Puppy Linux Discussion Forum

hi all

as a user i have a comment and a question

1. comment
as wiak and others have stated
i do think that having a basic set of polished applications in the standard distro is important and a major selling point for our distro
so that set of applications ( from whatever source ) should be kept available

2. question
why cant we just include whatever libraries are needed for whatever applications old or new we want to use
by making sfs files available for that application (or set of apps)
for example is still use emelfm ( i just add gtk1 when i need it )

i am not says that it be required that these old apps be maintained indefinitely
if a new app is chosen for our distro
then it would be up to whoever wants the old app
to maintain its support

wanderer

wanderer wrote:

for example is still use emelfm ( i just add gtk1 when i need it )

Really gtk1 is too old, but emelfm works with gtk2 too, e.g. on DD-bookworm, installing this package works ok : https://github.com/doglinux/book-worm/r ... _amd64.deb (or install with apt on dd-bookworm)

hi fredx181

wow thanks a lot

you are the man

wanderer

wanderer wrote:

why cant we just include whatever libraries are needed for whatever applications old or new we want to use

We can include old stuff, ok,, but the point is: how long it will last? One year perhaps, or a little more, but not eternally .

hi fredx181

that answered my question

so my vote is to go with the new app
( as needed not just change for the sake of change )
if it will work better and have a longer supported lifespan

wanderer

dimkr wrote: Sun Jun 09, 2024 2:42 pm

Some of the Puppy in-house applications

mikewalsh wrote: Sun Jun 09, 2024 2:06 pm

our pride in doing things differently to everyone else meaning we've kept all those old home-grown utilities around for probably way too long.

IMO some of them are really bad and optimize for the wrong thing. An audio player written as a shell script, with gtkdialog for UI, can be super small on disk and fast to start but slow to respond and much heavier than a "binary" one like deadbeef. The choice of shell script as the implementation language means most operations are handled by running a process or even multiple processes, making it a CPU and RAM hungry application that freezes often (it doesn't react to a second click while it waits for a command-line to finish). Rewriting such applications with yad won't solve problems like their single-threaded nature, but most of them have alternatives that are bigger on disk (because they're not shell scripts) but not huge, and consume fewer resources at runtime. A usable OS is so big these days, to the point a slow 100K music player is a very tough sell compared to a 5 MB one that doesn't have the same problems.

These applications made much more sense in <2010, in times where replacing coreutils with busybox reduced the size of distro by >1%. Replacing 'big' applications with a shell script made sense, too.

The above is exactly what I feel also, and the example of a not actually sensible to use gtkdialog app the same one I have pointed to, yet it is included via woof-CE in root-fs/packages! Certainly, and to be fair, interesting once upon a time, it was clever to script that 100K sized music player frontend to ffmpeg etc, but yes 'a very touch sell' overall in practical use and usage - no offence intended, but some packages should be retired just like many of ourselves. The main point agreed with, however, is that, despite their small size, most gtkdialog apps are not actually resource friendly in use.

There is a 'but', however, and a big BUT: Puppy is a hobbyist distro and encouraging people to begin programming seems to me an important part of that hobby. That was really why gtkdialog was so important for so long at least for some people. It remains important to me that we continue to support and encourage the writing of special utilities, since despite a few dubious ones in the past, many were actually incredibly useful.

Come to think of it, had I not myself written several (and some very bad) gtkdialog-based apps involving a lot of bash scripting I would probably never have created FirstRib and the likes of weedogit (though neither of these actually used gtkdialog itself). Possible future developers have to start somewhere and have to practice somehow and become sufficiently enthusiastic to put the often hundreds if not thousands of hours on some bigger venture later; finding some small utility app accepted into some official Puppy release has that encouraging effect towards continuing contributions into the future.

