoppers.
Why don't we build and continue to build AROUND the younger developers (i.e. @dimkr, etc) before
all the grandpas go to bed and say, "Good night, sweet dreams! Won't be back after these messages"?
I'm sure @MochiMoppel knows exactly what I'm talking here.

Imagine...
if all the HEADS in this forum focused on the life and death of a single Puppy
called "Puppy Linux".

Imagine...
PUPPY LINUX: The Timeless Linux Distro Mix - Versatile, Fast, Small, and Modern

User avatar
pp4mnklinux
Posts: 1137
Joined: Wed Aug 19, 2020 5:43 pm
Location: Edinburgh
Has thanked: 635 times
Been thanked: 283 times
Contact:

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

Post by pp4mnklinux »

sonny wrote: Sat Aug 03, 2024 3:23 pm

I feel you, Dim.

PUPPY USER: Here, try Puppy Linux flashed on this USB :)
DISTRO HOPPER: Thanks! Lemme try tonight.
The next day...
DISTRO HOPPER: Liar! You gave me BookwormPup, not Puppy Linux.
PUPPY USER: My bad. TBH, I'm just a Puppy Hopper :oops:

My thoughts:

Unlike Puppy Linux Forum, other forums like MX and Mint, FOCUS SOLELY on MX Linux and Linux Mint (and LMDE).

Puppy is aging, as are its users/hoppers.
Why don't we build and continue to build AROUND the younger developers (i.e. @dimkr, etc) before
all the grandpas go to bed and say, "Good night, sweet dreams! Won't be back after these messages"?
I'm sure @MochiMoppel knows exactly what I'm talking here.

Imagine...
if all the HEADS in this forum focused on the life and death of a single Puppy
called "Puppy Linux".

Imagine...
PUPPY LINUX: The Timeless Linux Distro Mix - Versatile, Fast, Small, and Modern

Clap, clap, clap !!! (... and beauty)

sonny
Posts: 725
Joined: Mon Feb 15, 2021 4:50 pm
Has thanked: 486 times
Been thanked: 173 times

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

Post by sonny »

Puppy developers unite:

"Digging in many places won't make a well."

User avatar
pp4mnklinux
Posts: 1137
Joined: Wed Aug 19, 2020 5:43 pm
Location: Edinburgh
Has thanked: 635 times
Been thanked: 283 times
Contact:

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

Post by pp4mnklinux »

That is:

"Jack of all trades, master of none."

"He who grasps too much, squeezes little."

These phrases cautions against trying to do too much at once, emphasizing the value of focus and specialization and I think that must be bear in our minds.

Excuseme If I stop posting about this topic, I think all of us know what we must do, so this chat is IMO loosing its utility.

HAVE A NICE WEEKEND.

User avatar
fredx181
Posts: 3074
Joined: Tue Dec 03, 2019 1:49 pm
Location: holland
Has thanked: 374 times
Been thanked: 1311 times
Contact:

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

Post by fredx181 »

sonny wrote:

PUPPY USER: Here, try Puppy Linux flashed on this USB :)
DISTRO HOPPER: Thanks! Lemme try tonight.
The next day...
DISTRO HOPPER: Liar! You gave me BookwormPup, not Puppy Linux.
PUPPY USER: My bad. TBH, I'm just a Puppy Hopper :oops:

My thoughts:

Unlike Puppy Linux Forum, other forums like MX and Mint, FOCUS SOLELY on MX Linux and Linux Mint (and LMDE).
....

Ok, I see your point, only have a question;
Why in your opinion can't BookwormPup not being considered as a 'Puppy Linux' ? (as I think one of the things you're saying that it's not).
And what (Puppy) Linux distro are you using nowadays ?

sonny
Posts: 725
Joined: Mon Feb 15, 2021 4:50 pm
Has thanked: 486 times
Been thanked: 173 times

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

Post by sonny »

@fredx181!
Thank you for taking my bait!
So, you said it, not me.

Will it be offensive if we rename BookwormPup64 PUPPY LINUX?

