F96_4-radky6-CE Perfomance Evaluation and Finalization

[bigpup]

As I understand the nocopy boot command option.

The different sfs's are only loaded (layered) into the final layered operating filesystem.
The contents of the sfs stays on the drive.
Anything needed from them, is gotten by accessing the sfs, by reading it as needed, and putting that specific needed item from the sfs, into RAM to use.

So if something is later needed from one of the sfs's.
That needed item is read from the sfs and put into RAM to be used.

Computer runs slower, because time is used to read the sfs, find the item requested, and put that item into RAM.
Mainly the longer time it takes to read from the drive, (copy) move the requested item from the drive, and put it into RAM.

During booting process all the needed stuff to run the computer and end up with an operating Puppy.
Only what is needed is read from the sfs's and put into RAM.

This is the same as if you did a full install of Puppy, that will have no SFS files in the full install.
Everything stays on the drive until needed to be put into RAM to use.

A normal boot,
having the different sfs's load into RAM.
Eliminates the need to read from the drive, and move stuff into RAM.

The save file or folder always stays on the drive and has to be read from it, requested item moved into RAM to use.
The filesystem in the save is only layered into the operating filesystem, not loaded into RAM.

[amethyst]

Computer runs slower, because time is used to read the sfs, find the item requested, and put that item into RAM

.

In both cases the sfs is already mounted. Exactly the same happens when the sfs file is copied to RAM (the file is copied not the extracted contents, I've mentioned that to you before). So the nocopy option slightly slower at initial operation, in my opinion hardly noticecable though. In both cases the contents of the sfs still has to be accessed to fetch the files but because the sfs file is in RAM the fetching should be slightly faster (still needs to be decompressed though). Just copying the sfs file (as a whole) to RAM at bootup is highly overrated in terms of overall performance and the copying itself takes time which should be taken into consideration.

[bigpup]

I agree!

The speed of modern computers is making the difference between loaded into ram or not loaded into ram less and less.

Modern SSD's are getting read transfer speeds as good as DDR 3 RAM speeds that older computers had.
Most have the lower speed DDR 3 RAM. That was the days you had to pay a lot for the fastest RAM.

However, the difference is noticeable if reading from a Hard Drive, USB drive, or CD.

Anyway getting off the subject of checking out this version of Puppy and getting it cleaned up for official release.

To me, this version of Puppy should follow the standards, set in Woof-CE, for what each specific drv.sfs has in it.

What is this version trying to be.
Puppy Linux or Puppy like?

If it is going to be radically different from Fossapup64 9.5.
It is not just an update of it.
It is a totally different Puppy version.

Then it needs to not be named Fossapup64 in any way.
That name has already been used by Fossapup64 9.5.

If this is not going to follow the standard setup that is provided by Woof-CE and is used in Fossapup64 9.5.

You need to have some provided info about how this is going to work.

[Feek]

As I understand the nocopy boot command option.

The different sfs's are only loaded (layered) into the final layered operating filesystem.
The contents of the sfs stays on the drive.
Anything needed from them, is gotten by accessing the sfs, by reading it as needed, and putting that specific needed item from the sfs, into RAM to use.

So if something is later needed from one of the sfs's.
That needed item is read from the sfs and put into RAM to be used.

Computer runs slower, because time is used to read the sfs, find the item requested, and put that item into RAM.
Mainly the longer time it takes to read from the drive, (copy) move the requested item from the drive, and put it into RAM.

During booting process all the needed stuff to run the computer and end up with an operating Puppy.
Only what is needed is read from the sfs's and put into RAM.

This is the same as if you did a full install of Puppy, that will have no SFS files in the full install.
Everything stays on the drive until needed to be put into RAM to use.

It depends, among other things, on the speed of the device from which it is booted. In general, it could be said that pfix=nocopy can be suitable in combination with a hard disk (sufficiently fast devices) and, conversely, unsuitable in combination with a usb device (which seems to be considerably slower).

As already mentioned, the compression type of puppy sfs files will also affect the final result.

For a long time I used vanilladpup64 with basic settings (ie copy sfs to ram). I'm booting from the hard drive. I recently tried adding the pfix=nocopy parameter. It seems a little better to me. Boot time is shorter (sfs are not copied to ram) and I have more ram available at the beginning of the session (after that it depends on what all applications I open). Firefox-esr built-in launch speed is almost identical compared to copying sfs's to ram (vanilladpup uses zstd compression type).
(10 year old thinkpad)

[bigpup]

For a long time I used vanilladpup64 with basic settings (ie copy sfs to ram). I'm booting from the hard drive. I recently tried adding the pfix=nocopy parameter. It seems a little better to me. Boot time is shorter (sfs are not copied to ram) and I have more ram available at the beginning of the session (after that it depends on what all applications I open).

