Discussion, talk and tips
https://forum.puppylinux.com/
Puppy look and feel and conceptionally currently similar, but may drift away in both these matters
Even forking that as new Puppy might become problematic trademark-wise since it no longer seemingly much of the original woof-CE code base?
Q: Is Puppy really a multiple distributions that live under the same name? What makes them Puppy?
A: Yes. All of them are built using Woof-CE that tailors packages regardless of source, to the puppy needs and principles. They also share a common set of puppy-specific utilities, applications and settings that gives them comparable functionality regardless of binary compatibility. The famous puppy OOB functionality, ease of use, efficiency and speed.
Above from Puppy FAQ
Note the part about common set of puppy-specific utilities. Not so sure that idea works nowadays either. How can that be enforced, and would you always want if to be?
There are direct committers to Woof-CE but usually these people don’t play the role of gatekeepers / stewards. They are simply people that the stewards have trusted enough to give them push access.
Also in FAQ
But issue is that direct committers can and could re-work woof-CE into entirely different build system and potentially a completely different Puppy design? So, for example, trust fredx181 enough and invite him as direct woof-CE committer and he could make current debiandog build system the new woof-CE. That was just an example. I'm neither advocating for that or suggesting fredx181 would ever want that...
Note the part about common set of puppy-specific utilities. Not so sure that idea works nowadays either. How can that be enforced, and would you always want if to be?
That is becoming more or less out of date in ways and too limiting in scope.
I am for more of a FirstRib approach of the simpler build scripts with PLUG file recipes.
This already has the ability to build different distro's using a variety of upstream repos for those distro's
rockedge wrote: ↑Thu Jun 06, 2024 2:29 pmI am for more of a FirstRib approach of the simpler build scripts with PLUG file recipes.
This already has the ability to build different distro's using a variety of upstream repos for those distro's
But I was referring to Puppy, rockedge, which has its own trademark and whether you prefer firstrib build script method or not doesn't seem to solve Puppy build needs. Well, I suppose similar build approach might be possible yet still keep underneath Puppy main system scripts?
EDIT: problem might be Puppy wants its simple (sort of) sysvinit basis so that tends to cause major issues even if Puppy now moving to use up-stream package managers and so on. And then all that pupmode and distrospec stuff currently part of the build design... Using KL/FR and making pup lookalikes could certainly be done, and multiple upstream package manager flavours as we know - but no pupmodes per se - different...
Yes, the PLUG script to complete builds is simple to use for anyone who can write pretty simple bash commands - that's why FR creating feels so convenient and acts like templates for adoption by others who wish to build their own creations. Having said that, I am not advocating Puppy to become like Firstrib conceptually in terms of how it is built. Not my call anyway and KL/FR already exists and could be used to build pup lookalikes.
@wiak yes, some way of changing the woof-CE distro creation recipes to be easier to manipulate. Perhaps in a way that FirstRib builds use but layered on to the woof-CE build system.
I am just throwing out some ideas really. Talking to myself kind of......
problem might be Puppy wants its simple (sort of) sysvinit basis so that tends to cause major issues even if Puppy now moving to use up-stream package managers and so on. And then all pupmode and distrospec stuff currently part of the build design...
I agree. Though the different modes are desirable in the sense it makes Puppy more versatile So a rewrite of the initrd?
Address the core sysvinit usage and look into alternatives that has Puppy still performing in a similar traditional way?
That would certainly need to be done. Vanilla Dpup probably does that in its own way (albeit no convenient build plug extra?) Also, it is debian only. Note that I expanded my above post
That makes sense to me
hi all
i for one
am very pleased to see the gurus talking about
expanding the build system and structure of puppy
i think this will allow puppy to grow and become better and better
like a puppy maturing into a dog
which is a name we can use if we wish to avoid any trademark issues
so it could be a dog ( a puppy is an immature dog and a dog is a mature puppy )
it could even be an official dog
wanderer
hi all
maybe you can teach an old dog new tricks
wanderer
I hope that whatever happens in the future that animal names like puppy or dog are replaced by something else (not animal, please 
, I never liked it for an OS).
please make a suggestion fredx181
if we have a new name for the the synergy of all the projects on the forum
we will not be able to argue about what is and what is not a puppy anymore ( and that would be a bad bad thing )
wanderer
Indeed. I never liked it either, which is main reason I threw away the weedog naming system in firstrib tho proved impossible to remove all remnants. 'Puppy' seemed even worse to me though since that is so long known it has brand status (I suppose)
So this is the puppylinux.com domain and forum
Kennel Linux was otherwise a reasonably unifying name since no need for that to always be based on firstrib - that was just provided as convenient start to that range, but domain name remains problematic in my view really
Then again, Puppy is known and valued so that much is set in stone in practice I feel
Or maybe not.
i think the name problem can be solved very simply
by actually not doing anything
besides coming up with a new name for a project
puppy linux can remain puppy linux
the community will vote what is the candidate on the puppy homepage and distrowatch
which will be a puppy because the puppy community says it is
the other name can be used only to identify a project that just happens to be hosted on the forum
that includes all the work on the forum focused on making the system better
it just will be easier to talk about our distro
then constantly trying to decide if its a puppy or not
suggestions anyone
wanderer
Well... how about: "Wanderer Linux" ? 
No, sorry, don't have a suggestion, just expressed some annoyance I have about animal names for some software. But no big deal !
@puppybrand should stay of course, but perhaps more in the background 
(just thinking out loud)
hi fredx181
if you name it wanderer linux
it is bound to be a dead dog on arrival
how about fredx181 linux
then maybe it will be a masterpiece like your debian(whatever)
wanderer
well until the community comes up with a name for the new project
who's goal is to make our distro better
i will call it "our distro"
( or "res nostra" which is "our thing" in latin )
wanderer
so how is "our distro" doing
maybe adding some firstrib stuff to woof-ce ?
maybe look at mklive as a build script ?
(i have no dog ( sorry fredx181 ) in this race since i am playing with debian(whatever) and am perfectly happy
and i shall make no more dog jokes after this post
wanderer
Vincere
Vincent (Latin: Vincentius) is a male given name derived from the Roman name Vincentius, which is derived from the Latin word vincere (to conquer).
hi williwaw
then our distro will conquer the world
and the prophecy of linux world domination will be fulfilled
wanderer
even though i dont understand exactly how it works
i do like the idea of firstrib being combined with woof-ce
to make it more user friendly and more universal
wanderer
woof-CE is 11 years old but many parts came from Woof and Unleashed. Some files even contain evidence of their birth some time in the early 2000s. There are big piles of unused code, code that doesn't do anything and code that doesn't work because assumptions made 10+ years ago are not true with today's kernels.
If you want to make woof-CE tidier and easier to use, there's so much you can remove before you add stuff 
thank you dimkr
you are our window on woof-ce
and since your creation shares less than 1%
you clearly have mastered it
what is your advice on what should be done ?
should we adopt your creation since you have already cleaned it up ?
wanderer
thanks dimkr
i think that is a good answer
you do not see any advantage to trying to combine the two systems
wanderer
hi dimkr and everyone
the problem to solve ( or at least the topic to discuss ) is how to make our distro ( family ) better
to my eyes there appears to be a number of systems being developed on the forum
1. old woof-ce
2. dimkrs vanilla dpup
3. debiandog
4. firstrib
5. fatdog
6. easyos
each system is being used to produce excellent work
this is quite an amazing situation
an embarrassment of riches
perhaps the only thing to do is highlight what each of these systems are producing
so community members new and old are aware of all that is going on
i also think it would be interesting to hear ideas
on how to improve things and directions to take
so there it is
thoughts anyone
wanderer