It is MX Linux (we all know it's Debian).
It is Linux Mint (we all know it's Ubuntu).
It is Manjaro (we all know it's Arch)
It is Puppy Linux (we all know it's Debian or a mix)

What say you?

wanderer
Posts: 760
Joined: Mon Jul 13, 2020 7:15 pm
Been thanked: 138 times

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

Post by wanderer »

hi all

to my understanding

the two bookwormpups 64 and 32
are the distrowatch candidates
and will be for about 1 year

so that is a done deal

whats up in puppy world is another thread

wanderer

retiredt00
Posts: 222
Joined: Fri Sep 04, 2020 12:11 pm
Has thanked: 11 times
Been thanked: 35 times

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

Post by retiredt00 »

wiak wrote: Fri Aug 02, 2024 5:50 pm
retiredt00 wrote: Fri Aug 02, 2024 8:48 am

Puppylinux maybe the first one where the users in spite of their best intentions, will manage to bring it down!
Looks like that the "let a hundred flowers blossom" forum movement, as the original may be destined to fail. :(

If I wasn't Scottish I might have cried reading that. Lack of developers and thus development is what brings down distros.

Developers develop because they have an itch to scratch AND have fun with it
And many puppy developers did so, initially.
However, when their efforts were met with abusive, offensive behavior, the fun part was gone and so did they.

So now the forum ended up with several scripters and at best, packagers that consider adding a layer file system or an init script to a standard distribution is new distribution. And these are the best cases compared to the development totally illiterate ones that ask/demand whatever crosses their mind.

Come to distrowatch and puppy family, it has puppy linux for historical reasons I think, EasyOS which is build from source with a new take on isolation, and FatDog, another distribution build from source with a lot of home utilities much closer to original puppylinux than anything else out there.

And then there is debian dogs, a revival of the abandon Debiam live and (also abandon) emil's take on debian live. Is basically a bunch of build configs for Ubuntu/Debian with few scripts to accommodate frugal installation.
Then there is the Kenel Linux which actually provides the same as the dog with less utilities but with wider selection of upstream distributions in a single script.
And other words ooooold chewed and rechewed stuff with minimal effort and no new input.
At least old puppy linux and woof provides a plethora of utilities and work arounds to enhance usage and user information, instead of reinventing the flat tire over and over hopping that repetition will be sufficient for the tire to fix itself! And they proudly call it "development".
Indeed you should cry

(Note: if you find the above offensive/abusive/trolling etc, you may want to revisit posts in the old forum regarding woof-CE development and offerings see how they compare)

User avatar
rockedge
Site Admin
Posts: 6547
Joined: Mon Dec 02, 2019 1:38 am
Location: Connecticut,U.S.A.
Has thanked: 2749 times
Been thanked: 2626 times
Contact:

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

Post by rockedge »

And other words ooooold chewed and rechewed stuff with minimal effort and no new input.

Minimal effort!!!!!!????????

I am highly offended personally by what you wrote and take as a direct insult thrown at me head on. I don't need any explanation...what is done is done.

The KLV systems being offered are advanced and stand alone. Developed totally independent from Puppy Linux.

We happen to share a forum space....why you ask? Because it's expensive to run and time consuming and I'm the one doing the work. Kennel Linux had it's own forum put together by @wiak and I BEFORE I set this one up. How does the murga forum still exist? Because I believed in it and put in the work and money to save it.

No effort eh? @retiredt00 you've caught my attention and I am going to go over EVERYTHING you've ever posted on both forums to see how much you've actually contributed. Wrote a program to scrape your stuff and I'll have an AI engine summarize it and access your level of contribution.

(Note: if you find the above offensive/abusive/trolling etc, you may want to revisit posts in the old forum regarding woof-CE development and offerings see how they compare)

Only reason you can even "revisit the posts in the old forum" is because of the work I put into it....no effort huh? Where were you?

User avatar
fredx181
Posts: 3074
Joined: Tue Dec 03, 2019 1:49 pm
Location: holland
Has thanked: 374 times
Been thanked: 1311 times
Contact:

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

Post by fredx181 »

retiredt00 wrote:

And other words ooooold chewed and rechewed stuff with minimal effort and no new input.

Saying "minimal effort" is indeed offending (what do you know about the efforts taken ?), but rockedge addressed that already.

