Does Abiword exist as an SFS?

[JASpup]

Does 32 or 64 bit matter?

I'm in a Xenial 64 puplet & 3.01 lists installed but it isn't. The PPM adds 3 dependencies, about 9MB total.

Libre is default and while usable I like Abi's simpler, classic feel. The Abi+Gnumeric distros are goers.

[OscarTalks]

You can package Abiword as an SFS if you want to, but this would be up to the person creating the package. If you have a .PET you can convert it to an SFS. The package would need to match the distro in terms of 32bit or 64bit. Abiword is usually included in most official Puppies so an SFS would not be needed and if you wanted to do a version upgrade it might not work as SFS because it would be underneath the original in the layered file system (using a .PET would be needed instead). If you are using a remaster of Xenial64 with the original Abiword removed, it may still be listed as installed because some of the files which list the installed packages may have been left behind. In this case you could probably create and load an SFS to optionally give you back the Abiword which has been removed in the remaster process. Some people have reported problems with Abiword crashing, leading to loss of work which can be quite serious and distressing. Personally I have always found it to be OK, but only use it for light tasks and regularly save any work. My remasters have the latest stable release of Abiword (3.0.4) which I compiled from source myself.

[bigpup]

I'm in a Xenial 64 puplet & 3.01 lists installed but it isn't.

In my install of Xenialpup64 7.5
Abiword is already installed in it and runs OK from menu->Documents->Abiword

Must be something wrong with your install.
Try running abiword in a terminal and see if it shows any errors.

[JASpup]

By your explanation it seems like I shouldn't bother.

I'm in Leafpad most of the time, but prefer Abi over Libre for word processing.

My experience thus far is SFS creation is intermediate to advanced level. I get the gist, but I have yet to have taken a PET with dependencies for a working SFS.

Existing SFS are hit-or-miss, and you have to learn what you're doing (e.g., "O-kay, this browser is running as Spot").

I haven't used Abi enough to experience crashes. Warning acknowledged.

You can package Abiword as an SFS if you want to, but this would be up to the person creating the package. If you have a .PET you can convert it to an SFS. The package would need to match the distro in terms of 32bit or 64bit. Abiword is usually included in most official Puppies so an SFS would not be needed and if you wanted to do a version upgrade it might not work as SFS because it would be underneath the original in the layered file system (using a .PET would be needed instead). If you are using a remaster of Xenial64 with the original Abiword removed, it may still be listed as installed because some of the files which list the installed packages may have been left behind. In this case you could probably create and load an SFS to optionally give you back the Abiword which has been removed in the remaster process. Some people have reported problems with Abiword crashing, leading to loss of work which can be quite serious and distressing. Personally I have always found it to be OK, but only use it for light tasks and regularly save any work. My remasters have the latest stable release of Abiword (3.0.4) which I compiled from source myself.

[JASpup]

I'm in a Xenial 64 puplet & 3.01 lists installed but it isn't.

In my install of Xenialpup64 7.5
Abiword is already installed in it and runs OK from menu->Documents->Abiword

Must be something wrong with your install.
Try running abiword in a terminal and see if it shows any errors.

I've reported a history of this problem, but usually with official installs.

Is it possible a puplet maker could remove Abiword while the PPM still lists it installed?

I have an XML and a script in /usr/local/apps/abiword/ (those two files alone), and otherwise a bunch of .svg icons, but there's no "abiword" on this system.

[bigpup]

Puplet makers could do anything.

I know you asked for an sfs package.
But here is the pet package for Xenialpup64 7.5
http://distro.ibiblio.org/puppylinux/pe ... x86_64.pet

If you installed anything Abiword using the Puppy Package manager(PPM).
I would uninstall it first, before installing the pet.

[OscarTalks]

I presume the puplet creator removed Abiword because Libre was added as a substitute. I believe there are some files (maybe under /root/.packages?) which PPM reads in order to know what is already installed. If these have not been amended, PPM will be misinformed.

