Puppy Linux Discussion Forum

Hello forum.
As you may or may not know i was tinkering with several pups on my usb flashdrive and i have settled with 3 for now.
xenialpup32.
focalpup32.(very very nice pup.)
fossapup64.

I am currently using focalpup32 which is my favourite and i am wondering how i can keep the savefile in a lean shape.
i have 1.5gb of storage with 1.3 gb as free space.
I have chromium sfs as my browser although i have limited to no knowledge of how sfs truly works.Everything is more or less how i want things and i am aware i can not use the save function at reboot etc but if i make small incremental changes can these changes be added to the savefile manually.?

thank you.

@xenial

The chromium sfs (and all added sfs) file does not take up any save file space. However, chromium's cache file does take up save file space and it will grow like weeds. I personally like to use firefox on usb and ssd drives since you can adjust the automatic save interval and you can configure it to place the cache outside the save file. I have not done the same with chromum but I'm betting that @mikewalsh knows how since he is the browser king.

wizard

Thank you wizard.
I have used firefox for many years and love the browser but i am experiencing issues with the latest version on my relatively oldish laptop.Chromium seems to perform slightly better. could use a v78esr firefox i have lying around but i am not sure how long it will run until it goes bang.

I shall wait until mr walsh responds as he is more knowledgeable than me.

@xenial :-

Hi, Xenial.

It's easy enough to put any browser's cache outside the save. As you've found, the Chromium code-base is not equipped with an internal limiting mechanism in the same way the 'zilla-based browsers are. There are, however, command-line "--switches" that can be employed in the wrapper-script, by means of which it is possible to force the browser to limit the amount of space it uses for the cache.

peebee has been using these in his Chromium builds for years. Now I think about it, it probably wouldn't be a bad idea for me to employ these in the browsers I build. It simply hasn't been an issue for me this last year or so, what with 32 GB RAM and almost 5TB of disk space. I need to bear in mind that not everybody has such resources to play with!

Puppy's sym-link function is a very powerful tool for us to do stuff most Linux users would consider "mad"..!

--------------------------------------

2 questions..?

How much space have you got in total on your flash-drive? I mean, how much spare room have you got to play with?
And can you show me your wrapper-script, please?

If your Chromium browser is one of peebee's builds, it'll have these limit "--switches" in the wrapper anyway. I still need to confirm what it looks like anyway. The wrapper script should be in /usr/bin if one of peebee's...

It's also possible to specify the location of the .cache directory via another command-line "--switch".

Mike.

Yes, getting an updated 32 bit browser is getting harder and harder, the same will probably happen with 32 bit puppies. I had great luck with 32 bit until last year, like mikewalsh said " the writings on the wall" for them. To bad, they worked great.

What is your hardware and is it limited to 32 bit?

wizard

@wizard :-

We worked this out the other day. Xenial's got an early Core2Duo there. He thought it was strictly 32-bit, but it IS actually 64-bit capable; only 1.6 GHz, so not a speed demon, but it's got all the necessary instruction sets needed for more modern software.

He was quite surprised!

Hence why he's been experimenting with Fossapup64. Had some issues with wireless connecting, but I think it's sorted now. Most folks simply don't realise just how long 64-bit CPUs have been on the market. The old Compaq tower I used to have ran the great-granddaddy of 'em all; the immortal AMD Athlon 64, the first commercially viable 64-bit CPU, released in late 2003.....and the last time, till recently, that AMD handed Intel's ass to 'em on a plate. It was the impetus Intel needed to come up with the immensely successful "Core" architecture....

I think that old banger's got some life left in it yet..!

Mike.

The first rule of keeping your SaveFiles lean and mean is don't put anything into them which doesn't have to be there. What has to be there are setting, customizations and those applications which have to be installed. Whenever possible, use SFSes, portables and AppImages.

I am somewhat of a pack-rat: if I see something I may someday want to use I download it. Saves having to hunt for it when I do want it. This screenshot shows my current collection, not including SFSes.

. Most of them are rarely, if ever, used. But I hope it will suggest that if you actually need an application to perform some task, there's a good chance that you won't have to install an application in your SaveFile.