Just replying on the other things you say:
What are you suggesting ? Is it:
- All people from this forum with some knowledge about building an OS should stop wasting their time (and efforts) on projects other than Puppy, instead join together and fix Woof-CE to create a decent PuppyLinux and all should be built from source.
- Kick out from this forum all projects that are not "true" PuppyLinux (oh... not easy, what is a "true" Puppylinux, discussed over and over already , but can be done again...), except Fatdog and EasyOs can stay.
- Or ... ?
(just guessing around what you may suggest, but if you are only complaining without any ideas, that's fine (well.. not really) )

wanderer
Posts: 760
Joined: Mon Jul 13, 2020 7:15 pm
Been thanked: 138 times

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

Post by wanderer »

to read this post i suggest you go to the whats up in puppy world thread

User avatar
wiak
Posts: 4082
Joined: Tue Dec 03, 2019 6:10 am
Location: Packing - big job
Has thanked: 65 times
Been thanked: 1208 times
Contact:

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

Post by wiak »

A lot of ignorance around. Sad. Programming is programming. Irrelevant which language, be it a scripting language or needing compiled. The language does not define the code complexity nor its importance in the system ability scheme of things.

The guy who rubbished KL and my own FirstRib build system related contributions to that should now be obliged to write his own unique full featured initrd/init, which his words suggest will be a trivial undertaking for him. For me, it was very hard to do and I found it extremely complex to include all the needed functionality including uncompressed layer handling to work in every operating mode. Looking forward to seeing him now do provide his easy for him to make equal or better uniquely coded alternative.

I'm afraid though that there is a lot more to it than the one liner mount overlay or aufs single command line. Personally I truly doubt I could myself successfuly now write FR initrd/init again - maybe I could, but the thought of repeating the effort hurts me; I feel my brain would struggle so Im glad the forum now has someone saying it is a trivial effort from their perspective, so looking forward to them now showing that with their own brand new superior code design.

Seems to me that if they fail to do that then their failure defines themself and their words as nothing more than ignorance in all its worse case meaningless and ugly.

As for the distro building, configurating, polishing; certainly a task/endeavour I shrink from taking on and tend to leave to others I see as brilliant at that. A lot of technical understanding, hundreds of hours effort, enthusiasm, hard graft and even 'Art' involved; at least as difficult as in similar Puppy Linux work and very similar system utities scripting involved. But seems the guy has superior abilities to us rubbish lego block assemblers and will provide now proper hard to create wonder systems for us all, and thus distrowatch will also thank him in future.

But just answering a post above, which doesnt concern this thread otherwise. Better to talk about how bad the work of myself and others are in the What's up in Puppy World thread, though personally I do object to referring to my work as Puppy work, which that FR initrd part isn't. It is forum work, so part of what's up in forum world certainly.

https://www.tinylinux.info/
DOWNLOAD wd_multi for hundreds of 'distros' at your fingertips: viewtopic.php?p=99154#p99154
Αξίζει να μεταφραστεί;

retiredt00
Posts: 222
Joined: Fri Sep 04, 2020 12:11 pm
Has thanked: 11 times
Been thanked: 35 times

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

Post by retiredt00 »

Dear all
It is interesting that people are getting upset when they taste their own medicine isn't it?
This knocking down (of better and way more extended) efforts went on for years with woof-CE and the people involved with it, presumably to make room for fresh new ideas and ended up where we stand now that apparently makes no one happy as our little pond keeps shrinking. Or does it?

Seriously thought what I propose is to stop putting effort in rediscovering the flat tire (that may indeed take effort) and build something relevant today.
There is already AntiX/MXLinux linux (for the most solid debian frugal installs out there), Tinycore Linux (for the most modular system if anyone wants this), Porteus for a small and modular system for removables, EasyOS for a puppy-with-containers system and FatDog for a modern infrastructure puppy with the yesteryears look and feel.

So where this leaves puppy and friends?
Many ideas can come forward other than repacking other distributions which apparently is the current effort.
Many questions must be answered in the process, argued already here several times

Bleeding edge kernels of stable longterm security-supported only?
What is the evidence that puppy users get a newly build machine and peripherals every 6 months?
Who (what percentage) uses puppy in a production system?
The more flexible Aufs or the in-tree overlayfs?

Modern Wayland or more stable (for the moment) Xorg ?
Are there many/any puppylinux gamers?
How many are using touchscreens?

All possible desktop and file mangers or limited resources/compatibility cautious selection?

Importantly, what puppy-specific applications/utilities/managers will be included, if any, to distinguish puppy from other debian/slackware derivatives?
All the distributions based on the 4-5 main ones add a lot of customization in look, feel and utilities to make their mark.
What puppylinux will have on that front?
More important who/how is going to maintain all these puppy-specific apps?

