Puppy Linux Discussion Forum

WeeDogLinux recently began to provide a new variation called WDL_GO systems

Currently there are two main WDL_GO system creation utilities. These have been announced previously on rockedge's forum, but I'll repeat some details here for the timeline blog since I'm planning to develop and blog about these more in coming months.

1. The first WDL_GO creation mechanisms are provided as options (vnopm and vmini) in latest build_firstrib_rootfs script. These are for Void Linux flavour and there are two options depending what the WDL_GO distro creator wants:

i. vnopm (contains no package manager at all). Currently testing frugal install booted WDLGO vnopm system that has Arch kernel and modules. Plan to use much smaller Void 4.19 kernel, however, in release for older systems.

The one under test has just enough modules to boot from my own system hard drive:

01firstrib_rootfs.sfs	1.2MiB
initrd.gz		1.2MiB
vmlinuz-5.7.2-arch1-1 	7.1MB

Above frugal install boots fine and can connect to the internet via ethernet out-of-the-box. Immediately after booting, utility 'free' reported 27MB RAM used. Core boots to simple cmdline busybox-only system, but can be expanded by addon sfs to anything really (with or without adding any package manager). By default, both new distro options use basic SysVinit via busybox and simple (provided/used) inittab and /etc/rc.d/rc.sysinit script, which builder can edit to call up, for example, /etc/rc.local or whatever... or replace with runit etc etc...

Like all WeeDog distros it comes with all the flexible WeeDog abilities: load addon sfs or uncompressed directories on boot, upper_changes save/rollback persistence, optional w_copy2ram and so on. Hence it can be easily expanded, to however much desired, via sfs addons (or, for example, any self-contained package manager, such as static xbps from Void could be added to it or included in one of the sfs or uncompressed directory layers).

I'm planning to release a few versions of vnopm core for different sets of modules (more or less modules). For example, one release may contain just sufficient modules to boot from usb. Extra modules can be bolted on via sfs addon (layer-numbered) additional-modules releases.

ii. vmini (Void mini distro). This is similar to above but by default includes static compile of Voids xbps package manager. Hence it is much bigger being around 60MiB. Really this is just for fun/experimenting/education. Better to employ one of rockedge's fuller builds for either commandline-only or X-windows-capable practical use.

2. A second build_lgo_rootfs script is under development for creating WDLGO_Debian-based systems.

The first such distro, WDLGO_Focal64 was released some while back as an iso, but is now being re-designed. The original build_lgo_script also outputs dpkg_apt_multiuserPAM addon sfs modules for compatible Puppy Linux variants. Note that debootstrap is not used in this construction, so the resulting distro can be much smaller than is typical, and since it uses WDL initrd/init frugal install capabilities such builds are inherently very modular indeed (with currently up to 100 sfs module layers).

The attached image shows the directory contents of a tiny vnopm build that utilised the kernel of bionicpup32 plus only one overlayfs external module.

just about ready to try out a new build!

Just a thought that would be consistent and "may" increase user participation.

I was thinking to myself that: If WDL_GO was a simple builder ISO where the user would have the option to select process #1 or process #2.

It would be nice, as well, if it can be booted via SG2D like the modern PUPs/DOGs such that a user, when needing, could boot the ISO, Live, and generate the outcome by selecting one of the 2 options the ISO would allow. A 2-option ISO would probably be less than 50MB or something very small to only support the build pathways.

This way, the user merely selects from the ISO screen versus having to install a set of scripts. And, it cuts down any complexity that a written doc might incur. And, at the same time, other users with greater skillsets may be even greater help to this effort.

The easier for users to partake, the greater the participation: ... I think, humbly.

I do, though, like the detail you have shown.

Clarity wrote: ↑Tue Apr 27, 2021 6:31 am

Just a thought that would be consistent and "may" increase user participation.

I was thinking to myself that: If WDL_GO was a simple builder ISO where the user would have the option to select process #1 or process #2.
...
The easier for users to partake, the greater the participation

There are possibly/likely-maybe to be isos later Clarity (yes I'm aware of loopback.cfg, grub2, and also noted you use SuperGrub2 etc). Perhaps sooner rather than later from rockedge WDL Void project work, and later, perhaps from me - though that's not guaranteed since I'm already happy with what I have and what I can do with it within my 'family' - I'm not trying to be a BarryK-type provider to the world, and since I'm not overly self-interested in 'polishing' distros for general use I probably would fail if I had that kind of 'ambition' - and truth to tell I have no such 'ambitions' for the stuff I personally work on anyway. Indeed, I'm not actually trying to increase user-participation at this time at all, but am aware of the scope/potential of WDL; I am absolutely sure WDL is a particularly flexible and modular multi-distro, multi-options build system/distro, but want for now, myself, to simply focus on the core build scripts, and provide behind-the-scenes progress reports, because main distro builds rely on these scripts. I don't mean to be selfish, but am no longer further interested in advocating better cooperation/equitably shared-space on this forum anyway - clearly, others were against that, not me.