I think the original .PET is this one:-
http://distro.ibiblio.org/puppylinux/pe ... x86_64.pet

There are several fairly easy options here. If PPM refuses to install it (because it is already listed as "installed") you can extract the .PET using UExtract and move the files to their appropriate locations in your system (manual install) or run dir2sfs on the (correct) root of the directory tree and this will create an SFS for you.

Really it would be better to grab the source of the latest abiword-3.0.4 release and compile that (as it will have more bugfixes). You may need to add libboost-dev as a build time dependency, but it is not required as a run time dependency. Unfortunately I don't have any 64bit builds of this at present.

[mikeslr]

Hi JASpup,

Mostly I use LibreOffice Writer. But I always avoid abiword. Perhaps it's OK for a short note. But the things I write have a tendency to grow beyond a page or so; and abiword will crash at some inopportune moment. Worse, even though abiword reads and writes files of various file-type, e.g. odt, rtf --two I commonly use-- it employs some formatting mechanism inconsistent with that used by LibreOffice and other word-processors. Whether created under abiword or just opened in it, when saved using abiword then opened in another word-processor the formatting will be wrong.

If you have Wine on your system, for a light-weight word-processor I recommend Atlantis, viewtopic.php?p=13216#p13216. If not, give RTFed Word Processor a try, http://www.murga-linux.com/puppy/viewto ... 60#1029936. I think Puppus Dogfellow accompanying comments means that it works well under 64-bit with 32-bit compatibility SFS loaded. I've examined the pet and it is a 32-bit.

[tosim]

I've been using AtlantisWP for many years, and can attest to it being really good.

[OscarTalks]

I had a go at compiling abiword-3.0.4 in Xenial64
The .PET is here:-
http://smokey01.com/OscarTalks/abiword- ... xenial.pet
I also packaged as .SFS but this will (I believe) only be suitable for use if the old abiword-3.0.1 original files have definitely been removed.
(EDIT:- The .SFS package has now been taken down)
You can try it and see what happens.
Anyone trying to do a version upgrade in standard Xenial64 should use the .PET package.
In any case this is strictly for testing purposes only.
Some people have reported crashes with abiword which can mean lost work
In theory though, a later version should have bugfixes so should make crashes less likely
The build was configured for GTK2 and with the same set of plugins as the original.

[backi]

Mikeslr wrote:

Mostly I use LibreOffice Writer. But I always avoid Abiword. Perhaps it's OK for a short note. But the things I write have a tendency to grow beyond a page or so; and abiword will crash at some inopportune moment. Worse, even though abiword reads and writes files of various file-type, e.g. odt, rtf --two I commonly use-- it employs some formatting mechanism inconsistent with that used by LibreOffice and other word-processors.

Had similar Experiences.
Abiword ruined a few Times my Documents (formatting Problems ---formatting -printing Problems on longer Documents ).....also did crash a few Times. I do completely avoid Abiword since,---and would not use it any longer..... quite buggy .

To be on the safe Side better look for LibreOffice:
as AppImage:
viewtopic.php?f=96&t=1630

or :
LibreOffice as sfs or pet File:
viewtopic.php?f=96&t=404

[oui]

I'm in a Xenial 64 puplet & 3.01 lists installed but it isn't. The PPM adds 3 dependencies, about 9MB total.

also I prefer actually (it's dependent of the actual occupations!!!) the Gnome Suite plus magicpoint (as I really rarely use some presentation!).

(but for A LOT OF JOBS, I really prefer mTpaint! especially to trim pictures to upload in forums ; gimp can also does it but I am not happy to have found it preinstalled in my usual Puppy used daily in the last 6 months)

make it easy:

- start fresh as new frugal

- uninstall what you want

- install more

- REMASTER

but you need to start with a Puppy iso made with an yet accessible and intact depository!!!

a lot of Ubuntu puppy's are obsolete!

In your case, it CAN BE a desolation !

(I use actually the Dpups 32 and 64 bits from josejp, especially with XFCE4, and I am enthusiast of then! Daily I use more the 32 bit version because the remasterization I did do: I is portable on more than only one or two of my laptop's collection!)