Build from source, with modified distribution packages or with original distribution packages?
If we go with either of the first 2 who will be maintaining them?
If not how will it be different? (see above)

Will building (and testing that most distributions do now) be automated or hand crafted and alpha-user tested
etc, etc.

However, the answers to all these and more must address the basic question which is "use case".
Is puppy going to be a compressed Debian/Arch/Fedora/Slackware that does everything for linux hackers and runs as root in RAM?
Or will try to be a linux for today's windows/mac/android user that wants a friendly linux system to do every day work, as the original puppylinux aimed 20 years ago?.
In other words will focus on the user or the (aspiring) developer as it currently doing?

None the above dilemmas are mutually exclusive.
However, whatever is build must have a clear focus and priorities AND a group of likeminded persons to support it.
A handful (or less) of builders/packager and dozens or "distributions" can only result flat tires, specially when the builders/packagers suffer from the NIH syndrome.

Apologies for the long post and any discomfort

User avatar
wiak
Posts: 4082
Joined: Tue Dec 03, 2019 6:10 am
Location: Packing - big job
Has thanked: 65 times
Been thanked: 1208 times
Contact:

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

Post by wiak »

retiredt00 wrote: Tue Aug 06, 2024 5:57 am

Dear all
It is interesting that people are getting upset when they taste their own medicine isn't it?
This knocking down (of better and way more extended) efforts went on for years with woof-CE and the people involved with it, presumably to make room for fresh new ideas and ended up where we stand now that apparently makes no one happy as our little pond keeps shrinking. Or does it?
...

No. Above is insufficient. Time you stepped up to the plate yourself and show by your own efforts why something has flaws and needs improved. Naming alternative distros is not sufficient to allow you to insult the work of developers. Show your better alternative work that you do - not work of others that we already know.

https://www.tinylinux.info/
DOWNLOAD wd_multi for hundreds of 'distros' at your fingertips: viewtopic.php?p=99154#p99154
Αξίζει να μεταφραστεί;

retiredt00
Posts: 222
Joined: Fri Sep 04, 2020 12:11 pm
Has thanked: 11 times
Been thanked: 35 times

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

Post by retiredt00 »

Dear wiak
shooting the messenger is an old and tried approach to cover our failures, but only in the eyes of those that do not want to see and correct them.
Are you interesting in seeing and correcting anything or you would rather go with blinkers on you and your horse?

dimkr
Posts: 2423
Joined: Wed Dec 30, 2020 6:14 pm
Has thanked: 53 times
Been thanked: 1202 times

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

Post by dimkr »

These are my answers to @retiredt00's questions. Anyone who shares my view is welcome to contribute to https://github.com/vanilla-dpup/woof-CE. I will accept contributions that follow this spirit, and won't accept messy, complicated or out of scope things that become a maintenance burden.

If you have a different vision, go on and make it happen. Puppy is a do-ocracy. My work is not supposed to replace upstream woof-CE in any way, only create a parallel branch of development that's based on my opinions.

---

retiredt00 wrote: Tue Aug 06, 2024 5:57 am

Bleeding edge kernels of stable longterm security-supported only?

Both. A stable version with several years of security updates and low-risk fixes for high-severity bugs, plus a bleeding edge development version.

retiredt00 wrote: Tue Aug 06, 2024 5:57 am

What is the evidence that puppy users get a newly build machine and peripherals every 6 months?
Who (what percentage) uses puppy in a production system?

I see more and more screenshots of computers with 16 GB of RAM. Therefore I think Puppy should be built to do "progressive enhancement": for example, automatically free RAM used by SFSs copied to RAM in a low RAM situation, but try to maximize performance at the cost of RAM consumption when possible (like most OSs do).

retiredt00 wrote: Tue Aug 06, 2024 5:57 am

The more flexible Aufs or the in-tree overlayfs?

overlay.

The Vanilla Dpup 9.x line has been consistently shipping bug fixes and security fixes on top of the 5.10.x kernel series for over 2 years (!!!) and this is not possible with aufs because it breaks often and drops support for still maintained "longterm" kernel branches way before they reach their EOL date.

