Whats up in Puppy World

[wiak]

the solution to fredx181 dimkrs wiaks and rockedges concerns about the downsides of modularity
can be solved by having the package manager download the app
and then package it into an sfs file with a script
so that everything is automatically compatible

Yes that does work ....
...

Ok, it can work but is there a real advantage compared to a 'single' SFS module ?
I think it's only useful that way for very advanced users, not for the average user or beginners.
So, in other words, not user friendly at all IMO, unless there's a easy way included in the system to accomplish that . Big challenge to make that foul proof (not saying it's impossible though).

Well, as we all know, and I'm sure wanderer would agree, he is a real fan of tinycore linux and what he describes is always close to that distro build model. Now, I used to use tinycore a lot, back in the days I was also using old Puppy Linux 2.17. So I spent hours and hours configuring tinycore linux with all these tcz (sfs) addons, to get as close as I could to the operating system I wanted. Each time I gave up - the effort was ridiculous compared to simply booting up old Puppy Linux. Years later tinycore linux still fascinated my, so flexible and fun to assemble, but the pain... I agree that next to no-one who simply wants a flexible but easy to use distro would EVER use that multi-tiny sfs app approach (be they layered in or symlinked in) - it is just too much work. Great hobby though.

[Grey]

It served your own interests, it seems, to have them join in with you to cconstantly attack what you saw as dangerous alternatives to what you work on,

I didn't want to interfere, but... I spoke the other day with users who have just started browsing the forum. Apparently, it seems to them from the outside that most of the old-timers of the forum are engaged in the business described in the quote.

[rockedge]

@Grey We find very few developers working with woof-CE at this time. The rest of us a throwing ideas and opinions at that fact but it still is really just peebee and less than a handful of others doing work with it. What you see is no clearly defined direction of the project and the discussions reflect that. But you know that already, so what are you saying?

Last woof-CE release was June 15 2014 by mick01.....that's over 10 years ago. Yes that means a decade ago was the last real release of woof-CE.

I lean heavily on F96-CE_4 and KLV's for doing work and daily stuff and have been using NoblePup64 setup with an artifact ISO auto-built by woof-CE but my NoblePup64 is using a FirstRib initrd.gz

[Grey]

What you see is no clearly defined direction of the project and the discussions reflect that. But you know that already, so what are you saying?

I know. I have clearly indicated that this is the opinion of OUTSIDE OBSERVERS. Old-timers scare off users themselves. I have nothing more to say.

[dimkr]

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.

I don't like your attitude towards Puppy. To me it looks like you're taking advantage of every opportunity to describe Puppy as pointless and inferior, or trying to portray it as a dead project and discourage new development. Every time you're given a link to evidence that Puppy is not dead and not doing things exactly as your implementation of a certain feature, you just ignore this information and say everything is 'rubbish' and pointless.

If you're not interested in the future of Puppy (even interested specifically in Puppy having no future) then I don't see why you're in this thread. Criticism of Puppy and people who work on it for years, and not of the constructive kind (that eventually leads to improvement) is off-topic in a thread that's specifically about Puppy, no?

using NoblePup64 setup with an artifact ISO auto-built by woof-CE

That was one of my last contributions to woof-CE before I forked, and I think it's sad that nobody maintains and further develops it.

[rockedge]

I have clearly indicated that this is the opinion of OUTSIDE OBSERVERS.

Clearly.

Obviously none of it's good enough.

@dimkr I've felt your "attitude" plenty of times, including right now, Your actions are plenty loud and you've made it perfectly clear where you stand. Like you quit or no?

nobody maintains and further develops it.

Simple, no one who would like too can. And there are isn't anyone who can that wants too. So the words just echo off the walls in an empty room.

[stevie pup]

I’m putting this here although it’s probably also relevant to the “DistroWatch needs a new Puppy” thread.

What is the purpose of Puppy? What is the target audience for Puppy? Until we get some basic agreement to these two things I can’t see either thread reaching a satisfactory conclusion. I’ll briefly outline my Puppy usage.

I run Puppy on this 15 year old laptop simply because it boots faster and is more responsive than anything else I’ve tried, with the possible exception of antiX. I admit I know nothing about things like TinyCore, as I wouldn’t know where to start with such bare bones stuff.