That is the purpose of nocopy keep more RAM not used.
You describe how it will run.

[amethyst]

The biggest advantage of copying the sfs files to RAM is obviously to operate complete in RAM without having to access the physical storage media. Other that it's a waste copying sfs's to RAM, the copying time at bootup is just so frustrating in the first place.

[amethyst]

the compression type of puppy sfs files will also affect the final result.

Absolutely, the biggest factor in my opinion. You want the fastest possible decompressing algorithm.

[dimkr]

Firefox-esr built-in launch speed is almost identical compared to copying sfs's to ram (vanilladpup uses zstd compression type).
(10 year old thinkpad)

I see similar results with my 11 years old Thinkpad and a 7 years old Dell. Most Puppy releases feel slow here and there, especially when I launch an application or navigate the file system. zstd solves that problem for me: I can afford the ~10% increase in SFS size because I still have enough RAM for pfix=copy, and the huge difference in decompression speed is worth it.

[bigpup]

Still testing programs and will report what I find.

Maybe it is me, but where this versions ISO is located for download.
It is very slow to download.

If you can do it.
It would be best to have the ISO placed into the official Puppy repository at ibiblio.
https://distro.ibiblio.org/puppylinux/

[rockedge]

@bigpup Which location URL is it that is downloading slowly?

[wizard]

@rockedge

Probably the downloads from smoky01 servers, I noticed too. Downloads from Sourceforge (peebee stuff) are 3-4 times faster for me.

wizard

[bigpup]

@bigpup Which location URL is it that is downloading slowly?

Yes the smokey01 server.

I am clicking on the link (F96_4-radky6-CE) in the first post of this topic.
www.smokey01.com/radky/Testing/F96_4-CE_radky6.iso

Well, now when I click on the link, I get this:

Sorry, this page doesn't exist.
Please check the URL or go back a page.
404 Error. Page Not Found.

If this version of Puppy is going to be a release of Puppy Linux and posted on Distrowatch.
It seems to me that it should be available from the Puppy official repository at ibiblio. https://distro.ibiblio.org/puppylinux/
For sure, it will always be available for download, because that repository is never going away.
Plus, I do not know what smokey01 is providing, but not sure if he wants the download demand, that putting a version listed on Distrowatch on his server, will cause.

Best I can find out from ibiblio.com
To post to the official Puppy repository

register to get an account.
That allows you to post.

Follow this requirement:
You may not post anything digital that belongs to someone else without permission.
You may not post descriptions of, links to, or methods for stealing someone’s intellectual property (software, video, audio, images), or for breaking any other law.

In the Puppy repository in the different pet directories.
I see all kinds of pet packaged software made by others, but it is stuff provided by people that post it on this forum, which gives us permission to use it as we want.
So for that stuff, the permission to post has already been provided, by the original developer of the software.

[peebee]

Some observations from brief testing......

Frugal install with both bdrv and ydrv included...... (no adrv??)

First thing to do with any new system - checkdeps -system
to show missing dependencies - attached

TAS is included but the PrintScreen key is attached to mtpaint -s
which is far less functional

Clicking an audio CD desktop icon starts Deadbeef but doesn't play the CD - and a log screen shows many messages - attached. The CD will play but only after various clicks.....

PPM strangely does not include the FossaPup64 repository - screenshot
http://distro.ibiblio.org/puppylinux/pe ... s-fossa64/

[bigpup]

Frugalpup Installer is not the latest version.

This has version 20.

It is now at version 38

Frugalpup Installer:
viewtopic.php?t=337

These are also v20: DiskPup, StickPup, f2StickPup
There are much newer versions of these:
DiskPup 38, StickPup 38 and f2StickPup 39

All of them can be gotten by getting the latest version of Frugalpup Installer package.
All are in it.

[rockedge]

All of them can be gotten by getting the latest version of Frugalpup Installer package.
All are in it.

Where is a link to the package or what's the best way to get it?

