F96-CE_4 Latest Stable Release

[rockedge]

@vtpup no worries! We'll keep F96-CE_4 going strong and thanks for the head's up on the Java.

This we'll need to fix. I use Vassal to play board war games which relies on Java and I have it running but I installed Java manually.

[wiak]

I note that Focal Fossa reaches end of life in April 2025 so will no longer be supported(?).

Really I know nothing about this kind of stuff. Question I have is: are the repos for that distribution still available long term anywhere?

If not, would it not be a good idea if someone mirrored the Fossa repos for future use by this forum? (unless not necessary); perhaps package apt-mirror can do that (per the link I give at bottom of this post).

Seems to me that a problem with old distros is unavailable packages, and this is a problem when a user wants to keep a really old machine running reasonably well.

Yes, I know security updates re web use are problematic, but sometimes we just need a running computer for the likes of Libreoffice or okular (my needs) and can use a different computer for browsing (maybe via vnc or rdp).

I don't have space or time to mirror repos anyway, but did notice this document about doing so: https://kc.jetpatch.com/hc/en-us/articl ... untu-18-04

I just think it would be great to keep old fossa distros running forever with access to suitable old repos despite those who warn of security issues involved.

The likes of KLV distros can be made in either 32bit or 64bit form, but these are rolling release distros so won't end up fast on old machines. I suppose it would be possible to mirror a snapshot of Void's repos, but too late now for old ones anyway... We can however still access current Ubuntu Fossa repos, and maybe there are archives of the old repos of other distro releases too?

We do of course have the apt sfs capability I produced for Fossapup some years ago (via a FirstRib mod) and there is also Fossadog that works with apt natively in case any of the above apt-mirror stuff is relevant. I'll leave it to those who know about such matters to tell us if such measures would be needed to keep forum Fossa distros running longterm (yeah... despite security considerations, which we are most all well aware of...).

[peebee]

Question I have is: are the repos for that distribution still available long term anywhere?

Focal will be moved at EOL to:
https://old-releases.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/dists/

[ozsouth]

Fossa might wind up here, where Xenial & Bionic are: https://mirror.linux.org.au/ubuntu-rele ... buntu.com.

[rockedge]

With UPUP Raring 3.9.9.2 and Lucid the repo's were moved to archive.ubuntu.com.

I will have to double check if that's the correct format but it does start with archive

We can look at the oldforum for the topic. There's the exact instructions on how to do it.

[wiak]

Question I have is: are the repos for that distribution still available long term anywhere?

Focal will be moved at EOL to:
https://old-releases.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/dists/

So I presume that means the repos can still be used. That's good to know.

[rockedge]

Yes peebee has the URL correct!

[mikeslr]

@wiak , the problem encountered by Puppys when its binary-compatible distro reaches end of life is not with what is included in the ISO but that Package Managers no longer have access to archived repositories: not Puppy Package Manager, not Apt, not synaptic, not pkg-cli. Even if you could configure them to add an archive repository where 'old' applications are now located, there would be no dependency checking; or with say pkg-cli, if checked no automatic download. Say 'My-package' has five dependencies. You can obtain 'My-package' from the archive. But then you'd have to run ListDD to determine what depedencies it has; and seperately obtain each dependency. And that process is further complicated because applications in the archives are not grouped by distro-version but only alphabetically: the xyz package which was used in Trusty Tahr is in the same folder as that for Bionic Beaver, each distinguished by its numeric suffix.

Forunately with Puppys by the time EOL is reached, our devs and fans have packaged and made available applications which were not included in an ISO; and most portables can be used until the new version of a porable demands a glibc higher than that provided by a Puppy. By EOL many applications may have been packaged as self-contained AppImages and portables.

IMHO, the best thing to do in preparation of EOL is to decide what 'accessory' applications not otherwise available may be desired in the future, construct them and/or make them available. See my preparation of Bionic Beaver's EOL with publication of Bionicpup64-Revival, https://www.forum.puppylinux.com/viewto ... 994#p90666 and the discussion under its thread of Applications I chose not to include in its ISO, https://www.forum.puppylinux.com/viewto ... 994#p90668

Nothing lasts forever. My 'guestimate' is that 5 Human-Years translates to 85 Computer-Years. No matter how much we may irrationally love an operating system eventually it will have to be 'put out to pasture'. On rare occasions I still ride 'Bionicpup64-Revival'. But F-96 has become my daily driver. And I suspect in view of FossaFocal's approaching EOL, I'll have to eventually transition to NoblePup64 despite that It can't display analog clocks under PWidgets.

[Clarity]

Today, we discuss EOL which constantly occurs. Some, here on the thread, share concerns and approaches for archival needs that might be needed for an EOL distro.

Couple important things are brought out, I think.

• Package dependency for something 'new' (at least to the running EOL system) to be added to the running EOL system(s).

• Lack of a desire to want to change/upgrade from an EOL to newer version.

@mikeslr, to me, adds 2 great concepts:

1. extensions needed beyond just the archive

2. And "No matter how much we may irrationally love an operating system eventually it will have to be 'put out to pasture'."

I've often wondered in the past, If on a distro's forum thread, the distro builder should "Announce" when the foundation for that distro is at EOL and will no longer be actively maintained. This way, it would alert its users to know to seek a pathway forward at that time. It might be very useful for several reasons to do so as it offers mutual benefit to the current user as well as the developer who, too, has probably moved on to the newer supported foundation.

[wiak]

@wiak , the problem encountered by Puppys when its binary-compatible distro reaches end of life is not with what is included in the ISO but that Package Managers no longer have access to archived repositories: not Puppy Package Manager, not Apt, not synaptic, not pkg-cli. Even if you could configure them to add an archive repository where 'old' applications are now located, there would be no dependency checking...

Well, if that is the case, I remain concerned. If access to archived repos is so convoluted that is not encouraging. If so, I would again suggest the creation of our own repo mirror for the likes of Fossapup via apt-mirror package. On the otherhand, if the ubuntu archive can be used directly by apt and PPM all would be fine, but won't be if that approach will not deal with dependencies, which generally is a core job of efficient/useful package management. My concerns aren't just for fossapup distro of course.

Some may find it odd that wiak would care about legacy distros, but these people simply don't understand my wider distro views. My main philosophy in that domain is that legacy distros would be most useful (and sometimes importantly so) if kept 'alive', which primarily means that they continue to have some efficient/dynamic package management support (which is preferably able to resolve package dependencies).

Legacy distros, being small and fast are also potentially useful for use in a network of virtual machines; for example in education, which remains a huge market for Linux since Linux dominates the server world.

Would have been great to keep the likes of Bionicpup 'alive' in that sense, and fossa really is a current 'sweetspot' in terms of longtime useful facility and resource efficiency.