I add 3 overviews on my actual app's in subdiv's internet, office and soud (yes they all work including xombrero and tazweb 32 bit from slitaz as xombrero is present - tazweb is really useful to avoid a lot of smudge caused by the advertising on a lot of sites! probably it would be possible to compile easily a 64 bit version as you seem to prefer 64 bit... palemoon is the actual one and is NOT in the iso, but only a link to a partition on my HD, same thing with Seamonkey 2.32, the last version with xulrunner, giving me the comfort of the WYSYG composer.

My iso includes a lot of different hunspell dic and of fonts for Chinese, Hindi/Sanskrit but not Urdu, Japanese, Korean, Tamil and didiwiki of course as didiwiki is the best easy smart editor and works in CLI in links or links2: you can write normal, bold, italic, underlined in CLI with it and make beautiful only-readable spreadsheets in more than one language or writing font using XFCE4 in X or setxkbmap pipa popu in the parallel console and rotate the layout with "cursor up" in command line!

I don't use some save file! Never!)

[JASpup]

updating my original post:

There are different 32/64 Abiword versions in the repository. I was trying to SFS the 32 version on a 64 system. The 64 version is a single PET and runs without dependencies.

There's a right-click menu utility in this Xenial puplet that is supposed to make SFS, but when I copy the PET to the desktop, the menu option disappears. When I don't copy the PET and just select the menu option, it does nothing. The mysterious green menu icon...

It would probably be easy to SFS Abiword another method, but it'd be interesting to know what this menu utility is and how to use it.

[JASpup]

Abiword is that bad and Atlantis is an alternative to check out if you WINE, noted.

Why not Word + Wordpad then?

Mostly I use LibreOffice Writer. But I always avoid abiword. Perhaps it's OK for a short note. But the things I write have a tendency to grow beyond a page or so; and abiword will crash at some inopportune moment. Worse, even though abiword reads and writes files of various file-type, e.g. odt, rtf --two I commonly use-- it employs some formatting mechanism inconsistent with that used by LibreOffice and other word-processors. Whether created under abiword or just opened in it, when saved using abiword then opened in another word-processor the formatting will be wrong.

If you have Wine on your system, for a light-weight word-processor I recommend Atlantis, viewtopic.php?p=13216#p13216. If not, give RTFed Word Processor a try, http://www.murga-linux.com/puppy/viewto ... 60#1029936. I think Puppus Dogfellow accompanying comments means that it works well under 64-bit with 32-bit compatibility SFS loaded. I've examined the pet and it is a 32-bit.

[bigpup]

There's a right-click menu utility in this Xenial puplet that is supposed to make SFS, but when I copy the PET to the desktop, the menu option disappears. When I don't copy the PET and just select the menu option, it does nothing. The mysterious green menu icon...

You just found a bug in this Xenial Puplet.
Whatever it is !

[JASpup]

The creator goes by battleshooter on sourceforge.net.

Is it normal for them to welcome feedback, perhaps when they've moved on to new projects?

Would there be Bionic or Fossa XFCE puplets by anyone else?

https://sourceforge.net/u/battleshooter/profile/

You just found a bug in this Xenial Puplet.
Whatever it is !

[mikeslr]

Responding to some non-vital matters JASpup raised on a couple of threads:

xfce-xenial with a bug in the right-click facilities: You can now appreciate why there aren't a lot of udrv.sfses -- about the term, see my post following yours on the 'grandpa friendly' thread.

lxde uses openbox window-manager with some panel (lx or tint2 or other) and usually pcman as file-manager, although others could be used. xfce is the window-manager customarily associated with thunar as file-manager. But, again, a different file-manager could be used.

