THIS LANDED IN MY PM INBOX

[backi]

taeRSH last Post September 17 2021.

[rockedge]

The whole forum has become prone to distraction instead of Puppy development.

It might seem so to the untrained eye but is simply not true. All of the paths of development eventually will be technology that continues to shape Puppy Linux going forward. For Puppy Linux to survive there must be changes in it's evolution. But what changes? What will actually work as the computer world constantly is shifting like desert sands. Just dealing with the changing mechanisms of booting is cause enough to keep advancing.

Then there is the lack of enthusiasm for the actual work in continued development. There are only a handful people that are actively working on the different approaches. With new machines is Puppy relevant and needed?

@peebee is in the midst of working on and releasing one after another improvements on the new VoidPup's. An absolute candidate and is pushing Puppy Linux into a leader of the pack....again. Then there is @dimkr working hard and with consistency on Vanilla Dpup another extremely solid advancement in the world of woof-CE builds. Just these 2 breakthrough projects are propelling the Puppy star ship with new ion engines towards the vast expanses. Also there is @BarryK continuing on producing unbelievably well thought out and the very useful EasyOS.

So I see see it differently. No it's not the same as it was. But again we are seeing exciting times and leaps and bounds of improvements and advances. We are to the point of improving the Puppy Wiki soon and putting in the effort to launch a improved version of what now exists. Just getting and keeping these forums alive is feat in of it's self.

I miss @taersh as well, and I've been wondering where he has been for a while now. I don't think he was in any distress over here in the forum the last times we saw him, so I'm not sure what is happening.

[Grey]

With new machines is Puppy relevant and needed?

A new device is not a reason to switch to a large distro I need Puppy even on a new computer. I can even perhaps give an example.

When rendering this project in Blender, guess how much RAM was used? Blender does not rape the hard drive... and used... 26 gigabytes of RAM. For such a simple project!

So I installed 64 GB of memory and use Puppy (Fossapup) as a system that does not consume a lot of resources for itself.

[mikewalsh]

@Grey :-

More or less the same reasons why I maxed-out to 32GB RAM, AND installed that GeForce GT710 - despite that everybody laughs at 'em! - because I didn't want the on-die GPU "borrowing" system RAM for VRAM.

After years with only 3 GB of RAM, I wanted to make sure I was never in that situation EVER again. And it means I can finally indulge in some of the video-rendering projects I've been promising myself I WOULD eventually get around to doing....

Oh, aye; Puppy is still very much "relevant" in today's world.....even with all this high-performance, high-capacity hardware. It's sure as hell not there for the OS's benefit; it's there for the user, and their projects. The OS enables that, sure, but once it's done so it really needs to basically "keep out of the way".....which our Pup does admirably. MyCrudSoft's abomination intrudes itself upon your consciousness at every opportunity.....as though the only possible reason computers could have for existing was simply TO run Windoze!!! A means in itself, as opposed to being a "means to an end".....

Nah. No way. For this Puppy-lover, "da Pup" roolz!

Mike.

[ozsouth]

With new machines is Puppy relevant and needed?

I'm mostly using my HP Chromebook (with crostini, the debian buster subsystem option), and I just bought one
for the last Puppy user I support, so my personal use of Puppy will likely be minimal from now. I am indebted
to the Puppy forum for giving me sufficient knowledge to set up crostini & would hate to see Puppy die. Those
remaining devs are gold! Peebee in particular has provided me with vital software & support for years.

[bigpup]

With new machines is Puppy relevant and needed?

It is not so much about need, but how useful it is as an operating system.

The OS does not need to be so small, anymore!

But there is no real reason it has to be really big in size.

To be useful, the OS has to be able to do, what you need to do.

The basic, operational principles of Puppy Linux, are still very different, from other Linux operating systems.
That alone, is a reason to still support and use it.

[amethyst]

How does Puppy 64-bit systems compare with other systems in terms of system resources? I'm still using 32-bit but the change to 64-bit seems inevitable (especially as far as new internet browsers are concerned). With an old machine and "only" 2GB of RAM this becomes a challenge more and more. I would for instance like to know how the new Puppy 64-bits compare to say a Windows 7 64-bit system.