i agree with wiak

and on a much wider level

i think the key is obviously busybox ash/bash

that among many other reasons is why i am so taken with debiandog

it has one central bash script that even i am able to read ( and try to modify if i dare )

this is a great entry point for both the novice and the expert

and encourages everyone to get involved
because anyone can learn the basics of bash

so in my opinion even though there are alternatives
the more we keep the entry/core of our distro ash/bash based the better

this was true from the very beginning with init being the heart of our distro
under the grandmaster barry k

wanderer

Actually, a major factor of myself not liking the way woof-CE operates (despite the calls for people to learn and use git) is that I believe the forum should be the place where inclusion of such utility apps in Puppy, which is a community distro afterall, should have been voted on and decided. For example, despite not having a 'great relationship' with the online persona rcrsn51, I have long felt that several of his Peasy util/apps were far better than many of these old P_apps forged into Puppy via their woof-CE embed. I also much prefer Peasy coding style, but maybe that is simply a matter of opinion, but that is where my own vote would have gone. Others no doubt disagree and do not see a problem with Puppy having 'stewards' or gate-keepers deciding what goes in and what is kept out, but only selecting from whatever is pushed to woof-CE, which is done but by a tiny few of us here. Anyway, it is long past the time some gtkdialog apps were removed and replaced in order to make Puppy better and more attractive to those who come across it.

wanderer wrote: Sun Jun 09, 2024 5:29 pm

i agree with wiak

and on a much wider level

i think the key is obviously busybox ash/bash

that among many other reasons is why i am so taken with debiandog

it has one central bash script that even i am able to read ( and try to modify if i dare )

this is a great entry point for both the novice and the expert

and encourages everyone to get involved
because anyone can learn the basics of bash

Well thanks for agreeing, @wanderer, but you don't seem to be talking about what I was talking about at all (well...not much anyway). However, it is gratifying that you "agree"

hi all

i would like to remind everyone

since there is no puppy master
it falls to the the entire puppy forum community
to decide by vote
what is representative of our distro

that means
*** anything ***
that the entire puppy forum decides
is representative of our distro
is representative of our distro
period
either classic puppy, puppy like or puppy inspired

everyone will continue to work on their own projects
and will produce distros
that may be useful to us all

i use upup32 which is a masterpiece ( thanks peebee )

my advice is that if someone wishes to make an improvement to our distro

rather than trying to get others to change their ways

they choose the system that works for them
and create a distro that they can present to the community
as a candidate for our distro

the communty will then vote ( if desired )
and it will be christened "official"
and will be included in our family
and presented as an example of our distro to the world

i am playing with debiandog
which is puppylike
and which i consider a member of our distro family
the improvements i am trying to make
i will try to apply to debiandog
and if anything ever materializes
i will present that to the entire community
for its blessing

wanderer

I think we should refer questions, about where Puppy should aim in the future, and what is & isn't a proper Puppy Linux, to
ChatGpt, so that we can receive a definitive AI assisted response.

Problem solved! I just dloaded the Perplexity AI appimage, mentioned by Sonny here: https://www.forum.puppylinux.com/viewtopic.php?t=11780, and asked:

where should puppy linux aim for in the future

Perplexity then responded:

PLAYGROUND
LLM served by Perplexity Labs
Hello! How can I help you?
where should puppy linux aim for in the future
LLM served by Perplexity Labs
Puppy Linux should aim to adopt the Void Linux package manager xbps as its core/default package management system. This would provide several benefits, including:
Dependency-Resolving Capability: xbps is a full dependency-resolving package manager, ensuring that all dependencies are properly installed and managed.
Flexibility and Efficiency: xbps is written in C, making it fast and efficient. It is also self-contained and distro-independent, allowing for greater flexibility in package management.
Distro-Agnostic Initrd: Implementing a distro-agnostic initrd would enable Puppy Linux to use alternative package managers and initrd designs, increasing its versatility and compatibility with other Linux distributions.
Multiuser Support: Adopting runit instead of sysVinit could provide full multiuser support, a feature currently lacking in Puppy Linux.
Community Engagement: Puppy Linux should continue to foster its friendly and helpful community, which is a significant strength of the distribution.
Targeted Use Cases: Puppy Linux should focus on its strengths in running on old hardware and providing a live USB environment for troubleshooting and hardware testing.
By adopting these strategies, Puppy Linux can enhance its functionality, flexibility, and user experience while maintaining its unique identity and strengths.
1.68 SEC TO FIRST TOKEN
60 TOKENS/SEC
259 TOKENS
4.26 SEC

llama-3-sonar-large-32k-online
Ask anything...