Using aufs in a distro for old computers or a stable distro is a very bad idea because it forces frequent kernel upgrades, to chase the limited range of kernel versions supported by aufs. Newer and newer kernels support less and less old hardware, and add new issues while "longterm" kernels age like wine and gain only fixes.

retiredt00 wrote: Tue Aug 06, 2024 5:57 am

Modern Wayland or more stable (for the moment) Xorg ?

Wayland, because X.Org is dying. Latest X.Org fails to start on my oldest laptops and Wayland doesn't work either, so I don't see a reason not to drop support for X.Org and just migrate to Wayland. Most users of major distros already use Wayland, and I've seen cases where applications that work only thanks to Xwayland (= not ported to Wayland to run natively) no longer work under X.Org because nobody runs then under X.Org anymore.

Support for old hardware in the modern Linux graphics stack (maintenance of the Mesa Amber branch, etc') is not a Puppy-specific concern and those who want to support old hardware should do some upstream work first and their changes will eventually propagate to Puppy. Somebody needs to do this work, and the expertise required is not the same as the expertise required to build a distro.

retiredt00 wrote: Tue Aug 06, 2024 5:57 am

All possible desktop and file mangers or limited resources/compatibility cautious selection?

By default, a specific Wayland compositor, one file manager, etc', that are preconfigured and patched to make them familiar to existing Puppy users. Users should be able to switch to something else, but it takes a lot of work to achieve the same degree of cohesiveness and polish.

retiredt00 wrote: Tue Aug 06, 2024 5:57 am

Importantly, what puppy-specific applications/utilities/managers will be included, if any, to distinguish puppy from other debian/slackware derivatives?

1. Many yad-based configuration tools and wrappers for tools like wf-recorder which force the user to use the terminal
2. A lightweight and fast init system that reduces the number of running processes
3. Various tweaks for low resource consumption and increased longevity of flash storage
4. Various security and privacy tweaks - ad blocking and firewall that are enabled by default, various browser privacy tweaks, and support for encrypted or partially encrypted save folders
5. ... everything in https://github.com/vanilla-dpup/woof-CE ... e#features and more, as more features are added

retiredt00 wrote: Tue Aug 06, 2024 5:57 am

All the distributions based on the 4-5 main ones add a lot of customization in look, feel and utilities to make their mark.
What puppylinux will have on that front?

Very little customization and artwork because many applications don't want to be themed, and changing the appearance of GTK+ 4 applications requires patching of libadwaita. The distros that do this (like Ubuntu) make very subtle changes anyway, so IMO the big effort is not justified in a small community distro with few developers.

retiredt00 wrote: Tue Aug 06, 2024 5:57 am

More important who/how is going to maintain all these puppy-specific apps?

The same people who maintain the build system. Everything is in one place, it's a single git project.

retiredt00 wrote: Tue Aug 06, 2024 5:57 am

Build from source, with modified distribution packages or with original distribution packages?

Both. Puppy-specific stuff is built from source by the build system and the source code is part of the build system, the rest comes from binary packages.

retiredt00 wrote: Tue Aug 06, 2024 5:57 am

Will building (and testing that most distributions do now) be automated or hand crafted and alpha-user tested

100% automated and reproducible.

retiredt00 wrote: Tue Aug 06, 2024 5:57 am

However, the answers to all these and more must address the basic question which is "use case".

The original Puppy use case, a lightweight and fast distro people can use for daily tasks. While some in-house tools are crude, simple and amateurish, they get the job done.

User avatar
wiak
Posts: 4082
Joined: Tue Dec 03, 2019 6:10 am
Location: Packing - big job
Has thanked: 65 times
Been thanked: 1208 times
Contact:

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

Post by wiak »

retiredt00 wrote: Tue Aug 06, 2024 6:42 am

Dear wiak
shooting the messenger is an old and tried approach to cover our failures, but only in the eyes of those that do not want to see and correct them.
Are you interesting in seeing and correcting anything or you would rather go with blinkers on you and your horse?