One advantage of SFSes, portables and AppImages is that they can often be used by more than one operating system. This should prove especially true in your case as both xenialpup32 and focalpup32 are 'Ubuntu-based'. But to use some --for example-- master-pdf-editor-4 (highly recommended) you'd have to install some Qt4 libs into each operating system. [I wonder if an Extralibs folder and wrapper ala firefox would work?]. Still, one portable + qt4 libs in two OSes uses less space than the same application installed into two OSes.

With fossapup64 as your third system, you could get away with also using some of the portables and SFSes (but probably not AppImages) if you load fossapup64's 32-bit compatibility SFS. The 32-bit LibreOffice.SFS and the portable web-browser (while they are still acceptable) certainly will work.

I still swear by MikeWalsh's Seamonkey46.SFS. It's a rare web-site which doesn't allow access.

You can keep datafiles out of all your Puppys. I create a folder named my-stuff on the Home partition. Then, with a Rox-window open to it, drag /root/my-documents into it, selecting move. Drag my-documents back into /root and select Link(relative). On your other two Puppys, delete my-documents from /root and drag my-documents from /mnt/home/my-stuff into /root and select Link(relative). Anything you create in /my-documents on any of your systems will be on /mnt/home. Each of your OSes will offer to open from and save-to that folder. Do the same with /root/Downloads.

But frankly, with only 1.3 gb as free space on your USB-Key, you'll have to keep your collection of applications to a minimum. What to you really need? With Fossapup64 I'd select one 64-bit Web-browser and those of its applications (1) only available under it and (2) that you actually intend using. I wouldn't use the 32-bit compatibility SFS as it's almost as large as another Puppy. Do you really need both focalpup32 and xenialpup32? Focalpup may be newer. But does it offer all the applications you want that are available under xenialpup32? Or any application you want which isn't available under xenialpup32?

some echo advice here...

I use almost every browser but builtin & Chromium most overall, overall meaning on both 32/64.

Chromium is my highest motivation to keep in a PUPSAVE because:

• performance

• less-commercial

• installation difficulty

Yet apps and especially browsers are the biggest cause of PUPSAVE bloat.

Now I use homemade Chromium 32-bit by .sfs.

The common Chromium .sfs others make don't work on my systems.

A 64 Chromium .sfs is on my extensive todo list.

So here you're already onto your answer: use .sfs and standalone apps where possible.

ALSO (Puppy nuance), learn how to keep browser config and cache out of your PUPSAVE.

You do this by saving changes BEFORE you open a browser, and deleting the stuff that's already in.

I tend to copy a static browser config from storage media to ram that never gets saved.

Once you setup a system you like that doesn't change much, you can remaster it or make a drv.sfs and run live with no pupsave at all.

It's a great feature but can be a hassle to implement if you don't need it, because drv creation is not fullproof nor as easy to update as a PUPSAVE.

The issue with PUPSAVES really is setting them up the way you like them and not saving changes, automatically or accidentially.

All these other guys here are experts, but I solved my "bloating" Firefox as shown: viewtopic.php?p=33036#p33036
I also added memory, but the problem was already fixed before adding memory.

BTW my old Dell Vostro 1400 is dual core and can handle 64 bit, but bus is only 32 bit I think. Anyway, it works well with Bionic Puppy32. You might try it, too.

wizard wrote: ↑Fri Aug 20, 2021 10:55 pm

Yes, getting an updated 32 bit browser is getting harder and harder, the same will probably happen with 32 bit puppies. I had great luck with 32 bit until last year, like mikewalsh said " the writings on the wall" for them. To bad, they worked great.

The last bastion of 32 bit systems could be Void Linux or for easy small build you could try some of rockedge's WeeDog Linux Void builds (WDL_Void32) such as here: viewtopic.php?p=14696#p14696\

It proves relatively easy to use WeeDog Linux builds such as these with Puppy kernel and modules, so can be trimmed down to equally small size but with full power of Void Linux multiuser system (uses runit rather than systemd) and its great official Void xbps package manager, which provided full access to all Void Linux repositories.

I'm currently working towards update of WeeDog github available resources including new build scripts, but slow at doing so since I'm currently 'employed' working of commercial invoices (spreadsheets) in my partner's business - but every spare minute I can find I try to do something computer-development-related. - fortunately I have our business WDL_Arch64 system fully configured for our business needs so I don't have any issues to fix with that.

