Puppy Linux Discussion Forum

Frugal Save Folder = Preferred Method

Frugal Save File = Preferred Alternate Method

Full = Alternate Method

That would settle it.

It is not that simple.

Depending on the format of the partition.
The only choice will be a save file.

A save file can be placed on any format.

A save folder cannot.

Only real advantage of a save folder.
It is not a set size. It auto adjusts as needed.

A save file is a set size, but it can be made bigger, if more free space is needed.

bigpup wrote: ↑Thu Sep 01, 2022 11:44 am

It is not that simple.

Depending on the format of the partition.
The only choice will be a save file.

A save file can be placed on any format.

A save folder cannot.

Only real advantage of a save folder.
It is not a set size. It auto adjusts as needed.

A save file is a set size, but it can be made bigger, if more free space is needed.

I believe the savefile is compressed, so how about this?

save file = cross-platform user file (compressed)
save folder = linux user folder (standard puppy install)
full install = linux traditional install (not recommended)

geo_c wrote:

I believe the savefile is compressed, so how about this?

No, a savefile is never compressed, SFS's are.

The first time I installed puppy 4.3.1, I did a full install, then I broke the system in about an hour. Then I said to myself, "Let me try that frugal install thing."

"Ah, now I get it!"

fredx181 wrote: ↑Thu Sep 01, 2022 2:00 pm

geo_c wrote:

I believe the savefile is compressed, so how about this?

No, a savefile is never compressed, SFS's are.

correction:

save file = cross-platform user file (useful for dual boot with windows)
save folder = linux user folder (standard puppy install)
full install = linux traditional install (not recommended)

For a brand new Puppy Linux user, fresh out of the gate.

I think just renaming "Frugal Install" (save folder method) to some name such as "Preferred Install Method" would eliminate a lot of misunderstanding. It actually is the preferred way to do an install and would eliminate wrong assumptions. Point being, on the first interaction with Puppy Linux, users should not have to make a guess like that.

Meaning just a name switch would be helpful to those that are on their first time around, I would think most first time puppy users never make it into the forum and do a full install because of how it is named. I know I would want a full install, not a partial frugal install I want a full tank of gas, not a frugal tank of gas.

My whole point being "Frugal" is misleading. At least to me

@dogcat wrote:

I think just renaming "Frugal Install" (save folder method) to some name such as "Preferred Install Method" would eliminate a lot of misunderstanding.

My whole point being "Frugal" is misleading. At least to me

Fully agree !

The name frugal has been talked about for years to change it to something else.

Problem is, the name is hard coded into a lot of the core Puppy programs, that make Puppy operate the way it does.

Only way to fix this.
Come up with the name to change it to.
Go through all the programs, with frugal in the code, and change to the new name.

So far, no one wants to do this.

Frugal name was originally used, because of how frugal this install uses space on the drive.
Requires no change to partitions or format.

There has been more talk about not even providing a way to do a full install.
Some features of Puppy are not possible with a full install.

Only way to fix this.
Come up with the name to change it to

future installers should not qualify a frugal install with any proper name at all. just direct for the install to be created " here", or for the install to be created to a new directory, along with the note that any existing file system on the partition will remain untouched and a new directory will be added.

the full install should be relegated to an "alternative install method" tab or dialog box, and described with language such as "uncompressed file system method. or similar, ie, without any proper name either, and a warning that the existing filesystem will be replaced.

My whole point being "Frugal" is misleading.

actually, I think it's the "full install" naming that is more misleading to the new user, who assumes a new install must necessarily replaces an existing one.

less than adequate naming caused the headache, and renaming might make it worse.

Much of this is defined here: https://forum.puppylinux.com/viewtopic.php?t=5209 in Getting Started and System Requirements

wizard

bigpup wrote: ↑Thu Sep 01, 2022 6:37 pm

The name frugal has been talked about for years to change it to something else.

Problem is, the name is hard coded into a lot of the core Puppy programs, that make Puppy operate the way it does.

Only way to fix this.
Come up with the name to change it to.
Go through all the programs, with frugal in the code, and change to the new name.

So far, no one wants to do this.

Frugal name was originally used, because of how frugal this install uses space on the drive.
Requires no change to partitions or format.