Is it my only PC? No, I have another laptop that is a bit more powerful. Currently that is set up as dual boot, MX Linux and Manjaro. Both of these distros fall into the “trouble free” category. Well they have been for me anyway. I also have a couple of portable hard drives that I use to try out other stuff.

Do I use Puppy for everything? No, I spread things about a bit. Two reasons for this, firstly I’m the sort of person that craves variety. I don’t want to see the exact same thing every time I boot something up. Also, keeping one or two things separate is usually beneficial from a security viewpoint.

Could I use Puppy for everything if I wanted or needed to? I think so, yes.

If I had a PC with a Ryzen 7 and 16Gb of RAM would I be running Puppy on it? Probably not. Do I need a Ferrari just to go to local shop to pick up pint of milk? Would a Rolls Royce salesman target the people stood at a bus stop?

I think everyone will see what I’m getting at. Whether or not my use of Puppy puts me in a majority or a minority we’ll have to wait and see. I’ll be interested to see other people’s comments.

[Grey]

Do I need a Ferrari just to go to local shop to pick up pint of milk?

Most likely, in this case, you have servants (OS developers) who will buy food for you

In fact, the cases are different. An artisanal version of Puppy is launched on this device, in which the Spectrum emulator (Unreal Speccy) is launched smoothly and without seams immediately after loading. But if you hold down the hotkeys during the boot, then just Puppy will start with a browser and a book reader.

[wiak]

hi all

this is a thread to discuss the technical innovations that are occurring in Puppy World

that is all of the projects on the forum

i am hoping that this will bring all the projects together to exchange ideas
and to have a place where forum members can go to see what is happening

wanderer

I'm being told not to post in this thread because it is about Puppy Linux only. First post of thread evidences monkey talk nonsense. Puppy name of forum and in this thread title suggests to me that I can also talk about FR/KL or DebianDog and so, or Puppy Linux. No apartheid push to 'own' corner supposed to happen here after all. Such crap rubbish. Try to at least get simple facts about thread correct.

If you're not interested in the future of Puppy (even interested specifically in Puppy having no future) then I don't see why you're in this thread.

As for bad things I'm told I'm saying about Puppy Linux above. Which post above? About adrv, bdrv? No opinion about that limitation "allowed" then?

[wanderer]

hi wiak

you are correct

this thread is about everything on the forum and beyond

that is to say everything

not just puppy

please post your thoughts here

and that includes everyone and everyone's thoughts

wanderer

[wanderer]

hi everyone

i would just like remind everyone how well puppy world is doing
(that means everyone on the forum official puppy or not )

peebee radky and associates have created bookwormpup 64 and 32
great pieces of work
and they are our distrowatch candidates for around 1 more year

and there are other remasters of classic puppies
that are being actively developed
which i wont try to list
because i dont have enough knowledge of them

dimkr has created vanillapup
a very advanced distro

wiak and rockedge and associates have created and developed firstrib
a very innovative system

fredx181 and associates have created debiandog
a fantastic build system and distro

barry k has developed easyos a great distro

fatdog is a great distro

we have 1000s of members

and 100s of hits on distrowatch a day

puppy and its relatives obviously run on 1000s of computers

and puppy is well known and well regarded in the linux community

so let us all congratulate each other and ourselves
and all work together for the common good

wanderer

[wanderer]

hi all

if you are working on something
a distro or an idea
it would be great if you posted a note about it
on this thread
so everyone can know what is going on

wanderer

[fredx181]

Yes that does work ....
...

Ok, it can work but is there a real advantage compared to a 'single' SFS module ?
I think it's only useful that way for very advanced users, not for the average user or beginners.
So, in other words, not user friendly at all IMO, unless there's a easy way included in the system to accomplish that . Big challenge to make that foul proof (not saying it's impossible though).

Well, as we all know, and I'm sure wanderer would agree, he is a real fan of tinycore linux and what he describes is always close to that distro build model. Now, I used to use tinycore a lot, back in the days I was also using old Puppy Linux 2.17. So I spent hours and hours configuring tinycore linux with all these tcz (sfs) addons, to get as close as I could to the operating system I wanted. Each time I gave up - the effort was ridiculous compared to simply booting up old Puppy Linux. Years later tinycore linux still fascinated my, so flexible and fun to assemble, but the pain... I agree that next to no-one who simply wants a flexible but easy to use distro would EVER use that multi-tiny sfs app approach (be they layered in or symlinked in) - it is just too much work. Great hobby though.