Recent 32bit Firefox build is available per the screenshot attached:

@mikewalsh

You didn't say if xenial had a desktop or laptop, but at 1.6ghz it is most likely a laptop. Most laptops like that could have a cpu upgrade into the 2.x ghz range. I've done a dozen of so and it gives them a good boost. Got the cpu's from ebay most in the $10 U.S. range. Currently have 3 or 4 running fossa64 nicely.

I also spent many hours using a HP DX5150 with a athlon64 x2 3800+, 3g ram. It was a rugged machine.

wizard

@wizard is it normal to upgrade cpu's these days or surgery?

I'm old enough to remember when most computers were called "clones" that were custom-built, whereby you could swap out a motherboard with a higher spec CPU, but not just the chip.

Hello @xenial Everyone is giving good guidance.

It I understand your OP correctly you have a PC that has 1.5GB of RAM and you want to run best with that RAM in today's Puppyland. Further, you shared that you have 2 32bit PUPs and 1 64bit PUP to boot choose at boot time. Mentioning that, suggest that you have a 64bit PC.

For best results, understanding the world over the past 16 PC years and the directions that ALL of today's manufacturers are entrenched, I would recommend several things; IN ADDITION to the posts received about use of apps outside of storage within the save-sessions.

1. Use your FossaPUP64 as it is CONSISTENT with everything around us and is 64bit. Using it, even as a 64bit OS, it offers the BEST of both the old 32bit world apps as well as the current and future 64bit direction of our world. FossaPUP64 will do EVERYTHING your 32bit PUPs do.

2. ALL of the mainstream browsers have concentrated their development resources in the advantages of the 64bit browsers. As such everything you learn in using these 64bit browsers will be useful now and into our future.

Our world is never going back to 32bit and development efforts now and into the future have 'switched-on' their products for 64bit operations. Manufacturing totally switched for customer PC consumption in 2006.

@666PhilB's FossaPUP64 is an excellent platform providing updates via its desktop icon to insure hot needs are resolved. And @Barryk's EASY is another 64bit power platform along with both FATDOG and DebianDOG-FossaDOG. All of which will run well on your PC...even in its 1.5MB size. (Although, if possible, you might keep your eyes open for more RAM.)

Enjoy

Thank you everyone for those incredible replies .
i have 2gb of ram and my usbdrive has 1tb of storage.I don't know what to say as those informative and knowledgeable responses pretty much cover all the bases.

xenial wrote: ↑Sat Aug 21, 2021 8:03 am

Thank you everyone for those incredible replies .
i have 2gb of ram and my usbdrive has 1tb of storage.I don't know what to say as those informative and knowledgeable responses pretty much cover all the bases.

Now you see why these "kennels" are the best port-of-call for Puppians of ANY stripe.....

The "impossible" we dispatch on a regular basis. Miracles, hmm.......well, those CAN take a bit longer. (But it don't stop us from trying....)

Mike.

@mikewalsh

I don't know how "normal" it is, but I am a chronic "tinkerer", always try to get the most possible out of the old computers. It's a challenge. Almost all desktops can upgrade the cpu, sometimes a lot. Sometime after 2012 some laptop manufacturers on some models started soldering the cpu to the mb, that's a no go. Desktops are easy to change, you have to enjoy puzzles to do laptops. The upgrade can sometimes be dramatic. I did a couple of Dell E1505 laptops. Went from a 1.6ghz T2050(32bit) to a 2.0ghz T7200 (64 bit), the passmark cpu speed almost doubled. The cpu cost me $3 U.S. each and took about an hour each to install. I've done desktop cpu upgrades where the speed quadrupled.

By the way, I sold my last athon64 x2 computer about a month ago. It was a dual boot, Windows 10 32bit v1511 + Puppy fossa64 9.5. both running nicely. Of course, pup ran the best.

wizard

@wizard :-

When I inherited the old Compaq tower from my sister - like most non-techies, she upgraded from XP to Win7 by buying a new machine - it originally ran a single-core 3200+. I specifically went for, and tracked down, a dual-core X2 3800+; cache, bus and clock speed were all the same.....I wasn't after performance 'improvements' with regard to running faster (the 3200+ was plenty fast enough), I simply wanted to give Puppy a better ability to multitask with twice as many cores.

(Out of curiosity, I had a quick look to see if there were any 4800+ versions around, this being the fastest the 939 socket would support. They were like hen's teeth; rare as anything, and when one DID show up, invariably the seller was asking a ridiculous price for it. I decided I was quite happy with a "cooking" X2 3800+..!)