However, Puppys* are built using woof and the default build is rox-filemanager, jwm-window manager. To have something different, someone has to not only build it but has to figure out to what extent rox can be removed, what applications are dependent on rox, and how to duplicate their facility in the absence of rox. Cf. peebee's LxQtPup, viewtopic.php?p=2419#p2419.
In Puppys, the right-click menu is a part-of/function-of rox file-manager. Battleshooter is/was a talented programmer. Among other things her work with glibc, http://www.murga-linux.com/puppy/viewto ... 989#806989, served as the foundation for our ability to run recent web-browsers in old Puppys. Currently, however, Puppys are not her concern. And while xenialpup is a great operating system, it is now 6 human years --that's about 90 computer years-- old, and a half-dozen or so Ubuntu versions behind. [Most importantly, its openssl --essential for internet security-- is out of date. To update it requires a glibc update, and glibc --being one of an operating system's basic infra-structures-- if updated along with every built in module which depends on it will result in a frankenstein version of bionicpup or fossapup].
So, no. It's not reasonable to think that anyone would be interested in improving xfce-xenialpup. And criticizing it would serve no purpose other than to demean its creator.
Considering your window-manager preferences, it is unfortunate that AFAIK peebee withdrew his LxQtpup-xenial. But if you're interested, you might ask him. Or starting with some available Lx(Qt)pup package see if you can build it.
Or search for the various Puppys Josejp2424 has published. He's been doing some interesting things with alternate window managers and has published several 32-bit Puppys.

P.S. For older Puppys you might want to install Vicmz's openboxplus, http://murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic. ... 730#703730; for newer, radky's FBbox, http://www.smokey01.com/radky/. Also note that with openbox (+ its lxpanel choice) or FbBox WhiskerMenu can be added without also needing the entire xfce structure. But WhiskerMenu doesn't add much to FbBox. And AppFinder can be easily added regardless of which window-manager is in use.
-==-=-=-=-
* For various reasons discussed elsewhere I think this is the preferable plural. Now I have to remember to type it that way.

[TerryH]

The creator goes by battleshooter on sourceforge.net.

Is it normal for them to welcome feedback, perhaps when they've moved on to new projects?

Would there be Bionic or Fossa XFCE puplets by anyone else?

https://sourceforge.net/u/battleshooter/profile/

You just found a bug in this Xenial Puplet.
Whatever it is !

battleshooter, unfortunately i don't believe has made an appearance on this forum yet, but used to come and then disappear for extended periods on the old forum, then reappear when ever time allowed. She produced some great puppy derivatives.

If you want an excellent current xfce 32 bit puppy, look at mistfire's quickpup:
viewtopic.php?f=33&t=1743

[mikewalsh]

The creator goes by battleshooter on sourceforge.net.

Is it normal for them to welcome feedback, perhaps when they've moved on to new projects?

AFAIK, in a communication I had from battleshooter a few years back - when she assisted with the built-in 'lib' directory I've used in my 'portable' Chromium-based browsers for some time - she intimated that we wouldn't be seeing much of her in the forseeable future, due to her taking an advanced Multimedia Studies degree as a 'mature' student. That was expected to last at least 5-6 years, it seems.

Quite how she's getting on with things in this COVID-dominated world, I wouldn't like to say....

Mike.

[JASpup]

If you want an excellent current xfce 32 bit puppy, look at mistfire's quickpup:
viewtopic.php?f=33&t=1743

Thanks for reference though I believe 32 machines are headed for the dustbin, as much as I still prefer them. They seem simplier and less resource demanding, like storage space. It's nice that they are still being maintained, but the machines themselves don't have the power to keep up with contemporary use demands.

I can't update this machine so it can struggle to keep up.

I'm about 50/50 in X-Tahr/Tahr JWM on my 32 machine this past month, Xenial XFCE 80% of the time on my 64.

[JASpup]

Interesting. She's talented. I wonder what hoops she jumped for her creation. The other interesting XFCE maker would be X-Tahr and X-Slacko creator(s).

Battleshooter gave us something customized, while the X-series is more generic and flexible.

AFAIK, in a communication I had from battleshooter a few years back - when she assisted with the built-in 'lib' directory I've used in my 'portable' Chromium-based browsers for some time - she intimated that we wouldn't be seeing much of her in the forseeable future, due to her taking an advanced Multimedia Studies degree as a 'mature' student. That was expected to last at least 5-6 years, it seems.

Quite how she's getting on with things in this COVID-dominated world, I wouldn't like to say....

[mikewalsh]

@JASpup :-

X-Slacko & X-Tahr? That would be rg66, one of the old, regular crew from Murga days.