So are there more than one perplexity ai sites?

I went directly to: https://www.perplexity.ai/

Put in
where should puppy linux aim for in the future

and got this (verbatim):

Sources
oldforum.puppylinux.com favicon
The Future of Puppy Linux
oldforum.puppylinux.com
·
1
puppyite... ### The Future of Puppy Linux To the world at large Ubuntu is synonymous with Linux. There may even be some who are aware of Ubuntu but not Linux. Recently an article about productivity software in a Linux print magazine prominently featured Puppy Linux as a “portable office Recently an article about productivity software in a Linux print magazine prominently featured Puppy Linux as a “portable office Last edited by puppyite on Mon 23 May 2011, 15:09, edited 3 times in...
reddit.com favicon
forum.puppylinux.com favicon
unix.stackexchange.com favicon
View 3 more
Answer
Puppy Linux should aim to maintain its core purpose of being a lightweight and efficient distribution, while exploring opportunities for innovation and growth. Here are some potential directions for Puppy Linux's future development:
Adopt Modern Package Management
Adopting a robust and dependency-resolving package manager like Void Linux's xbps could greatly benefit Puppy Linux. This would provide access to a vast repository of packages while ensuring smooth installation and updates.
Integrating xbps or a similar package manager would enhance Puppy's capabilities without compromising its lightweight nature.
Develop a Distro-Agnostic Initrd
Creating a distro-agnostic initrd (initial ramdisk) would decouple Puppy Linux from its current reliance on Puppy-specific configuration files. This would enable Puppy to boot various root filesystems, including those from other distributions, expanding its versatility and potential use cases.
Improve Multiuser Support
While Puppy Linux's security model is suitable for specific scenarios, introducing robust multiuser support could broaden its appeal. This could involve implementing a user-friendly mechanism for creating non-root user accounts and enforcing appropriate permissions and access controls.
Optimize for Specific Hardware
Puppy Linux's low resource footprint makes it an excellent choice for older or underpowered hardware. Continuing to optimize for such systems, perhaps by offering tailored versions for different hardware configurations, could solidify Puppy's niche in this area.
Enhance Community Involvement
Puppy Linux's friendly and helpful community is one of its strengths. Fostering greater community involvement in development, package creation, and support could drive innovation and ensure Puppy remains relevant and responsive to user needs. By pursuing these directions while staying true to its lightweight and efficient roots, Puppy Linux can evolve into a more capable and versatile distribution, appealing to a broader user base while retaining its unique identity.
Related
how can Puppy Linux improve its user experience for new users
what are the key features that set Puppy Linux apart from other lightweight distros
should Puppy Linux aim to integrate more modern software

Pretty much of the same.

Chelsea80 wrote: Mon Jun 10, 2024 12:55 am

Puppy Linux's low resource footprint makes it an excellent choice for older or underpowered hardware. Continuing to optimize for such systems, perhaps by offering tailored versions for different hardware configurations, could solidify Puppy's niche in this area.

The second half of that statement is something I have felt is an area where Puppy could improve hugely - ie have a forum section that is specifically dedicated to making specific hardware run correctly on any given Pup.
Too often a user struggles against hardware specific issues (eg maybe nvidia vs radeon) and their troubleshooting falls dead.

Is there enough forum room to add a "hardware" section directly under each Puppy distro section?
eg: under "BookwormPup" section there are a number of threads - but could it be possible to have an actual subsection of BookwormPup labelled "Hardware specific" - so that any user could create a thread in that space dedicated to a specific laptop and get real indepth help.

That way future new Puppians might find a very specific thread targeting the machine they have.