[bigpup]

Try a 64bit version of Puppy and see what it does.
If the 32bit Puppy you use has a 64bit version.
Run both and compare the two on your hardware.

And do not get all bent up about RAM usage.

The newer Linux kernels have much improved memory controllers.
They do a lot of stuff with memory that older kernels did not.

Pup-Sysinfo->Devices->Memory

the important info is:
Actual Used RAM: Used - (buffers + cached)
Actual Free RAM: Free + (buffers + cached)

Buffers and cached, are set aside memory, but it can be released, at any time, to use for other memory needs.

That is why actual free memory is Free + (buffers + cached).

[amethyst]

I have a DpupBuster 64-bit. Seems to be slightly slower than my 32-bit Puppy's, memory usage seem to be okay (not much difference as far as I can see). The thing is I have so many things to change. For instance I have to install Java 64-bit, upgrade Wine, etc. I'll probably switch over when I start to run into problems with the internet browser. Until then, think I'll continue with 32-bit. No real reason to change now.

[dimkr]

The whole forum has become prone to distraction instead of Puppy development.

Often, I feel like this, too.

Specifically, two users of this forum that tend to nag about the same topic over and over and/or attack me personally make me want to leave it and move all technical discussions to GitHub Discussions.

But again we are seeing exciting times and leaps and bounds of improvements and advances.

That's true, but lots of effort gets wasted! This forum contains many projects, and very often, developers ignore the work of others (admittedly, I ignore *dog related stuff, and look at a variety Puppy derivatives, to see what common problems I can find).

For example, people keep building Puppy derivative that use GTK+ 2, and don't bother including matching GTK+ 3 themes. woof-CE these days is capable of building a pure GTK+ 3, a mixed GTK+ 2 and 3, or a "traditional" GTK+ 2 Puppy, and even has 3 themes that support both GTK+ 3 and 2. These themes can be used in the "GTK+ 2 purist" builds too, with zero risk, while giving GTK+ 3 applications consistent appearance. It's a shame most developers ignore this future-proofing; some even boycott recent innovations in woof-CE and resist risk-free change for reasons I don't understand completely.

Also, woof-CE's Wayland support is moving forward (https://github.com/puppylinux-woof-CE/w ... nd-Support, https://github.com/puppylinux-woof-CE/w ... projects/1, https://github.com/vanilla-dpup/unstable/releases). It's a shame nobody tries to build the first Puppy that uses a pure Wayland desktop out-of-the-box: that would be the most hardware-accelerated, smooth, small and lightweight Puppy of its generation.

Moreover, woof-CE has a weekly job that builds the latest minor versions of longterm kernels, in https://github.com/puppylinux-woof-CE/w ... el-kit.yml. Most Puppy builders don't use these builds, and instead, craft their own kernel configuration (tedious and error-prone work): this results in regressions (like a driver that gets left out, if its configuration key has changed) or bad defaults (like wasteful memory management) and users eventually learn that they should stick to a specific kernel package that works for them, but doesn't receive stability and security fixes.

(There are many more examples.)

With an old machine and "only" 2GB of RAM this becomes a challenge more and more.

Have you tried any recent Puppy? For a year or so, the woof-CE init script automatically creates a compressed swap block device in RAM (zram), if no swap partition is found on disk. This swap device is small and has low priority, but it doesn't eat your disk and it's super fast.

I have an old 32-bit ARM Chromebook with 2 GB of RAM (and an eMMC drive; you don't want swap there) and this feature makes it work very very well, even with many browser tabs. This swap devices eats a portion of your RAM, but the compression ratio is very good, and you hardly notice any slowdown when RAM is full and the system starts to use this swap device. The browsing experience is comparable to what I see on a much newer Chromebook I have, with 4 GB of RAM and a much faster 64-bit processor.

IMHO, if you have a 64-bit capable CPU, you should go 64-bit.

[rockedge]

make me want to leave it and move all technical discussions to GitHub Discussions.

This seems to be a trend which is very disappointing, so now again I am considering how much more energy I will invest in these forums, wiki and all of the infra structure involved. The numbers of users has dropped in a major way and the numbers are not encouraging and this quote has turned into a much more common sentiment than ever before.