[peebee]

Where is a link to the package or what's the best way to get it?

viewtopic.php?t=337

https://github.com/puppylinux-woof-CE/w ... pup-38.pet

[amethyst]

So what's happening to this project now since there does not even seem to be a download link anymore? Also, especially with these Puppys going the modular route, I would suggest that the iso are also uploaded to archive.org as soon as possible (ally?). Some of us would just like to download the working base sfs (without the ydrv with applications). archive.org makes this possible as one can normally view the contents of the iso and decide which of the files to download. This way it may also be useful to include other files like browsers, etc. in the huge iso uploaded to archive.org so that one can extract what one needs... OR upload all the individual files in the iso to a dedicated folder created on the mega.nz site with a link to that folder?

[mikewalsh]

I have to agree with amethyst.

I need to test something out that somebody has told me isn't working properly, but they haven't told me exactly which version of FP64 they're using.....and since there seems to be several concurrent versions of FP64 kicking around, half of which appear to be unavailable, I have no idea what to test....

Might we have some clarification, please? Which one is the "official" version going forward, and where are we supposed to obtain it from?

Radky's 'Testing' directory at smokey01.com is currently empty, 'cos I've just checked.

(*shrug*)

Mike.

[peebee]

where are we supposed to obtain it from?

???? F96_4-CE_radky6.iso 2023-01-05 14:00 483M

from: https://rockedge.org/kernels/data/ISO/F96-CE/

????

[mikewalsh]

@peebee :-

Cheers, Peter. Thanks for that.

(You ought to know me by now. I don't rigorously keep up with the latest releases, the way many do.... I'm more interested in using a stable, already-sorted release, where I can develop my packages'n'stuff. I don't WANT to have to be constantly setting everything up BEFORE I can use it.)

Not for me, the constant round of testing, testing, testing. I'll leave that to others, who actively enjoy such stuff. I'd rather be in a rock-solid atmosphere where I can develop packages for use WHEN those releases finally become stable.

(*shrug*)

Mike.

[MochiMoppel]

I need to test something out that somebody has told me isn't working properly, but they haven't told me exactly which version of FP64 they're using.

Methinks that you are talking about me. I don't know what else than FP64 9.6 I can call it. The main sfs is called puppy_fossapup64_9.6.sfs. It's very stable and probably a predecessor of the newer but (for me) less stable CE Radky version'. Here the DISTRO_SPECS:
DISTRO_NAME='fossapup64'
DISTRO_VERSION=9.6
DISTRO_BINARY_COMPAT='ubuntu'
DISTRO_FILE_PREFIX='fossapup64'
DISTRO_COMPAT_VERSION='focal'
DISTRO_XORG_AUTO='yes'
DISTRO_KERNEL_PET='Huge_Kernel'
DISTRO_DB_SUBNAME='fossa64'
WOOF_VERSION=9
DISTRO_TARGETARCH='x86_64'
NO_MULTIARCH_SYMLINK=1
BUILD_FROM_WOOF='testing;d4f71989b;2022-04-18 18:31:59 +0800'
DISTRO_BDRVSFS='bdrv_fossapup64_9.6.sfs'
DISTRO_PUPPYSFS='puppy_fossapup64_9.6.sfs'
DISTRO_ZDRVSFS='zdrv_fossapup64_9.6.sfs'
DISTRO_FDRVSFS='fdrv_fossapup64_9.6.sfs'
DISTRO_ADRVSFS='adrv_fossapup64_9.6.sfs'
DISTRO_YDRVSFS='ydrv_fossapup64_9.6.sfs'
DISTRO_PUPPYDATE='Apr 2022'
DISTRO_ARCHDIR='x86_64-linux-gnu'

Unfortunately I can't remember where I downloaded it from and can't find it now either. Maybe someone from the Fossa team can help me? Looks like this:

screen_230109_212133.png (49.04 KiB) Viewed 1036 times

[mikewalsh]

@MochiMoppel :-

Ah, that's fair enough, then. Looks like it's the same one as I've already got set up. But with wanderer's Distrowatch thread having stirred things up, and with more than one version "doing the rounds", it's a wee bit confusing, like. I wasn't too certain which one you'd gone with.

Been out for a couple of hours, so I've only just got back in. Soon as I get organised, I'll take a peek at Brave running on this one. I'll get back to you in the other thread. Bear with me, please; it might be a while yet..!

Mike.

[amethyst]

@MochiMoppel :-

Ah, that's fair enough, then. Looks like it's the same one as I've already got set up. But with more than one version "doing the rounds", it's a wee bit confusing, like. I wasn't too certain which one you'd gone with.

