Puppy Linux Discussion Forum

peebee wrote: ↑Wed Apr 24, 2024 3:04 pm

wanderer wrote: ↑Wed Apr 24, 2024 2:59 pm

as i said it looks to me like the consensus is that we present bookworm as the new distrowatch candidate
but lets wait a little while for everyone to post their comments
before we send it in

wanderer

Hi

I feel you MUST have Radky's buy in before doing this..... or somebody else must takeover BWP64 from Radky - with his permission.

or the BWP64 build should be publicly available.

wanderer wrote:

i dont know how to get that

By asking @radky how he feels about it, I'd say.

hi fredx181

ok i will try to send radky a pm

i was hoping he would be reading this thread and would chime in

if i have no luck i will ask again on this thread

wanderer

Best thing to do right now is begin to design the pages for puppylinux.com. Writing the actual content is the key. Some decent screen shots of various looks of the distro's and we can merge these into the GitHub location the pages are stored and the web site generated.

The page content right now is written in Markdown formatting.

An editor that is good for GitHub markdown syntax is called MarkText and there is a nice PET package for F96-CE_4 and Fossapup64-9.6 variants.

Download MarkText-0.17.1.pet

This is the GitHub location for what one sees at https://puppylinux.com -> https://github.com/puppylinux-woof-CE/p ... .github.io

I have it set up to do some editing using MarkText ->

Calling now for some help with the changes in the text. Proposals highly appreciated. Get your name in the history books.

We know the content in the Getting Started and System Requirements really came out well (in my opinion) and several forum members stand out with their contributions. Looks and feels "professional" without intimidation.

I'm thinking (crazy as I am) that we could do the same for this puppylinux.com website!

@rockedge

I realize that puppylinux.com redirects to https://puppylinux-woof-CE.github.io and woof-ce is specific to puppy................

but is there a way someone who clicks on puppylinux.com can also find out more about all the active projects in the puppy community ie, dogs klvs easys etc?

rockedge wrote: ↑Wed Apr 24, 2024 5:21 pm

Calling now for some help with the changes in the text. Proposals highly appreciated. Get your name in the history books.

At the bottom of https://puppylinux-woof-ce.github.io/
following the section I need more info before deciding to try, there should be a new section titled Other community distributions that contains a link to a new page which will be a rewrite and update of the "other notable offshots" paragraph on https://puppylinux-woof-ce.github.io/family-tree.html

@rockedge
thanks for the marktext pet suggestion.
I am using void and wish to know if https://voidlinux.org/packages/?arch=x86_64&q=MarkText is possibly the same?

A new thread for the edits to puppylinux.com or maybe github is the way to go?

Rockedge could you start a new topic just about puppylinux.com

Tell people how to get it edited.
what exactly do you need to do!!!!!!!!!!

Discuss any suggestions or ideas.

What to edit.

What to change.

What to add.

etc......

Maybe puppylinux.com needs to have an administrator and a few other people to help them with puppylinux.com

Why does anyone think we can only submit, only one specific Puppy version to DistrWatch.

No reason 2, 3, 4, or more of the very good recent new versions could not be submitted.

But for sure, the Puppy version developer is going to have to agree to support doing it.
They have edit control of the Puppy version ISO.
Most of them seem to also control where the ISO can be downloaded from

Really need to get back to having all the Puppy versions available from the Puppy repository on http://distro.ibiblio.org/puppylinux/
This site will always be available.

ibiblio.org was formed as a collaboration between the University of North Carolina–Chapel Hill‘s MetaLab, formerly known as SunSITE, and the Center for the Public Domain in September of 2000. At UNC-Chapel Hill, ibiblio is supported by the School of Journalism and Mass Communication and the School of Information and Library Science.

IT IS FREE TO USE!!!!!!!!!

A lot of other Linux OS's use it!
http://distro.ibiblio.org/

That is why barryk set it up, in the very beginning of Puppy Linux.

But we have a bunch of Puppy version developers that do not want to support doing that.

I am using void and wish to know if https://voidlinux.org/packages/?arch=x86_64&q=MarkText is possibly the same?

Yes it is I use it on KLV-Airedale and KLV-Spectr.

I have a new editor available if MarkText at 76 M is too large. It is named CuteMarkEd and is 692.89K, but does load some dependencies.

Here is some info on CuteMarkEd -> https://cloose.github.io/CuteMarkEd/

Download -> CuteMarkEd-0.11.3-x86_64.pet size is 692.89K

bigpup wrote: ↑Wed Apr 24, 2024 9:55 pm

Why does anyone think we can only submit, only one specific Puppy version to DistrWatch.

No reason 2, 3, 4, or more of the very good recent new versions could not be submitted.

you would have to ask distrowatch about that. I was entertaining the idea that the distrowatch listing could point to a page with more than one project, but that might be asking too much of them

bigpup wrote: ↑Mon Apr 22, 2024 11:12 am

Really the reason to call it an official Puppy version, should be about:
Built up as a bunch of separate SFS files, how it boots, loads complete OS into RAM, stores changes in a save file/folder, generally operates in specific ways (pupmodes), supports hardware old and new, uses the same core programs, installs as a frugal install, etc.............