Great hobby, at least something positive to mention about Tinycore
I played with Tinycore too in the past, had some fun (and annoyance too), I would never use it as my main OS.
Btw, the big difference with Slax (and also with distros presented here) is that the 'sfs loading' IS the package management in TinyCore and it's well organized, every module has it's dependencies registered.

@wanderer First..., I do understand what you are up too and could be nice for your personal use.
But say you've built something like that, does it have value to share as an OS for everyone .
A big how-to would be needed to make things clear about e.g. exchanging SFS's (including many warnings in red, don't do this !, don't do that! ... to prevent breaking the system).

EDIT: A simple example of how the system can break on Debian based system by e.g. using sfs's for each application:

Say you created A.sfs from package A (installed with apt) , dependencies are X, Y and Z .
(and all is nicely registered by the package management (in /var/lib/dpkg) )

Placed it in the frugal install folder, > reboot and appl. A works OK.

Next you make another one, B.sfs from package B installed again with apt or synaptic, dependencies are W and X
Dependency X will not be included in B.sfs because it's already registered as installed (in A.sfs).

Reboot with B.sfs added, all fine, appl. A and B work well.

Later you decide that you don't need appl. A , and remove A.sfs, > reboot.
Expecting that appl. B still runs, but... not, it's missing dependency X (it was in the removed A.sfs).

This can be repaired of course, but the user who does the above gets an unexpected result, and may complain with "Doesn't work" or "Bug found !" not knowing what happened exactly.

edit: A way to make it work without problems is to not include the packages registration (/var/lib/dpkg) in the created sfs's (that's what apt2sfs does in debiandog).
But that has the disadvantage that dpkg doesn't know about the contents of the sfs's and will happily install packages that are in fact already included (in the sfs's) (which is waste of space then, it makes your save file/folder much bigger than actually needed).

[wanderer]

hi fredx181 and everyone

first i would like to talk about tinycore

tinycore is a system without peer
the only problem is that they do not have the manpower
to maintain their extensions adequately
so many times the extension doesn't work

debian has the manpower
so they maintain their applications adequately
and their applications tend to work

tinycore did combine the 2 with dcore
but have not kept it up

that is the only problem with tinycore

we should adopt dcore as our system
and maintain the extensions we like

that being said

the average user knows nothing about
and does not care about
any of the internals in their computer
they just want it to work

the os has already been downloaded to their hard drive
which is read/write
when they bought the computer
and if there is any need to change a program
the package manager handles everything
adding and subtracting the files as appropriate
and making sure each file is in the right spot
and linked correctly

if something goes wrong
the average user takes their computer to best buy and tells them to fix it
and while the technician is fixing it
the average user does some shopping
and comes back when its ready

most people on this forum are not the average user

but if we wanted to cater to the average user
and wanted the portability of puppy
you could use a usb as the hard drive
and just read/write to the usb
it may wear out eventually though


as to the present puppy-like systems

yes its a trade off
redundancy vs modularity

but everyone has to make the choice
flatpaks for example

what i am proposing
is just a minor reorganization
of how puppy already does it
we already have separate sfs files for the browser
and for the development environment etc
why not break a few of the more commonly changed systems out as well

the desktop environment people love to tinker with

etc

we are talking about very few parts


the key is having

1. a minimal core
with just internet and the apt package manager
( console only )

2. an xorg and sound module

3. a desktop module

4 a broswer module

and whatever else you want

not much change to what we are doing now
but more flexible

fredx181
your debiandog is a perfect candidate for this
and i am working to make a system like this out of your masterpiece
but that will take time

however
slax debian64 is pretty close to what im talking about
and its here now and it works

so im cool

wanderer

[Governor]

provides more evidence for my claim that woof-CE can be developed further, given a vision and at least one skilled developer.

Looks bleak.

Seems that as a Puppy Linux forum, the clock is winding down. Despite the best efforts, we've got water in the holds, rudder is unresponsive but we still have some engine power and the lights are on.