It might also help focus resolutions relative to thorny issues like drivers, firmwares, etc

hi all

as dimkr has pointed out
the puppy linux forum has too many diverse projects and developer/participants
for any one person to be delegated its overall representative

not because they would not be able to be fair
but because it would be a thankless and unmanageable job

thankfully rockedge has provided this forum
and that is really all that is needed

someone will step up when something is needed
as bigpup did when he noticed that our distrowatch candidate was getting old

according to ai
our friendly helpful forum is one of our great strengths

wanderer

@greengeek :-

Ian, perhaps I'm misunderstanding you here.......but I've always understood that you try to get software running on hardware (and NOT t'other way round). I mean, once hardware is built it's a "fixed" thing, isn't it? You can't exactly 'modify' the hardware to suit the software......

?????

(*scratches head....*)

Mike.

muggins wrote: Sun Jun 09, 2024 9:42 pm

Problem solved! I just dloaded the Perplexity AI appimage, mentioned by Sonny here: https://www.forum.puppylinux.com/viewtopic.php?t=11780, and asked:

where should puppy linux aim for in the future

Perplexity then responded:

PLAYGROUND
LLM served by Perplexity Labs
Hello! How can I help you?
where should puppy linux aim for in the future
LLM served by Perplexity Labs
Puppy Linux should aim to adopt the Void Linux package manager xbps as its core/default package management system. This would provide several benefits, including:
Dependency-Resolving Capability: xbps is a full dependency-resolving package manager, ensuring that all dependencies are properly installed and managed.
Flexibility and Efficiency: xbps is written in C, making it fast and efficient. It is also self-contained and distro-independent, allowing for greater flexibility in package management.
Distro-Agnostic Initrd: Implementing a distro-agnostic initrd would enable Puppy Linux to use alternative package managers and initrd designs, increasing its versatility and compatibility with other Linux distributions.
Multiuser Support: Adopting runit instead of sysVinit could provide full multiuser support, a feature currently lacking in Puppy Linux.
...

Ha ha ha. All sounds like FirstRib and exactly how and why it started. What a surprise

wiak wrote: Sun Jun 09, 2024 5:05 pm

There is a 'but', however, and a big BUT: Puppy is a hobbyist distro and encouraging people to begin programming seems to me an important part of that hobby. That was really why gtkdialog was so important for so long at least for some people. It remains important to me that we continue to support and encourage the writing of special utilities, since despite a few dubious ones in the past, many were actually incredibly useful.

Come to think of it, had I not myself written several (and some very bad) gtkdialog-based apps involving a lot of bash scripting I would probably never have created FirstRib and the likes of weedogit (though neither of these actually used gtkdialog itself). Possible future developers have to start somewhere and have to practice somehow and become sufficiently enthusiastic to put the often hundreds if not thousands of hours on some bigger venture later; finding some small utility app accepted into some official Puppy release has that encouraging effect towards continuing contributions into the future.

^^^

Really couldn't have put it better myself. If I hadn't joined this community, I doubt I would have ever gotten interested in shell scripting at all....

I won't pretend everything I've attempted has been a resounding success. Some have been really crap.....but enough have been successful that it's encouaged me to keep experimenting & trying new things out. And the community atmosphere has always encouraged members to contribute back TO the community anyway.

(*shrug...*)

I'll never become a 'developer'. For me, it will ALWAYS be just a "hobby".......but a very enjoyable & engaging one, for all that.

Mike.

hi all

let us all thank the woof-ce team for all that they have done
and all that they are still doing

please dont stop developing your masterpieces peebee and woof-ce guys
we appreciate (and use ) all of your work

but let us not put all the burden on them

i do not think that we should try to force this distro
into having only one distro build system

our distro is constantly evolving
bookworm puppy is very different
than the distro barry k originally made when he started this project
and future distros will be different than bookworm

however instead of trying force woof-ce to change
i think we should simply develop distros from the other build systems
and then present them to the forum for approval

for example
i wanted a build system based upon a single script
and i found debiandog
problem solved

the reason i use upup32
is because it is a polished gem
not because of the particular build system used

wanderer

yes im sure everyone will agree

the forum is the heart of puppy

and this is provided by rockedge

so let us help him as much as we can financially and otherwise

wanderer

VanillaDpup 11+ should be the very latest Puppy Linux offering.