These features are what makes Puppy Linux different to other Linux OS's.

That to me is a Puppy version.
No matter how it is built!

Have you not heard of Slax, for example, antiX, Porteus?

Suddenly they are Puppy Linux.

rockedge wrote: ↑Wed Apr 24, 2024 10:11 pm

I am using void and wish to know if https://voidlinux.org/packages/?arch=x86_64&q=MarkText is possibly the same?

Yes it is :thumbup2: I use it on KLV-Airedale and KLV-Spectr.

but the link shows, (at least for me anyways)
No results found. and I have found not all editors render the same results especially if the code is collaborative
there is a reccomendation at https://github.com/puppylinux-woof-CE/p ... cegithubio for a stylesheet https://github.com/adam-p/markdown-here ... Cheatsheet

I could try the pet, but was hoping to learn more about that particular app. do you think it is ?https://github.com/marktext/marktext

I think I will try the editor at my github account with the stylesheet for now, although I do prefer to work offline.

hi bigpup and everyone

distrowatch will only accept 1 candidate per distro
so we will have to settle on only one

however i think it is very important to always tell new prospects
about "the puppy concept"
and how it applies to the other non puppy projects on the forum
all of these projects create a synergy which helps everyone

wanderer

williwaw wrote:

I could try the pet, but was hoping to learn more about that particular app. do you think it is ?https://github.com/marktext/marktext

I think I will try the editor at my github account with the stylesheet for now, although I do prefer to work offline.

I have made an XBPS package for KLV available here -> https://rockedge.org/kernels/data/XBPS_ ... 86_64.xbps

Download it, click on it and it should install.

fredx181 wrote: ↑Sun Apr 21, 2024 2:39 pm

Wiz57 wrote:

Our distros are community based, built from a variety of base systems, and don't really fit into DWs perception of a separate distribution.

Yes, well said. That's the reality IMO.

Now there is the truth. There is no such thing as one useful/interesting distro discussed/developed via resource of this forum. That's actually what makes the forum special compared to other restricted one distro only typical other forums. Collaboration, innovation, and thinking-outside-the-box breeds choice - Distrowatch can't handle such a flexible multi-distro-to-suit-everyone approach if it insists on name of one distro with some specific old branding, which means nothing here in practice.

wiak wrote: ↑Thu Apr 25, 2024 5:02 am

fredx181 wrote: ↑Sun Apr 21, 2024 2:39 pm

Wiz57 wrote:

Our distros are community based, built from a variety of base systems, and don't really fit into DWs perception of a separate distribution.

Yes, well said. That's the reality IMO.

Now there is the truth. There is no such thing as one useful/interesting distro discussed/developed via resource of this forum. That's actually what makes the forum special compared to other restricted one distro only typical other forums. Collaboration, innovation, and thinking-outside-the-box breeds choice - Distrowatch can't handle such a flexible multi-distro-to-suit-everyone approach if it insists on name of one distro with some specific old branding, which means nothing here in practice.

This has been the way with Puppy on DistroWatch for a long time.

No two versions posted were the same, except a few different Slacko ones, and ones based on Ubuntu.

DistroWatch did have an issue about the version number, being in some kind of ascending order.

But S15pup and Slacko 7.0 broke that requirement.

With S15pup getting posted.
They now understand, that the Puppy version that gets submitted, could have any name or version number.

Sure they want only one new Puppy version submitted at a time.
Give them time to review it and add it to the Puppy Linux post.
But after it gets added to Puppy Linux posting.

Nothing stopping submitting a different one.

If you look at some of the other Linux OS's.
They post a newer version about every month or so.
Even adding the ones that are still in development and not even at release stage.

Example Ubuntu on DistroWatch:

• 2024-04-12: Development Release: Ubuntu 24.04 Beta
• 2024-02-22: Distribution Release: Ubuntu 22.04.4
• 2023-10-12: Distribution Release: Ubuntu 23.10
• 2023-09-22: Development Release: Ubuntu 23.10 Beta
• 2023-08-10: Distribution Release: Ubuntu 22.04.3
• 2023-04-20: Distribution Release: Ubuntu 23.04
• 2023-03-23: Distribution Release: Ubuntu 20.04.6
• 2023-02-24: Distribution Release: Ubuntu 22.04.2
• 2022-10-20: Distribution Release: Ubuntu 22.10
• 2022-09-30: Development Release: Ubuntu 22.10 Beta
• 2022-09-01: Distribution Release: Ubuntu 20.04.5
• 2022-08-11: Distribution Release: Ubuntu 22.04.1
• More Ubuntu releases...

The info statement at the top of the DistroWatch Puppy Linux post sure needs to get redone.

https://distrowatch.com/table.php?distribution=puppy

I think it goes all the way back to Puppy v1.0

Also the specific program info is not correct, for some of the listed Puppy versions.