Which failures exactly. I develop for my family's use, but as long time forum member I make it all open source available here for anyone to try or use if they want to, even you. But that is all there is to my view about my own developments really. They are not Puppy Linux, nor ever wanted to replace it or tried to. All distros have to sort out their own issues if their creator or users think they have any worth putting effort into. Words about such matters are irrelevant to me; and I contribute new work every now and then when I have time.

https://www.tinylinux.info/
DOWNLOAD wd_multi for hundreds of 'distros' at your fingertips: viewtopic.php?p=99154#p99154
Αξίζει να μεταφραστεί;

User avatar
rockedge
Site Admin
Posts: 6547
Joined: Mon Dec 02, 2019 1:38 am
Location: Connecticut,U.S.A.
Has thanked: 2749 times
Been thanked: 2626 times
Contact:

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

Post by rockedge »

@retiredt00 The question is still open.....where were you when the work was being done? Nowhere AI can find.

It is interesting that people are getting upset when they taste their own medicine isn't it?

I don't see how your insults are medicine at all. Coming from a guy with no contribution other than this bullshit is kind of typical for the personality type.

I've encountered lots of people like you in the movie making industry.....my usual answer borrowed from my internal teenager CPU: "yeah yeah, whatever"

You should checkout our new KLV-Boxer..........it's the bee's knees......a real travesty to the world of operating systems....with it's origins the same as all the others...emulating mainframes.

User avatar
pp4mnklinux
Posts: 1137
Joined: Wed Aug 19, 2020 5:43 pm
Location: Edinburgh
Has thanked: 635 times
Been thanked: 283 times
Contact:

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

Post by pp4mnklinux »

My reflection:

474 posts & "no final solution"

I hope u good luck.

Attachments
Screenshot_20240806-150656_Chrome.jpg
Screenshot_20240806-150656_Chrome.jpg (55.63 KiB) Viewed 1745 times
retiredt00
Posts: 222
Joined: Fri Sep 04, 2020 12:11 pm
Has thanked: 11 times
Been thanked: 35 times

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

Post by retiredt00 »

wiak wrote: Tue Aug 06, 2024 10:16 am

Which failures exactly. I develop for my family's use

Dear wiak
apologies if I misunderstood that in 4000 posts in the new puppylinux forum and as many or more in the old puppylinux forum (under both your handles) you are just developing for your family and giving to the community.

That is a lot of giving!
In a ruff calculation, say 8000+ posts with 300+ words on average, is ~2.5 million words
More than the entire Harry Potter, Lord of the Rings and Chronicle of Narnia series combined!

I can not help it but wonder why you needed a 10000+ pages encyclopedia just to explain and distribute family development, as you say. It must be a very intricate development process or a very obdurate audience.
I certainly admire your tenacity, though.

Code: Select all

    ,//)
   ,;;' \
 ,;;' ( '\
     / '\_)   
rockedge wrote: Tue Aug 06, 2024 12:52 pm

Coming from a guy with no contribution other than this bullshit is kind of typical for the personality type.

Dear rockedge
I would be very interesting to see your contribution to the movie industry. Any specific titles you fondly remember?

Regarding who, when, where and how, see my point above about the message and the messenger.

But why the specific interest?
I never claimed any contribution to puppylinux, as a lot of other prominent and very vocal persons around here.
Are you implying that opinions should be aligned with the views of whoever pays the bill?
Or that only proven contributors can express any skepticism or critique for offering that whoever pays the bill likes?
I hope certainly not.

I feel however that the focus to the messenger is just an effort to avoid addressing the message.
dimkr offered his views on some questions.
What about the rest of the "puppy family" developers/packager/builders/users?
is there any common ground or not???

dimkr
Posts: 2423
Joined: Wed Dec 30, 2020 6:14 pm
Has thanked: 53 times
Been thanked: 1202 times

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

Post by dimkr »

pp4mnklinux wrote: Tue Aug 06, 2024 1:09 pm

474 posts & "no final solution"

How can you expect a solution when we don't agree on the problem?

1. Some think there is no problem and Puppy development is in great shape (people who haven't looked in https://github.com/puppylinux-woof-CE/w ... ts/testing, https://github.com/puppylinux-woof-CE/w ... se/monthly and https://github.com/puppylinux-woof-CE/w ... ntributors)
2. Some think the problem is that Puppy is not modular enough, but ignore the extra complexity for developers and users alike
3. Some think the problem is that Puppy is built with tool x and not tool y, and ignore Puppy features that would go away if Puppy switched to y
4. Some just build many (similar) distros instead of trying to actually make a list of problems or areas that can be improved in Puppy, then think about solutions and do the actual work
5. Some find problems in Puppy, build their own variant with their changes and consider these problems "solved", instead of feeding these improvements into "mainstream" Puppy so they appear in the next "official version"
6. Some think that Puppy lacks a vision that can be used to make a list of potential improvements, but don't propose a vision

