dimkr wrote: Fri Aug 09, 2024 7:17 am
Regarding ideas - I never said I wrote overlay, apt or whatever, or was the first to use them in Puppy context. But the way my builds integrate apt has some reliability advantages over other integrations, and my save2flash is faster with fewer writes, etc'. You ignore important implementation details so you can portray others as 'cloners' of ideas you consider to be yours.
Oh, and my fork doesn't have this SFS naming limitations you bring up so often.
The weird thing is that no matter what I say regarding Puppy Linux, you seem to think (wrongly) that I am attacking you personally. Sometimes I defend myself against personal comments by attacking back; they say attack is the best form of defence, but generally speaking I just watch all developments going on and think good of most of the work that does happen, but like everyone on this forum, if I think there is a flaw badly needing addressed for the good of all, I say so. But I am never saying who has responsibility for fixing any flaws, because no one does have that as a responsibility.
From my own past actions regarding dpkg/apt addon for Fossapup, it should be obvious that I think Puppy needed a real package manager (and for Debian-based Pups that would be dpkg/apt), I think it is best to move to overlayfs (I did that in FR certainly). I think if you adopt the likes of apt of course there are security issues and problems relating to systemd expectations so that needed to be addressed eventually in any Puppy implementations, and well done for that... I didn't invent overlayfs (I simply use it); I didn't invent dpkg/apt (I hardly know how to use it, but install it anyway; I didn't invent any union layered filesystem (they have been around for several decades in various shades and forms).
If someone takes over woof-CE and it becomes brilliant, well thank goodness for that (but I don't hold my breath).
As for yourself dimkr; none of these above comments (aside for the "well done for that") are anything to do with you. I don't like a lot about your general attitude and trolling against myself and FirstRib nature, but really your comments are irrelevant at the end of the day to me. What you do with your Vanilla Dpup fork is entirely up to yourself and I am not paying much attention sorry.
Oh, good to hear you removed these awful SFS naming limitations; I have complained about these as a negative feature of traditional Puppy Linux for years (over a decade in fact) - unfortunately the fans of Puppy seems adamant that they needed their adrv, bdrv, ydrvs and so on - as if it would be not Puppy not to have them, or would somehow make Puppy less unique and too much like other distros that avoided such limitations (and limitation it was and is). I suppose the Puppy crazy-faithful (an odd behaviour in my view) don't want to follow the leads EVER of DebianDog or FirstRIb-based distros and hate to give credit when some might be due - but fine... such are some developers in open source world - we see that.
Maybe the problem was (in the Puppy Linux world I mean) that there was too much individual investment into shell script remaster type utilities that were writing with such drives as adrv, bdrv and so on in mind. Maybe it was never really a problem to Puppy users (definitely an unnecessary technical limitation however). Who knows? Does any of that matter? Not to me, though why you have to keep quoting my comments about Puppy Linux beats me. You are not Puppy Linux and all you are to me is someone who once beavered away on woof-CE github site and later forked that and beavers away on your own Vanilla Dpup, but... who keeps trolling me that I have to reply to or appear to accept the nonsense you throw at me regarding what I believe or do not believe, and so often you claim thoughts I'm supposed to have that never in fact crossed my own mind. Actually, I don't 'believe' very much, which is another fault about me apparently, but that is not anyone else's concern either; wow, there are certainly some nutcases on here, which was a big surprise to me. Okay, so I'm the nutcase for not believing what they believe, but such nonsense is no requirement of Linux development anyway.