I think DistroWatch just used info from earlier Puppy versions, to fill in that info for newer versions.

hi all

i have not received a response to my pm to radky
nor has he posted on this thread

he may not be available
or he may not be interested

but we don't want to wait forever

so i think it is time to consider what we will do if radky does not approve
of us using his bookworm as the distrowatch candidate

thoughts anyone

wanderer

Submit BW64 with the proper paperwork and say I said it's okay if anyone asks.

If that is no good and VanillaDpup can't be it let's throw F96-CE_4 / Fossapup64-9.6 on the list.

And somehow make a mention that there are 5000 other versions plus similar but different distro's closely related in philosophy

wanderer wrote:

i have not received a response to my pm to radky
nor has he posted on this thread

he may not be available
or he may not be interested

but we don't want to wait forever

Patience ! No need to rush IMO, radky will probably respond sooner or later and you really need his approval, I'd say.

Good idea to wait a little longer

fredx181 wrote: ↑Thu Apr 25, 2024 3:50 pm

Patience ! No need to rush IMO, radky will probably respond sooner or later and you really need his approval, I'd say.

yes, it's only a nomination thus far
Has @666philb ever mentioned why he visits less frequently?

hi all

i also agree that we should wait
there is no rush
and radky should contact us eventually

if there are further concerns
im sure someone will post them on this thread

wanderer

As mentioned earlier on tis thread, @dimkr' Vanilla(s) is an great candidate. It ticks all the boxes for a PUP, in my book, just as BKWP64 offers..

And so does @peebee's two 64bit distros, as well. One of them is a carryover for @01micko's "Slacko". Excellent feature set, constantly maintained...same as VanillaPUPs by dimkr.

yes clarity

there are a great number of excellent puppies on the forum

and its important to remember that being the distrowatch candidate does not infer that one is better than the other

if one is not available at this time maybe another one will be

eventually the community will need to decide what the candidate will be

so we will wait until there is a general consensus

and that is what this thread is for

wanderer

I have communicated with radky on the matter of BW64 - BW32 being the DW submission and he's okay with it BUT.....

If the Puppy community decides BW64 and BW32 are appropriate for Distrowatch, that's OK with me though my availability for daily support of BW64 would be quite limited. If the Puppy community prefers a different Puppy for Distrowatch, that's OK with me.

Some serious consideration to several points needs to be addressed. It must be determined if Distrowatch should even be a goal.

Worldwide distribution of any 'official' Puppy on Distrowatch results in greater usage followed by a a plethora of questions and user issues reported on the Puppy forum. This requires a level of support which is no longer possible for someone like me who engages in Puppy Linux development as a hobby.

I have to agree with this. It is a full time job just keeping the forum and other Puppy Linux related web sites in operation and it's hobby as well.

Alternatively, you (or other forum member) could build a default Woof-CE BookwormPup and submit to Distrowatch. Bookworm will be the current Debian stable release for the next 1.5 years

I feel like the Puppy Linux, DebianDog and Kennel Linux model does not "fit" Distrowatch philosophies.

hi all

this is just a suggestion

could we use radkys and peebees bookworm or another debian puppy

and just update it/maintain it slowly over time with everyone being involved

so that no one person has to be totally responsible

and nothing much changes and bugs get worked out so no major questions/demands

and use it as a puppy distrowatch lead in for a long time/forever

when people get to the forum
they quickly see the diversity of the puppy community
so there is no need to push this on the distrowatch lead

this would be less work updating distrowatch and supporting the distrowatch candidate
since the distrowatch candidate is just one of the many examples of puppy

wanderer

rockedge wrote: ↑Sat Apr 27, 2024 2:38 pm

I have communicated with radky on the matter of BW64 - BW32 being the DW submission and he's okay with it BUT.....

Alternatively, you (or other forum member) could build a default Woof-CE BookwormPup and submit to Distrowatch. Bookworm will be the current Debian stable release for the next 1.5 years

The "default Woof-CE BookwormPups" (64-bit & 32-bit) are found at:
https://github.com/puppylinux-woof-CE/w ... okworm.yml

This is what radky enhances to produce his BookwormPup64

Sure, you could do that, if this would produce a 100% fully working BookwormPup64 and BookwormPup32.

So far, I have never seen a Puppy produced with Woof-CE, get released, and not have some issues or bugs, that needed fixed.

Radky's BookwormPup64 is at final release stage and is working good.

Plus it has a forum topic and section for posting about it specifically.

Same goes for BookwormPup32.

Still do not understand why the Puppy version developers are so reluctant to offer their Puppy version for listing on DistroWatch?
Maybe it is just the effort involved in doing it.

I can tell you for sure, that myself and a bunch of other people, did not know about Puppy Linux, until they found it listed on DistroWatch.
.
.

as i understand

radky has given his approval

and i hope peebee has also given his approval

does this mean we can move forward with making these our (i hope long term) distrowatch candidates

wanderer