There has been more talk about not even providing a way to do a full install.
Some features of Puppy are not possible with a full install.

Hard-coding internally isn't the problem. The problem is the names displayed by the GUI when the Installation Program is activated. What the GUI displays can easily be changed in future 'not as yet published and in the wild' Puppys. Change the displayed name to initiate a Frugal Install to "Recommended Install" and the displayed name of "Full Install" to "Masochist's Install" and the routines they initiate when selected will be the same as now.

Maybe:
Frugal Install -> Typical Install
Full Install -> Old Fashioned Install

But html Help file should have all info from Getting Started and System Requirements, maybe somebody make PDF or EPUB?

puppy_apprentice wrote: ↑Thu Sep 01, 2022 9:41 pm

Maybe:
Frugal Install -> Typical Install
Full Install -> Old Fashioned Install

But html Help file should have all info from Getting Started and System Requirements, maybe somebody make PDF or EPUB?

This is one of the 'failings' of our community. Tons of people come up with all manner of suggestions for improvements.....but they very rarely want to do the work themselves. It's always in the form of a suggestion for someone else to do said work.

Too many take the attitude "Oh, I'm just a user. The 'devs' do the actual work.....but I'm happy to make suggestions for them to make improvements." Er.....huh?? In Puppyland, particularly, there's no such thing as "just a user". Haven't y'all read the statement on the PuppyLinux home page.....about the "PuppyLinux Team"? We are ALL members.....and can contribute in whatever way we see fit.

Why suggest work for others that you're not prepared to do yourself? Come to that, why EXPECT that someone else will pick up the baton and run with it, if that's the case?

I know I'll get flak over this.......but I do at least try to provide help files or ReadMes for anything that I produce. For one thing, it makes sense to do so.....and for another, it just gives a more professional 'finish' to any app. Just because I know how my application is supposed to be used / work, I can't expect others to be mind-readers, now can I?

Sorry to sound critical, but this is one of the few things that pisses me off about not just some Puppians, but many people in the Linux community as a whole. I know coding/compiling/building/packaging/documentation is not everyone's cup of tea, but in the Linux world all the tools are available for free.....for ANYONE to use. One of the favourite "pastimes" is criticising the work of others.......and Linux users are more guilty of this than Windoze users, believe it or not. Weird, given that you're getting everything for free; it's not like you're paying for it, which just might give you some room for complaint. Can you do better? If you can.....then why don't you? Put your "money where your mouth is".....for everybody's benefit.

(*sheesh*)

Mike.

Dirty quick PDF file could be done by:
1. Go to https://forum.puppylinux.com/viewtopic.php?t=5311
2. Use option Topic Tools/Print View:
https://forum.puppylinux.com/viewtopic. ... view=print
3. Print as PDF from browser.

Do this for rest topics and in PeasyPDF join all into one big PDF.
It should be easy to convert all documents from Getting Started and System Requirements to EPUB too.

More automated solution:
https://forum.puppylinux.com/viewtopic.php?t=6714

mikeslr wrote: ↑Thu Sep 01, 2022 9:17 pm

bigpup wrote: ↑Thu Sep 01, 2022 6:37 pm

The name frugal has been talked about for years to change it to something else.

Problem is, the name is hard coded into a lot of the core Puppy programs, that make Puppy operate the way it does.

Only way to fix this.
Come up with the name to change it to.
Go through all the programs, with frugal in the code, and change to the new name.

So far, no one wants to do this.

Frugal name was originally used, because of how frugal this install uses space on the drive.
Requires no change to partitions or format.

There has been more talk about not even providing a way to do a full install.
Some features of Puppy are not possible with a full install.

Hard-coding internally isn't the problem. The problem is the names displayed by the GUI when the Installation Program is activated. What the GUI displays can easily be changed in future 'not as yet published and in the wild' Puppys. Change the displayed name to initiate a Frugal Install to "Recommended Install" and the displayed name of "Full Install" to "Masochist's Install" and the routines they initiate when selected will be the same as now.

Yup, the install method name presented to the user, could be simple text replacement in the dialog box. Something understandable that does not require a dictionary of explanations.

williwaw wrote: ↑Thu Sep 01, 2022 6:51 pm

actually, I think it's the "full install" naming that is more misleading to the new user

I agree with above statement.