I tracked one down for around GBP £7.00 on eBay - in really nice condition, too. To accommodate the new CPU, a BIOS upgrade was required to handle the second core. Forum member Keisha, whom you may remember, helped me to do this under Puppy, using the native Linux "flashrom" utility, instructions for the use of which were sourced from the Arch Linux wiki.....an invaluable source for ALL things Linux-related. (I needed a helping hand, since like all of us I'd heard some right horror stories about BIOS upgrades going wrong and bricking your machine....and this was the first time I'd attempted such a thing under Linux.)

----------------------------

We had to use the BIOS for an almost identical MSI mobo. The one in the HP was built under licence by MSI for HP; the newest HP BIOS didn't support the dual-core, and as far as MSI were concerned, the '7184' board simply didn't exist! Certainly nothing was available for it. So, Keisha performed some fairly exhaustive research, and discovered that the '7093' board from MSI looked identical, with the sole exception of having 4 SATA ports - the '7184' only had two - and more importantly, had the same CPU socket & used the exact same chipset combo.

So, heart in hand, we proceeded to flash the '7093' BIOS into the '7184' ROM chip. Wonder of wonders, it worked. I had a few interesting hours tracking down a BIOS password, since the 7093's download had been 'locked' (!).....and after a few hours with the fans running flat-out, all was serene again. That old Compaq ran like a champ for the next five years with an alien BIOS.....as far as all the system utilities were concerned, though, the Compaq had a '7093' board ever after.....

You can, if you like, read the whole saga here; it runs to around 13 pages, since Keisha and I were using the thread as a way of keeping in touch during the upgrade 'flash' process..!

https://oldforum.puppylinux.com/viewtop ... =98295#top

Ye anciente Dell lappie got quite a workout that evening, I can tell you!

Mike.

I'm on two laptops most of the time. How can you tell if their CPUs can be upgraded?

Dell Inspiron B130:
http://www.notebookreview.com/notebookr ... ics-specs/
https://downloads.dell.com/manuals/all- ... _en-us.pdf

Gateway LT2802u netbook:
https://gadgetaz.com/Netbook/Gateway_LT2802u--4002

I also have two old desktop machines I'm struggling to keep alive.
My fast (only) 64 machine is a desktop.
I'm in it now and it changes my thinking a lot, even though my Puppy desktop looks the same.
It has some 6 USB ports but the two fast ones are in the back.
Bring those puppies up front so we can use them!

Other than kernel panic on old desktops, the last hardware failure I experienced is a monitor. I like to keep old machines chugging along.

wizard wrote: ↑Sat Aug 21, 2021 2:05 pm

I don't know how "normal" it is, but I am a chronic "tinkerer", always try to get the most possible out of the old computers. It's a challenge. Almost all desktops can upgrade the cpu, sometimes a lot. Sometime after 2012 some laptop manufacturers on some models started soldering the cpu to the mb, that's a no go. Desktops are easy to change, you have to enjoy puzzles to do laptops. The upgrade can sometimes be dramatic. I did a couple of Dell E1505 laptops. Went from a 1.6ghz T2050(32bit) to a 2.0ghz T7200 (64 bit), the passmark cpu speed almost doubled. The cpu cost me $3 U.S. each and took about an hour each to install. I've done desktop cpu upgrades where the speed quadrupled.

By the way, I sold my last athon64 x2 computer about a month ago. It was a dual boot, Windows 10 32bit v1511 + Puppy fossa64 9.5. both running nicely. Of course, pup ran the best.

@JASpup :-

Neither of those laptops can have their CPUs upgraded. They're soldered to the board, using what's known as the "ball micro-grid array" system of attachment. In theory it COULD be done, but you would need to have an extremely good grasp of electronics in general, and be an absolute whiz at soldering....including knowing a multitude of little "tricks" for working with these things, and the possession of some fairly specialist tools.

For most, it's simply more trouble than it's worth for the relatively small gains you would achieve.

Mike.

something to hack out after my puppy phone then i gather.

it not worthy any time unless it's common knowledge, but the dell b130 is slow as molasses on the internet. would just assume bandwidth is bandwidth, but it's not even ballpark.

maybe the isp throttles 32? whose guess