I just set up side by side the current Puppy Wiki and the new software to replace it. To do the conversions needed to go with a new wiki package since our current WikkaWiki is now a dead project, on a local web server (Puppy Linux Bionic64-CE as host, I personally built from woof-CE) But the enthusiasm is just gone and sure I get @dimkr's comment but that problem is a 2 way street. So press on? For what reason when 5 or so people use the forum and 4 threaten to quit every other day? So the wiki conversion is on hold and I am considering dropping the current wiki altogether. Anyway who wants to really do any administration, never mind contribute to a wiki when over half of the forum users are on the verge of quitting anyway? So what ever wreckage survives and operates will just stay that way until complete collapse then deletion.

@dimkr Would love to do more with woof-CE but trying to get more of a grip on getting a custom recipe out of it just isn't worth it anymore for me.

You know why..........I'm prone to distraction while pushing evil intentions all the while being mean and attacking people.

[amethyst]

@rockedge
So what are the reasons for the slow uptake? I've also noticed a drop in users' participation lately. Are people moving on using other distributions perhaps?

[rockedge]

@amethyst I don't really know. First I thought it was people went to the oldforum and realized it was static and thought Puppy was in decline. But that doesn't seem to be the case. Can't be search engines, this forum pops up on the first 5 if not top of the results pages every time. Maybe Puppy is just not that popular. I see all the advantages of Puppy Linux but others?

I do hope that the Puppy Linux variants out there work so well that there is no need to find solutions to problems and most users ARE actually doing stuff with it. Then so many names just don't come around anymore.
sc0ttman for example. Have not seen a thing from him in a long long time, taersh either and there are others as well.

Maybe we are aging out. NO younger people care about it and one by one the regulars drift away. I thought Puppy Linux and it's cousins would be more relevant than ever before these days, but I seem to be wrong and probably out of touch. Running as root, how utterly insane is that?

It is true that there are now other distro's probably more popular and Puppy isn't taken seriously enough to be in the same league. It must be a perception issue.

[dimkr]

You know why..........I'm prone to distraction while pushing evil intentions all the while being mean and attacking people.

Don't worry, you're not one of the two people that make me want to leave. I believe you think my impression of you is negative, and that is not true. I don't think your intentions are bad.

But sometimes I wonder if this forum is mostly controlled by an anti-Puppy or anti-progress crowd: some factions of the *dog crowd, 32 bit/X.Org/GTK+ 2 purists, "one-hit wonder" Puppy remasterers, or tinkerers who don't mind an absolutely horrible OS if they can tweak it to death. I think some of these people just want to see Puppy burn, or want to repeat the same formula forever, even if nobody uses Puppy anymore.

Puppy will decline without actual development, and in some ways, the forum is a distraction: packages that gets posted here and the private copies of woof-CE used to build many ISOs posted in the forums don't feed woof-CE's development. I don't think https://github.com/puppylinux-woof-CE/w ... ssues/2068 is enough to fix this, because the potential contributors to woof-CE are too busy with other things (for example, remastering old Puppy releases).

And I think some parts of this forum are too liberal: there's too much non-constructive feedback, too many irrelevant comments that talk about exactly the same thing, and sometimes you can't express your different opinion without touching somebody's soft spot and getting attacked.

[backi]

@amethyst wrote:

So what are the reasons for the slow uptake? I've also noticed a drop in users' participation lately. Are people moving on using other distributions perhaps?

So.... i for myself mostly using Fossa-Dog (or Bullseye-Dog) also have Fossa-Pup64 (frugally) installed....but almost never use it.
Fossa-Dog is my daily Driver......(works perfect ...for my Purposes).

The Problem is.... or it seems to be.... (if you want to call it a Problem).....most of them do work almost perfectly,except here and there some minor fine tuning.
So (almost) nothing to report.....

Since I am not a Coder or Developer myself (way above my Pay-Grade)....just a dumb End-User ....i am just looking for some useful Tips,Tricks,Programs or Information or even Entertainment on the Forum...or want to give (if i find some) useful Informations or Entertainment......now and than.