I think 'both' install types have their merits. I use both types for different purposes/situations that suit me (not with Puppy, which I always use in a so-called 'frugal' install).

Major problem of the term 'full install' is that it implies that any other type of install doesn't include everything (be that content or facilities).

To add to the confusion (though not in Puppy design) it is perfectly possible to arrange to use uncompressed filesystems in the unionfs layering-type mechanism used by so-called frugal install. So it is totally no use to suggest compressed filesystems means 'frugal'. The key difference is actually that frugal-type installs involve building up the overall root filesystem hierarchy via individual filesystem layers (much like building a graphics image via individual layers), whereas so-called full-install has only that one uncompressed filesystem (no actual layering involved). But yes you can construct a one-layer frugal install distro where that one layer is uncompressed (though not with Puppy design) - not quite the same as a full install, since has frugal install advantages of not needing own partition, but close in a grey-area sort of way. Isn't flexibility wonderful, but difficult to define to users via a simple meaningful describe-everything-about-it name?!

But main thing is: NO!!! - frugal install does NOT mean LESS provided than would be provided in so-called full-install! And, frugal install, or whatever you wish to name it, allows you to install multiple distros onto same partition if you wish!

Maybe best then to adopt peebee's solution across the board and just eliminate the full install option? Is the full install at all useful anymore?

dogcat wrote: ↑Fri Sep 02, 2022 8:46 am

Maybe best then to adopt peebee's solution across the board and just eliminate the full install option? Is the full install at all useful anymore?

Depends on the distro. Whilst most use frugal installed pups, don't underestimate how much easier it is to keep full installed Linux up-to-date when upstream changes occur. That becomes very much more true for rolling or near-to-rolling upstream distros. Main thing is, if you have some optional facility that works then you should keep it - why not? You certainly shouldn't get rid of an install mode simply because you find the name full install confusing!

bigpup wrote: ↑Thu Sep 01, 2022 6:37 pm

Some features of Puppy are not possible with a full install.

The features are almost certainly possible when using full install - just addon after-boot user utilities to achieve similar or the same overall result. I presume you are referring to the use of sfs addons. It should be understood that overlayfs at least can be used to merge directories and mounted filesystems (such as sfs files) after whatever Linux it is has booted. As far as I recall that is one advantage of overlayfs over aufs. Aufs cannot take an already aufs created merge and use it in a new aufs layered merge, but overlayfs allows layer nesting so you can take / for example as a new lower layer and say merge a mounted sfs file on top of that for a new merge and then chroot into that (or similar) - I imagine, though haven't gone further with such experiments, that a working sfs load of new application type facility is indeed possible via such an 'after-boot' extension of using overlayfs. Not I think with aufs though (no nesting allowed I think). Aufs on the otherhand provides advantage of being able to sfs-load into existing layer system after boot, which overlayfs cannot.

In fact, I touched upon the above a long time ago (Apr 2019): https://oldforum.puppylinux.com/viewtop ... 6#p1025462

and a few posts later back then I mentioned (having wrongly imagined I could do the same using aufs too, which turned out I couldn't...):

with aufs; seems can't use an aufs layer (such as Puppy root filesystem) as one of the merging aufs layers (after binding Puppy aufs root-filesystem to lower. So the following slight change WON'T work since Puppy root filesystem will result in an aufs mount in lower, which is not allowed (okay, I believe, if overlayfs used to build a Puppy or Dog though)

https://github.com/concourse/concourse/issues/1045

Within a container with an aufs filesystem, you cannot then create more aufs filesystems with an aufs directory as lower directory.

Though above site is definitely wrong when they say that you can't nest with overlayfs either - yes you can.

https://www.kernel.org/doc/Documentatio ... rlayfs.txt

The lower filesystem can be any filesystem supported by Linux and does
not need to be writable. The lower filesystem can even be another
overlayfs.