I have a really hard time understanding @dimkr resistance to this fact or why the other VanillaDpup 10's can't be it.

These have already where Puppy Linux will be going.

mikewalsh wrote: Mon Jun 10, 2024 1:36 pm

Ian, perhaps I'm misunderstanding you here.......but I've always understood that you try to get software running on hardware (and NOT t'other way round). ..You can't exactly 'modify' the hardware to suit the software......

Well, firstly you can modify the hardware - I've seen many examples of Puppians changing WiFi cards or RAM size etc to match what their preferred puppy supports.

The AI comment that Chelsea posted talked about the need for Puppy to improve focus on hardware. Imagine if the bookworm thread had a section where I could list 4 threads - each for a specific laptop - and get specific advice for that laptop using that puppy. That structure might make it much easier for someone else with similar hardware to follow the whole journey required to make that pup work on that laptop.
Here are some examples of issues that force me to turn away from one pup and try others instead:
Radeon video cards prevent me booting some laptops.
Some pups don't use synclient and I can't get rid of tap-to-click on some laptops.
Some laptops have trackpads instead of clickable buttons
Most laptops have brightness & volume keys that are inactive.
Etc etc

Although such problems are usually solvable - pursuing them in a puppy development thread becomes a hijack - it can be seen as a distraction to a developer - whereas if machine specific challenges were in a hardware subsection just below a Puppy's development thread then I think it would be more conducive to having other non devs chime in and help solve the issues on that laptop/puppy combo.
Bigpup does that sort of thing quite well. Possibly because he is a moderator and I assume reads pretty much every post.
But i imagine that others might be able to help out more if they could see someone's struggle as a specific hardware journey rather than waiting for a Dev to address functionality. It would allow others to suggest stuff like "don't waste time with this pup - your laptop has Radeon - go to pup xyz instead".
Rather than posts just getting lost in a long software Dev thread.

@greengeek :-

I'm with ya on the "trackpad" issue. Horrible things! They only came about due to Apple designer Jony Ive's obsession with making everything smooth & streamlined (to the point of hiding-away/covering-up everything he possibly could)..... Apple fanbois thought they were the next best thing to sliced bread, and other manufacturers rushed to jump on the bandwagon.

Re: Bigpup being good at what he does? Well; definitely! I won't argue with that. But you and he have both been members of the community for longer than I have... I became a mod due to already having previous experience at BleepingComputer. Bigpup and I both became mods on the same day; I, because when rockedge complained about the workload I volunteered my services.......and bigpup, because in the same thread, he demanded to be made one and he would tidy the forum up and show the rest of us how it should be done!

Bigpup was always good at that kinda thing anyway, long before he became a mod. Not because he IS one. And as you've probably noticed, although we once again now have a team of mods - as opposed to poor old Flash holding the fort by himself! - we all have very different styles.

Variety is the spice of life, mon ami!

As for stuff getting lost in the middle of other threads, arrgh.....it's always been a pet hate of mine. I keep telling folks to stick to one thread, one subject, but it consistently falls on deaf ears. And, truth to tell, I think we've all been guilty of this one at times over the years.....myself as much as anybody else.

(Anyway; swapping-out a wifi card, erm......well, it's modifying the computer's ability to connect to the 'net, yes. But you're not physically trying to modify the actual chipset itself, are you? You're just throwing one card to one side and replacing it with another one (that's modularity at work, which is a good thing). But once that wifi card leaves the factory, it will only ever work with one specific software driver.....)

Mike.

My 2 pence worth:

Take your failed computer into a repair shop and the engineer grabs the manual/schematic for that model.

Someone else brings in a different failed computer. The same manual/schematic as for the first computer is not chosen.

Training manuals will have a section and sub-section(s) relating to the section.

Within a computer, a directory named ‘Documents’ will have sub-directories, lets say ‘Letters’ - ‘Memos’ - 'Contracts'
A directory named ‘Spreadsheets’ will have sub-directories, lets say ‘Income/Expenditure’ - 'Holiday Savings’ - 'Income Tax Returns'.