My sister-in-law's dog and cat boarding kennel was closed and the owner's of the property had the building torn down.....so no more kennels, we gave all of the equipment away that we could...it was all rush rush rush to develop a different retail space but here we are...the property is overgrown and totally empty except for the illegal dumping of construction waste on it. My sister-in-law and her husband moved far away.

Wow, that is a sad story. Wishing you all the best.

[fredx181]

what i am proposing
is just a minor reorganization
of how puppy already does it

most people on this forum are not the average user

Don't think that is true, but anyway, if you are proposing a rather drastic change in the system setup (not minor IMO), isn't it required then that it should work ok for average users ?

You keep saying the same thing over and over (edit: well ... similar), I'll give up now trying to convince you that your proposal for a multi module setup is not useful (sorry, can't see the value of it).
(specially because of the risk when fiddling with custom made modules including dpkg registration, as I did mention above (in case of a truly Debian based system) ).
It seems to me (reading also replies from others) that you are the only one believing in it, fine of course if you are having fun playing with it though

[rockedge]

Wow, that is a sad story. Wishing you all the best.

Thanks! I only worked in the kennels on Sunday's by myself to give my wife's sister and staff a one day break. She lived next door so she had a hard time not working. Moved to Florida, took the kennel cats and a pack of Yorkie's and are all hanging out by the pool.

.....because of the risk when fiddling with custom made modules including dpkg registration......

Agreed, it's very hard to keep the modules components in sync across the different modules.

[wanderer]

hi fredx181

i appreciate your attempt to save me from myself

yeah probably no way to talk me out of it

thankfully i will no longer need to bug anyone about this idea
since i have my own toy to play with
if anyone else is interested they can join me by posting on this thread

and i appreciate you making debiandog

in my opinion debiandog is a system that puppy needs to adopt
its the best build system i have ever seen
it makes a great distro now
but has infinite possibilities of development

i am playing with it now
and like i said exploring some of the possibilities

and this includes all you other guys
who have provided much input and info

thanks a bunch for all you do
and keep up the good work

wanderer

[fredx181]

yeah probably no way to talk me out of it

You are consistent ! I appreciate that, I do love people who are doing their own thing (not easy) rather than going with the main-stream (easy)

[wiak]

yeah probably no way to talk me out of it

You are consistent ! I appreciate that, I do love people who are doing their own thing (not easy) rather than going with the main-stream (easy)

Wanderer, you are correct per fredx181 post. As far as Debian builds are concerned, nothing on this forum is a patch on Debiandog, and never has been. And that has been true for over ten years thanks in particular to the regular, consistent and hard work of Fred. It has been so frustrating to see most all forum hype heaped on the old forum titled distro, which was great in its heyday, but totally surpassed by 2014. Debiandogs users all knew and know that of course and probably never turned back(i). Why would they? Certainly, Debiandogs dont do Slacko...

The fact is, any Windows refugee would have done better using Debiandog than any other distro here because, Debiandog has always been rock solid reliable, properly dpkg/apt compatible and a well polished WORKING! distro. Name a package - chances are it will work on Debiandog perfectly wthout workaround huge efforts. What more can you ask for.

[rockedge]

@wiak I'm pretty sure KLV-Airedale is solid and can perform as well as DebianDog. But that's just me.

[wiak]

KLV Airedale is nor debian-based. Most all forum distros perform best in some way or another, but I was specifically stating my opinion re dpkg/apt using forum distro since 2013

Just an opinion. I didnt say DD was still my favourite forum distro...

[rockedge]

ZoneMinder was easy to install in DebianDog and ran okay. I also like DD and I've recommended it to friends that I knew were looking for an OS and I knew would really appreciate the switch over to using DD. Most of those guys are still using it!

[wiak]

ZoneMinder was easy to install in DebianDog and ran okay. I also like DD and I've recommended it to friends that I knew were looking for an OS and I knew would really appreciate the switch over to using DD. Most of those guys are still using it!

I'm no doubt biased though, rockedge. Whist Debiandog's build script is the most user friendly for more users, FirstRib with KL 'technology enhancements" is the best most flexible build system by a mile Needs more skill to get the most out of it though, but I think it is a happy medium in terms of being a development centred build system but straightforward to use once you get the idea, and assuming you know some basic shell scripting and put in some effort to learn some general purpose configuration tricks. Even that is made pretty simple because previously made build plugins act as ready made templates.