To be honest ......i personally do not need another Distro/Derivate/Remaster ....since i am fully satisfied with the "Dogs" Serie.

This does not mean that there is no need for further investigating/developing
/experimenting/refining and so on......

Could it be ....this seemingly "Stagnation" is a Result of...... that "Things" are working quite fine.........("Never change a running System?????")

I hope this does not to discourage anybody from further playing/experimenting with
new "Breeds" of Puppies.

Puppy Linux is not dying.....to perform it a bit "dramatically".....the World needs Puppy Linux (Forum) more than ever.
Puppy Linux It is one of the most innovative Linux Forums/Platforms on the Web.....in my humble Opinion.

Top Candidate for "The Linux Hall of Fame".

Thanks to all you Guys and Supporters (i can not name them all) who help to keep this Forum and Project alive .....

So keep on rocking ....you Guys......and best Wishes to you All.

[Grey]

Now decadent and gloomy moods have spread all over the world. It seems that this phenomenon has penetrated the forum as well.

Essentially. If the goal is to attract users, then it is necessary to copy the behavior model of "big" distros. That is, to REGULARLY release updates (this creates the appearance that "work is in full swing"). In addition, you may have to sacrifice "several zoo animals", that is, you need to develop ONE common distro, but with different desktops (KDE is mandatory).

And what to do? This is now the basis of promotion. It is necessary either to obey( help me, Obi-Wan Kenobi, you're my only hope...) the rules or not to want to be in the first places of the pedestal.

[dimkr]

If the goal is to attract users, then it is necessary to copy the behavior model of "big" distros.

There are some basic things that "serious" distros do, and Puppy doesn't. Security and stability updates are one thing.

But we must stop confusing "unique" with "valuable" - some things unique to Puppy are horrible (IMHO, SNS and PPM), while some unique things are truly valuable (for example, the ability to run from RAM).

[backi]

@dimkr wrote:

There are some basic things that "serious" distros do .....some things unique to Puppy are horrible (IMHO, SNS and PPM), while some unique things are truly valuable (for example, the ability to run from RAM).

This is the Reason why i do prefer the "Dogs" (Debian/Ubuntu Dogs).
They are based on "Mainstream" Distros but minimal.....connected to official (Ubuntu/Debian) Repositories via Synaptic.....but using the appreciated features of Puppy Linux (running in Ram for Example..frugal install......saving only on Demand.....fast remastering after easy Upgrades ......i like to run as root......and so on) .......

......also Multi -User capable if needed......maintained by a big Army of Developers.......with all the "Magic" of Puppy Linux of course......and a lot of yet not really recognized funky "Extras" too.
The Best of both Worlds.......Can`t be beat......IMHO...near to Perfection.
All i ever wanted/dreamed of..

I think the "Dogs" need more Attention.

[Grey]

(IMHO, SNS and PPM)

I agree with that (although I'm used to PPM). But if it's about attracting users... How to attract them without "unique things"?
And the main thing is to attract to what (to whom), if we do not have Puppy Linux as a distro, but only a collective name?

[ozsouth]

@rockedge - I really feel for your situation. It must be so discouraging after all your
effort. You are not the problem, nor are the devs. Puppy's niche is its customizability.
In 2011, Australia's biggest bank recommended a Puppy live CD for security. Soon after,
I made a version for a local radio station with just firefox & a clock, to stop tinkering.
What I've noticed is that most folk I know (many over 60) prefer out-of-the-box
generic solutions and laughed at me for spending so much time fixing basic things.
Other OSes drive technological advance & linux tries to play catchup. Ubuntu drives
that chase & we all follow. As @dimkr said, security is becoming a bigger issue too.
As I get older & my mind & health deteriorate, I'm losing the appetite for the chase.
Hence my seeking other solutions. I've had a few months of not having to fix many
things & I like that. I mostly enjoy reading the forum daily, & intend to still comment
& make occasional kernels & drivers even if I don't use Puppy much.

[mikewalsh]

Mm. I dunno.....

Personally, I don't think that an uptake of just under 2000 members in just over two years is bad going for a small, decidedly 'niche' family of lightweight distros. As for Oz's comment about 'enjoying' a few months of simply 'using' his computer instead of actively 'doing' stuff, I think that would drive me crackers.