Effectively, therefore, recent events decided me to adopt a closed development model for current and future WDL developments, though whatever I continue to chose to release as software remains open-source MIT licensed. Nothing unusual in that open-source-software/closed-development-model approach - Slackware, for example, similarly uses a closed development model and private repos accessible to only a few selected cooperative developers. Of course, WDL is a tiny personal project, and the comparison with Slackware is a bit nonsensical in that sense - WDL is just another wee distro project that does not have its own repos - like Puppy nowadays really and was just an alternative for people to 'play' with (I'm not serious enough to think of 'stewards' or 'guardians' ... WDL is just my way of creating distros for my family use... no special woof-CE-like team ever envisaged by me for WeeDogLinux).

Is it good that largest slice of forum membership insist on 'other' distros not using House-Training: HowTo, Beginners, Users, as shared areas for all forum distros?Well, from my many earlier posts I clearly did not think so, and indeed stated my opinion about that for many years on the old forum, and actively strived against that compartmentalism, despite less than helpful old forum moderation activities. However, that now closed development model part of my mind is now well and truly made up, which is probably good for the 'peace of the forum world', and I don't feel any need to collaborate at all frankly with anyone other than the few I wish to (except I will also rely on other Linux information sources, such as stackexchange, kernel documentation, wider Linux community and so on).

In practice, I'm actually in the process of reorganising WDL documentation to non-forum sites (such as my own tinylinux.info site and future weedoglinux.com site and likely wiki) so nothing guaranteed in terms of overall public access anyway - but... I remain keen to develop WDL since there is plenty can be done with it (and I find its development rather addictive, which may not be a good thing of course).

I also remain perfectly happy to support the WDL project work of any developer I wish to (such as rockedge) by providing them with private access to the latest core dev build scripts from WDL private project development repo, but that support will remain very limited (in terms of numbers) and by myself-invitation only, for old-times sake you might say; more wide-spread requests for access will be ignored (not that I expect any such requests anyway). That allows them to produce their own iso (or similar) creations and publish these WDL iso products for wider use whilst keeping a closed development model and dev build system.

It was never an original intention of mine that WDL would be in competition with any other distro to attract new users (I use it, my family use it, perhaps one or two others occasionally use it, or don't - that's actually fine). It has become clear to me that 'collaboration' is not a Puppy dev characteristic, which is fine; I forget that shared-space/collaboration idea I fostered for so long now anyway.

Sometime later in the year I will decide whether to release more polished/user-friendly modular or pre-constructed WDL distros of my own - perhaps everything Puppy has to offer and more besides, in which case that would now be a competitive distro. However, I really am not looking for a large user-base at all, since I rather enjoy the peace of not releasing anything at all whilst developing the system primarily for my private family use. More widely than that - maybe, maybe not; like I say I just want to work on the system at the moment, and blog progress for selected collaborating developers (sometimes in public, sometimes via private project dev site).

On the whole, therefore, I'll simply be 'blogging' now and then. My tinylinux.info 'blog' does sometimes include instructions on how to do something specific, but that's not it's prime purpose - rather it is a report on what I'm currently doing in case anyone remains interested. Occasionally, I may post something in a more general HowTo, but on the whole I have stopped producing such work. I'm duplicating these blog details in this forum sometimes, when maybe useful documentation on WDL progress, but also as a form of archive of info in case either source disappears one day - if anyone objects to these blog progress reports duplicated here to allow forum comments, that will be fine.

Anyway, just setting the record straight. Not worth reading this particular (overly large and unimportant) post really - back to simple technical blog posts from me for as long as they may or may not continue.

wiak

You're right, Wiak! Sometimes we report something that we think will be useful for other members. Our experiments, things that worked for us. We show you how to get there. Whether at the developer level or as a user. But there are some minds that do not accept changes, nor the request for changes. The answer to our euphoria, for having discovered, built or made available something new, is silence. Sometimes criticism. Therefore, it is natural to reserve what is good, first for ourselves!
Be happy in your work! I will follow your development as long as possible! Good luck!