Been out for a couple of hours, so I've only just got back in. Soon as I get organised, I'll take a peek at Brave running on this one. I'll get back to you in the other thread.

Mike.

@mikewalsh
Do you mind uploading the individual files to mega.nz, I have data restrictions here. Only the basic system would be fine (without the additional drive for the applications). Thanks.

[mikewalsh]

@MochiMoppel :-

Ah, that's fair enough, then. Looks like it's the same one as I've already got set up. But with more than one version "doing the rounds", it's a wee bit confusing, like. I wasn't too certain which one you'd gone with.

Been out for a couple of hours, so I've only just got back in. Soon as I get organised, I'll take a peek at Brave running on this one. I'll get back to you in the other thread.

Mike.

@mikewalsh
Do you mind uploading the individual files to mega.nz, I have data restrictions here. Only the basic system would be fine (without the additional drive for the applications). Thanks.

@amethyst :-

I would, Nic, if I weren't getting bloody close to my limit on MEGA. As things stand, I'm soon going to have to decide what I want to do with regards to that a/c; do I start to pay for extra storage, or do I open a fourth free hosting a/c somewhere? Yet another monthly payment is not really an option at the moment, so.....

I can probably upload to my Google Drive, if you have no objections to that. I have some spare space there (nearly 6 GB, if memory serves), and the a/c doesn't get so much use nowadays. The MEGA a/c, I'm trying to keep strictly for portable apps, y'see. I know what I'm doing that way.

What is it you want.....the individual files in the Fossapup64 9.6 ISO?

Mike.

[mikewalsh]

@amethyst :-

Here's a link to the containing folder on the Drive:-

https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/ ... sp=sharing

You'll have to dig through and find what ya want, mate. I've extracted the ISO to a folder, and just uploaded the whole thing as-is. The main SFS is there, along with the adrv AND fdrv.....and all the other bits'n'bobs.

Mike.

[mikeslr]

I have been keeping up with the changes. AFAIK, F96_4-CE_radky6.iso from the link peebee last mentioned is the latest version. This being a development thread rather than that of a final release, the practice of having the current version available from the first post of the thread was not used. The '6' in the title of the ISO is, AFAIK, the only way to distinguish it from earlier publications, e.g. F96_4-CE_radky5.iso
It is not less stable than the 'original' just structured differently and containing changes in response to issues raised previously on this thread.

@ peebee, you mentioned that it has a ydrv but no adrv. That's probably a result of my recommendation to name of the 'included' 'additional' sfs to ydrv rather than adrv. That recommendation was made because of the 'stacking/priority' order and the way nicOS-Utility-Suite's Save2SFS module used to work. An adrv used to be copied into RAM last or, at any event, have 3rd highest priority in the 'merge-file-system' [only lower than changes currently in RAM not Saved, and changes Saved]. Amethyst's Save2SFS module used to be able to create or update an adrv.sfs without having it include the contents of the ydrv.sfs, but not vice-versa.. With the publisher issuing an adrv.sfs, the user either had to manually change its name to ydrv.sfs, or modify the adrv.sfs in order to have the user's preferences prevail.

@ Amethyst. Amethyst has since modified the Save2SFS module. But I'm confused by the change. TBA, I've been too busy to test the result of the change. When the Save2SFS module is called the following GUI appears:

Save2SFS.png (24.78 KiB) Viewed 937 times

As you can see it offers to Save either to a ydrv or an adrv and also to 'Exclude existing adrv and ydrv'. I read that to be 'BOTH' without an option of Exclude one but not the other. But I could be wrong: there might be subsequent GUI that enables a User to select to exclude one but not the other. I created and have a ydrv which includes settings, customizations, and all applications I know will never be changed or need to be updated. My adrv, on the other hand, contains applications I frequently will need to update, e.g. web-browsers. In updating adrv I want to exclude ydrv, but not adrv. Perhaps, amethyst could post to the Utilities thread how to do that.

Frankly, it doesn’t matter what, if any, ‘additional drive’ is included, nor how the Save2SFS module works. The only thing which is important is understanding the system and how to work with it.

I can't find MochiMoppel's post specifying the issues he raised. But, MikeWalsh, you may not want to spend time addressing them if they weren't continued into the F96_4-CE_radky6.iso. Unless someone knows otherwise, that ISO will be the base for future changes, fixes.