You guys are like 'family' to me, and I really enjoy the atmosphere of the forums. Still, I suspect some of you are right; if we, as a community, don't decide once and for all just what it IS we want to do with Puppy/the Dogs/all the other related varieties, we're as good as putting nails in our own coffin.

I agree, we DO need more interested parties to put their names forward to take on the hum-drum, boring, but very necessary 'background' work that will keep our favourite OS 'viable' in an increasingly fussy, unsafe world. I wish I could do so, but the actual OS 'mechanics' which are so necessary just don't appeal to me; I can't muster the enthusiasm for that kind of work, and just can't get interested enough in it to be any good at it.

Which is a terrible admission from a dedicated Puppian, n'est-ce pas?

The whole idea behind automating some of my portable applications to handle their own updates was to free my time for doing more of what I'm now enjoying more than ever; actually trying to improve my coding skills, such as they are. Although I doubt they're leaning in the direction that some of you would like to see.....actual OS 'development' work. Still, we all of us have our own specialties.....and experience teaches that those who specialise in a particular field see that field as the most important one to put time & effort into, and frequently can't understand why MORE people don't see things as they do.

Hell. My 'maunderings' are NOT helping matters.....are they? Ignore me. I'm in a weird mood tonight.

Mike.

[amethyst]

I think it's more important how "active" the members are. You may have 10000 members but if only about 10 are regulars (or at least can be seen as relatively active posters).......

[Sound]

Simple things drive users away.

Maybe the colors of the names of the moderators can be changed to a more friendly pretty blue or green.
The bright orange is offensive to the eyes.

[Sound]

Actually both the red color and orange color of the admin and moderators names could be a friendlier color. I did not see the red until just now.

[bigpup]

the colors of the moderators and admin are picked, so they will show up in the forum, different optional board styles.

Red, for admin, is kind of a world standard forum color, to identify the administrator.

The bright orange is offensive to the eyes.

And it made you notice the name, did it not?

We tried different colors, across all the optional board styles.
These where the best fit.

Do not forget, there are some other standard colors, used for specific items, in different board styles.
So, those colors are already taken.

you do have option to have the board show up in a different style.

User Control Panel->Board preferences->Edit global settings->My board style

This changes to your selected style, when you log in.

[TerryH]

Actually both the red color and orange color of the admin and moderators names could be a friendlier color. I did not see the red until just now.

It only took 16 minutes, so that seems OK to me.

[mikewalsh]

Simple things drive users away.

Maybe the colors of the names of the moderators can be changed to a more friendly pretty blue or green.
The bright orange is offensive to the eyes.

I absolutely ADORE orange. It's always been my favourite colour.....

bigpup's right, though. I use one of the dark board styles. A "friendly, pretty blue" does not show up at all well on here.....and when members use it, I have one hell of a job reading it. But those colours were chosen to be as compatible as possible with all the different "themes", y'see.

Mike.

[mikewalsh]

Actually both the red color and orange color of the admin and moderators names could be a friendlier color. I did not see the red until just now.

It only took 16 minutes, so that seems OK to me.

^^^

Mike.

[Sound]

the colors of the moderators and admin are picked, so they will show up in the forum, different optional board styles.

Red, for admin, is kind of a world standard forum color, to identify the administrator.

The bright orange is offensive to the eyes.

And it made you notice the name, did it not?

We tried different colors, across all the optional board styles.
These where the best fit.

Do not forget, there are some other standard colors, used for specific items, in different board styles.
So, those colors are already taken.

you do have option to have the board show up in a different style.

User Control Panel->Board preferences->Edit global settings->My board style

This changes to your selected style, when you log in.

I don't see the optional board styles unless I log in, the 85% of the unwashed masses that do not log in would not know there was ever a way to adjust the irritant away?

Just a suggestion, death by 1000 cuts type of thing. Nice talking with you, bye.

[Sound]

Actually both the red color and orange color of the admin and moderators names could be a friendlier color. I did not see the red until just now.

It only took 16 minutes, so that seems OK to me.

Thanks for the welcome, I must now leave.