I think you get the idea so far.

So a section heading, of say Bionic xxxx, would have sub-section headings of say ‘Hardware’ - ‘Software’.

This provides quick and easy access to the end point required.

Sorry no more, my 2 pence has run out.

mikewalsh wrote: Mon Jun 10, 2024 9:49 pm

As for stuff getting lost in the middle of other threads, arrgh.....it's always been a pet hate of mine. I keep telling folks to stick to one thread, one subject, but it consistently falls on deaf ears. And, truth to tell, I think we've all been guilty of this one at times over the years.....myself as much as anybody else.

Indeed - mea culpa also.
So how to get intermingled "hardware" journeys out of each pup developers thread??
I would have thought that all posts relating to my Toshiba laptop attempting to run say, Fossa 9.5 - should surely be in one separate thread - rather than mucking up the main Fossa thread.
But where should I put it?
Into the main "Users" thread?
Why not into a subcategory of Fossa 9.5?
I just think it would be great to end up with a whole series of success stories visible where you could track the solutions for a specific hardware.
Sure we have the search function but I just wonder if a "hardware subcategory" option might be tidier than how it works at present.
Certainly easier for noobs to find something relevant to their Chromebook xx or whatever.

@greengeek :-

All I will say, Ian - and the idea does have merit, I believe - is.......mention it to rockedge, and see what he thinks. He's the one who would need to work his magic, and create all the necessary new sub-forums. See what he says.

He may agree with you. He may reject it out of hand. He may come up with an alternative, better suggestion. But; "Nothing ventured, nothing gained....."

He's quite "approachable", y'know..!

(*shrug....*)

Mike.

Hello @greengeek

I saw an earlier comment you referenced about the addition of hardware expansion for PUP distros.

I merely want to offer this as I also know you have raised concern of the deliverable (ISO/IMG) sizes of some distros on forum past, I think.

Adding additional hardware, which I agree is good, WILL also increase the size of the deliverable. But, in today's world, that size is irrelevant when the user's concern in successful operations, OOTB, for all of one's PC features...no matter the age of the PC being used.

Thus, to me, the most important need is "a boot to desktop is much more important than deliverable size". I also know that "deliverable size" has NOTHING to do with "operational RAM use size" as these are 2 completely different unrelated things.

BTW:
Statement - Question

1. Is there an example of any distro forum that breaks its versions into hardware and software sections for each version? I dont remember seeing one.

2. I think, what is being asked is for a wiki for a given distro+version where it has a table-of-contents and sections broken into these categories. Is this what is being asked?

Clarity wrote: Tue Jun 11, 2024 4:39 am

I saw an earlier comment you referenced about the addition of hardware expansion for PUP distros.
...
Thus, to me, the most important need is "a boot to desktop is much more important than deliverable size". I also know that "deliverable size" has NOTHING to do with "operational RAM use size" as these are 2 completely different unrelated things.

Statement - Question

1. Is there an example of any distro forum that breaks its versions into hardware and software sections for each version? I dont remember seeing one.

2. I think, what is being asked is for a wiki for a given distro+version where it has a table-of-contents and sections broken into these categories. Is this what is being asked?

Just to be clear - no, I was not referring to expansion of hardware, or iso size.
I was thinking of the circumstances where a dev becomes irritated or overwhelmed by the challenge of helping a user who has problematic hardware (eg: perhaps a laptop that uses Radeon video graphics and thus is incapable of booting "Puppy X")

I have seen many threads where "Person A" has twenty questions about their own hardware and "Person B" has twenty questions about their own hardware - and these questions and answers become intertwined in a multipage thread dedicated to improving Puppy X.

My point is that those 40 questions are actually specific to only 2 people. They are usually not indicative of the direction of the dev's intended thread. And they often become a hijack that potentially drowns out the positives of the thread.

I merely thought it may be helpful to have a "hardware" subsection attached to the development thread (for that particular Puppy) - so that complex and ongoing questions relative to a specific Laptop could be addressed by the whole community rather than burdening the dev or cluttering the dev thread.