User avatar
wiak
Posts: 4082
Joined: Tue Dec 03, 2019 6:10 am
Location: Packing - big job
Has thanked: 65 times
Been thanked: 1208 times
Contact:

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

Post by wiak »

retiredt00 wrote: Tue Aug 06, 2024 1:56 pm
wiak wrote: Tue Aug 06, 2024 10:16 am

Which failures exactly. I develop for my family's use

Dear wiak
apologies if I misunderstood that in 4000 posts in the new puppylinux forum and as many or more in the old puppylinux forum (under both your handles) you are just developing for your family and giving to the community.
...

Oh dear, sorry, I thought you would understand that I was referring to my new forum FirstRib-based KL related work.

Certainly, on the old forum it was a bit of a battle to publish anything not "Puppy" without trolls like yourself moaning and grumbling; so years of having to fight back against the gangs was inevitable, though these days the comments I made have all but shown themselves to be correct and only a few crusty souls still moan about the "new" distros (albeit with sadly defeated sounding voices). Yes, I left Puppy for DebianDog rather a while ago, back in early 2013, so it is no longer so 'new' afterall. Time is a good cure and tends to put most old grumps, those who cannot accept inevitable change, out to pasture, (not implying out to stud, which in such cases seems unlikely - more likely just eating grass) since the future is always about new developments and not protecting a long gone past (nostalgic though that is). Us old guys, like yourself, alas do have to sometimes force ourselves to accept that times change and that we either have to move with the times or are best to just become silent and let the rest of the more active world get on with it. However, if we do want to stave off brain degeneration at least a little bit longer, working on new projects rather than hanging on to the old computer interface design we once admired, possibly gives us a more active life, much more fun, adventure, and laughs, especially funny to listen to the remaining old grumps - a mention of which on Distrowatch might still be relevant concerning some of the support Puppy definitely still attracts. I can't help but think that you sound like a retired old school-teacher type; it is amazing how such stereotypes do exist in practice. Sometimes, but definitely not always, there is some truth in that old phrase: "those who can, do, those who cannot, teach". I've done both; industry and academia and back and forth between the two - maybe damaged my brain too.

https://www.tinylinux.info/
DOWNLOAD wd_multi for hundreds of 'distros' at your fingertips: viewtopic.php?p=99154#p99154
Αξίζει να μεταφραστεί;

User avatar
rockedge
Site Admin
Posts: 6547
Joined: Mon Dec 02, 2019 1:38 am
Location: Connecticut,U.S.A.
Has thanked: 2749 times
Been thanked: 2626 times
Contact:

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

Post by rockedge »

I would be very interesting to see your contribution to the movie industry. Any specific titles you fondly remember?

Yeah, Here's one -> Discovery Channel's James Cameron's Expedition Bismarck

You'll find me in the credits as Expedition Gaffer. If you want to see me, I am standing next to James Cameron on the deck of the ship during the ceremony of the 2 survivors of the Bismarck placing a wreath of flowers into the sea and reciting words in memory of the lost crew. Sometimes I am on the rail looking down on the MIR's as they are loaded for a dive to the ocean floor.

Did another that was nominated for an Academy Award (Oscar) for Short Documentary produced by HBO ->
God is the Bigger Elvis

I was 1st Gaffer.

Then I have a series commercials for Thyssen Krupp I was Oberbeleuchter for:

One of many music Videos for MTv and or Viva. I was Oberbeleuchter for this one:

User avatar
rockedge
Site Admin
Posts: 6547
Joined: Mon Dec 02, 2019 1:38 am
Location: Connecticut,U.S.A.
Has thanked: 2749 times
Been thanked: 2626 times
Contact:

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

Post by rockedge »

This one is so Pop Pop Music but the jobs paid well... I was Oberbeleuchter for a 6 man crew.

These guys were pretty big in Germany...did the principle filming on an Easter Sunday and late into the night. The limousine never really moves.......

This one was made for Connecticut PBS is for based on a autobiographical account of going through the Civil War as a Union soldier and made for teaching teenagers more about the Civil War and it's impact on American culture.

Post Reply

Return to “Announcements”