This I know because I, too, tried his XFCE-based Slacko Puppies for a change; I ran X-Slacko 2.3.2 for a while on ye anciente Dell lappie, where it worked really well. Later X-Slacko/Precise/Tahr Puplets never quite seemed to "hit the spot", somehow......not the way 2.3.2 managed to.

Having said which, the only reason I'll give XFCE the time of day is that out of all the 'mainstream' DEs, it's the best of a bad bunch.....I honestly don't have time for any of them, if the truth be known.

But that's one of the things I like about Linux; there's enough different ways of doing stuff that it would be really weird if most folks couldn't manage to find a combination they're happy with.

Mike.

[JASpup]

@JASpup :-

X-Slacko & X-Tahr? That would be rg66, one of the old, regular crew from Murga days.

I started on X-Slacko but use X-Tahr now for the same S-pup compatiblity issues facing the Mainline JWM versions.

Newness doesn't help the Slackware version much.

COMPATIBILITY IS KEY!

For DEs I think we also have an aesthetics issue. Computers are about binary instructions, and theoretically if humans could interpret that organically we wouldn't need other data.

I've never been that scientific, but I understand why others would be. It's not great, but an improvement over the conventional God.

Following, when I see some of our rough-looking desktops that's what I think. If it's functional, looks don't matter. If the user is comfortable, we're done.

[mikewalsh]

...Following, when I see some of our rough-looking desktops that's what I think. If it's functional, looks don't matter. If the user is comfortable, we're done.

Hm. And THIS qualifies as "rough"..??

[Click to enlarge:-]

(And before you say it, no; I don't think any of the mainstream DEs look particularly good. Nor do I think Windows is owt "special", either....As you say, aesthetics are in the eye of the beholder; if you're happy with what YOU have to look at all day, why should anybody else care? It's a very personal choice, desktops.)

I'm getting the impression that, for you personally, the whole thing is about maximum "ease-of-use". A complete "noob" should be able to set everything up to their liking without really needing to consult anyone at all. Everything should be self-explanatory; tons of 'wizards' & 'tooltips', and loads of easy-to-read documentation, yes? Pardon me for saying it, but this is sounding more & more like MyCrudSoft's abomination by the second..!!

I don't think Pup does too badly in the tooltips'n'wizards department, actually. My own biggest complaint with Linux documentation has never been the lack of it - that's not an issue! - but rather, the 'comprehension level'. Too much of it assumes that everyone who reads it is already a fully paid-up member of the "übergeek" squad, and is written accordingly. Consequently, much of it is incomprehensible to those who are most likely to need it...

Mike.

[OscarTalks]

@JASpup
Earlier in the thread I posted that I compiled abiword-3.0.4 and packaged it as both .PET and .SFS
Not sure if the .SFS is any use to you, but since it is really only suitable for Xenial64 remasters in which abiword has been removed (as per the specifics of this thread) I would like to take it down from my smokey01.com storage repo in a day or two. I will leave the .PET there as people may want to test that as an upgrade to the original installed version.

[JASpup]

@JASpup
Earlier in the thread I posted that I compiled abiword-3.0.4 and packaged it as both .PET and .SFS
Not sure if the .SFS is any use to you, but since it is really only suitable for Xenial64 remasters in which abiword has been removed (as per the specifics of this thread) I would like to take it down from my smokey01.com storage repo in a day or two. I will leave the .PET there as people may want to test that as an upgrade to the original installed version.

Sorry Oscar I don't know how or if I missed that.

I think I'm with a .pet that installs easily enough as it's the right one for Xenial64.

Dependencies are really the issue with .sfs. If not present, it doesn't go looking and they won't run. The 64 .pet I should have found first go doesn't need any.

Overall I've been sufficiently scared off Abi for write operations no matter how much I like it, so I'll only use it to read documents.

My weaning is .xls/.doc-era Office apps and if WINE fluidly supports the old MS programs, that's where I want to land.

I don't know what programming changed, but Abi loads almost instantly unlike Libre and the newer MS Office versions. Tinkering around a word processing document doesn't require loading a battleship.