I do have an issue. But I’m not sure it only relates to F-96. It has to do with the interplay between F-96, its employment of Pulse-Audio and perhaps only MikeWalsh’s portable web-browsers. So I’ll post it to the User Section. After I do I’ll provide link on this thread.

The only thing specifically worth mentioning here is that the scripts relating to the Multi-soundcare-wizard, mscw and mscw2, will be found in F-96 at /usr/sbin. But if you attempt to invoke either you’ll receive a notice to the effect that sound is controlled by pulse-audio. Selecting ‘off’ from the Taskbar audio-config launcher has no effect. Pulse-Audio is dependent on alsa. All alsa’s components are present, as is retrovol. But as far as I can tell, there is no way to ‘turn pulse-audio off’: no way to use the components other than via pulse-audio. This wouldn’t be a problem except that pulse-audio’s tools for selecting the proper sound card do not appear to me to be either as efficient or effective as the Multiple-Sound-card-wizard. MSCW operates under the principal ‘set it once and it is the default for all Sound applications’ until reset.

[rockedge]

@amethyst I can also provide the files contained in the ISO individually if needed. Let me know and I'll set it up.

A look into the audio setup will be undertaken as we progress to make sound system more versatile

[wizard]

@mikewalsh

If you haven't looked at Sourceforge for your file repository, give it a shot.

wizard

[amethyst]

@mikeslr

That's probably a result of my recommendation to name of the 'included' 'additional' sfs to ydrv rather than adrv. That recommendation was made because of the 'stacking/priority' order and the way nicOS-Utility-Suite's Save2SFS module used to work. An adrv used to be copied into RAM last or, at any event, have 3rd highest priority in the 'merge-file-system' [only lower than changes currently in RAM not Saved, and changes Saved]. Amethyst's Save2SFS module used to be able to create or update an adrv.sfs without having it include the contents of the ydrv.sfs, but not vice-versa.. With the publisher issuing an adrv.sfs, the user either had to manually change its name to ydrv.sfs, or modify the adrv.sfs in order to have the user's preferences prevail.

@ Amethyst. Amethyst has since modified the Save2SFS module. But I'm confused by the change. TBA, I've been too busy to test the result of the change. When the Save2SFS module is called the following GUI appears:

Save2SFS.png
Save2SFS.png (24.78 KiB) Viewed 54 times

As you can see it offers to Save either to a ydrv or an adrv and also to 'Exclude existing adrv and ydrv'. I read that to be 'BOTH' without an option of Exclude one but not the other. But I could be wrong: there might be subsequent GUI that enables a User to select to exclude one but not the other. I created and have a ydrv which includes settings, customizations, and all applications I know will never be changed or need to be updated. My adrv, on the other hand, contains applications I frequently will need to update, e.g. web-browsers. In updating adrv I want to exclude ydrv, but not adrv. Perhaps, amethyst could post to the Utilities thread how to do that.

The utility suite (including the save2sfs tool) was last updated on 13/2/2022, so nothing has changed since.
Recommendation to use the save2sfs tool as is with this new Puppy:
1. This iso ships with a ydrv which contains the applications and it has the adrv and bdrv available as additional drives.
2. Keep the ydrv shipped with the distribution as is. The Save to ydrv option of the tool becomes obsolete, don't use it.
3. Use the bdrv for applications you want to add (applications that are not installed) or load these applications as extra sfs 's. It's unlikely that the purpose of the tool will be affected by the bdrv although the bdrv has higher priority than the adrv in the stack system.
4. Use the Save to adrv option of the tool to record the contents of your current save file / folder, the contents of any existing adrv and current session changes to an sfs file (adrv).
5. Use the 'exclude existing adrv and ydrv' option of the tool to save the contents of your existing save file / folder and changes for the session to an adrv (but the contents of any existing adrv and ydrv are excluded).
6. Using a save file or save folder is up to you but running the tool to save to an adrv will have the affect of replacing your old save file / folder.

[amethyst]

@amethyst :-

Here's a link to the containing folder on the Drive:-

https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/ ... sp=sharing

You'll have to dig through and find what ya want, mate. I've extracted the ISO to a folder, and just uploaded the whole thing as-is. The main SFS is there, along with the adrv AND fdrv.....and all the other bits'n'bobs.

Mike.

Thanks, I'll have to use Chromium to upload from Google Drive, Palemoon is now a mess when it comes to using Google Drive. Will try tomorrow.