I was admiring the consistent good quality that Debiandog has brought for years. KL is a new kid on the block, relatively speaking. Some KL releases are great, some need a bit more work, but all are fun and high potential. Quite easy to become a FR/KL dev, but like every distro here we need more such people.

[Clarity]

This community is approaching a crossroad as the new technology is bumping up against established PUP/DOG societies. @dimkr is one of the 1st developers to start a trek to embracing the newer in his pipewire-wayland desktop productions. His astute steps were to produce a traditional appearance of past PUPs, while simultaneously sliding a distro into this forum which is full on new technology.

Since then, wayland desktop technology has REALLY improved.

KLs have already taken the plunge toward the embracing of newer technology. To date, they have produced one of this forum's finest distros with their developer, @Sofiya, producing one of the most polished distros this forum has ever seen in the KDE production presented. It is crazy stable, crazy full featured, kept updated, and crazy performing the subsystems tasks it does on user bequest. There has been much contributions by all of the KL developers to the ability of this distro.

So far, as desktops go in 2024, KDE is lightyears ahead of ALL other desktops. Along with the very fact it is using the most current technologies, GTK, QT, etc. this KDE KL is a masterpiece in forum productions.

I am sure, that soon, we will see some of the most amazing PUP/DOG/KL productions ever seen in a very short period of time over the next 12-18 months. So much so, that within this short period of time, we wont remember the past technologies at all.

Long live PUPPY LINUX FORUM!

[Joshua26]

ZoneMinder was easy to install in DebianDog and ran okay. I also like DD and I've recommended it to friends that I knew were looking for an OS and I knew would really appreciate the switch over to using DD. Most of those guys are still using it!

ZoneMinder installed smoothly on DebianDog and worked well. I also recommend DebianDog to friends who are looking for a new operating system. And they praised the switch. Glad to hear that most are still using it!

[fredx181]

ZoneMinder was easy to install in DebianDog and ran okay. I also like DD and I've recommended it to friends that I knew were looking for an OS and I knew would really appreciate the switch over to using DD. Most of those guys are still using it!

ZoneMinder installed smoothly on DebianDog and worked well. I also recommend DebianDog to friends who are looking for a new operating system. And they praised the switch. Glad to hear that most are still using it!

When you say 'DebianDog' , what exactly does it mean ? Just curious, as 'DebianDog' is not presented anymore as a 'distro' for some time already (shared as 'script to build' in the DebianDogs section for the most).
Is it from a build made with e.g. the bookworm build script or is it from any ISO once shared here on this forum (or older perhaps, like BusterDog or... ) ?
edit: oh..., perhaps you are a spammer. In that case, never mind about the above.

[dogcat]

ZoneMinder was easy to install in DebianDog and ran okay. I also like DD and I've recommended it to friends that I knew were looking for an OS and I knew would really appreciate the switch over to using DD. Most of those guys are still using it!

ZoneMinder installed smoothly on DebianDog and worked well. I also recommend DebianDog to friends who are looking for a new operating system. And they praised the switch. Glad to hear that most are still using it!

When you say 'DebianDog' , what exactly does it mean ? Just curious, as 'DebianDog' is not presented anymore as a 'distro' for some time already (shared as 'script to build' in the DebianDogs section for the most).
Is it from a build made with e.g. the bookworm build script or is it from any ISO once shared here on this forum (or older perhaps, like BusterDog or... ) ?

I believe it is probably a bot that regurgitates the post it replies to and attaches a spam link.

Its other post is at https://forum.puppylinux.com/viewtopic. ... 20#p130620

I would like to see it answer your question and prove me wrong

[fredx181]

I believe it is probably a bot that regurgitates the post it replies to and attaches a spam link.

Its other post is at https://forum.puppylinux.com/viewtopic. ... 20#p130620

I would like to see it answer your question and prove me wrong

Yes , thanks, a bit later I thought too it's a spammer (see my edit: at previous post).
edit: now deleted user Joshua26.

[dimkr]

@dimkr is one of the 1st developers to start a trek to embracing the newer in his pipewire-wayland desktop productions. His astute steps were to produce a traditional appearance of past PUPs, while simultaneously sliding a distro into this forum which is full on new technology.

Next time my manager at work is asking me what I'm working on, my answer is going to be "embracing and sliding".