My gut feeling, as I suggested back then, is that it should be possible to nest overlays such that the result would be similar to the sfs-load mechanism enjoyed by Puppy distros that use aufs to boot. However, I was too busy developing WDL initrd for weedog back at the time and never experimented further with that overlay nesting - I should attempt it again. Since then, of course, the tinycorelinux method of sfs loading via symlinks has been successfully used/re-implemented by fredx181 for some of his overlayfs-based DebianDogs and also with KLV-Airedale.

Features that a full install does not have.

Frugal installs:

Can be put on any partition any format, any type storage device.

They load more of Puppy into RAM. Runs faster.

Easier to backup, because all changes, settings, are in the save. The core Puppy files never change. Only what is in the save changes. All you have to do is copy the save to have a backup.
If Puppy really gets messed up. Just delete the save, and replace it with the backup save. Everything back to the way it was, before you messed it up.
All settings, configurations, added software, etc......

Can store the save, on a different drive or partition, from the one the frugal install is on.

Can make several saves to use, if you want to have different setups, configurations, and added software setups.
Choose the save to use when it boots.

Using a save file,
It can be stored on any format.

Can control what gets saved or not saved, when running in pupmode 13.
Can easily, try something, and as long as you do not update the save, it is not a permanent change.
Something goes wrong or do not want it.
Just do not update the save and it is gone.
Reboot, not saving, and back to the way everything was, before you did whatever.

You can easily load or unload SFS program packages.
This lets you use a program without actually installing it to Puppy. You will have to use this option to fully understand it.

Can install multiple versions of Puppy on the same partition.

All of Puppy is placed in a directory (folder).
You can have many Puppies on one partition.
All completely separate from the other.
All in different directories (Linux term for folder).

Can install a frugal install inside another Linux or Windows operating system file system.
It is just a directory(folder) to the other operating system.
Example:
Windows OS is a bunch of folders and files all on drive C.
Puppy frugal install is just a folder on drive C.

bigpup wrote: ↑Sat Sep 03, 2022 1:15 pm

Features that a full install does not have.
... etc etc ...
Easier to backup, because all changes, settings, are in the save. The core Puppy files never change. Only what is in the save changes. All you have to do is copy the save to have a backup.
If Puppy really gets messed up. Just delete the save, and replace it with the backup save. Everything back to the way it was, before you messed it up.
All settings, configurations, added software, etc......

Can store the save, on a different drive or partition, from the one the frugal install is on..

Can make several saves to use, if you want to have different setups, configurations, and added software setups.
Choose the save to use when it boots.

Using a save file,
It can be stored on any format.

Can control what gets saved or not saved
... etc etc ...

As I said in my previous post, don't be so sure! It is not because a distro is frugal installed that it can provide such features, it is because a layering structure is being used - such a structure can also be used with a full installed distro (which is what I was saying before). A simple example in evidence follows. I was using my full installed Zorin lite linux to do this:

1. Made an overlay using full installed Linux / directory merged with a tmpfs upper_changes savefolder at /run/upper_changes:

sudo mount -t overlay -o lowerdir=/,upperdir=/run/upper_changes,workdir=/run/work overlay_result merged

_____________________________________________________
2. In one terminal I then made a chroot into that merged overlay by doing the following:

bind mount /proc, /dev, /sys, /devpts, and /tmp to the merged overlayfs result
and then:

chroot merged sh

and as a test of session work save to RAM I installed new package mc via command:

apt install mc

and then ran mc using command:

mc

which is shown running in middle terminal in attached screenshot
____________________________________________________

3. In a different terminal then tried to run mc, but it isn't found!!! WHY YOU MIGHT ASK!!!!!

Because it has only been installed in the /run/upper_changes directory of my full installed Linux (/run is tmpfs in RAM by the way)... Just like we do with frugal installs.
When I reboot, it is gone as if I never installed it... because I didn't save the RAM stored session back to permanent savefolder, but I could...:

Just like we do with frugal installs, I could rsync it back to on-media savefolder and then load that save again via next time I make same overlayfs on my full installed distro.
_____________________________________________________

In other words, it is perfectly possible, as I said before, to use layers on top of your full installed Linux and use rw top layer for session work and only save that to savefolder if you so choose. If you ever break the underlying core system - just that to re-install and can continue thereafter to use your savefolders for all new work...

Quite a lot of rubbish is being talked about the difference between a frugal install and a full install in other words.

So what are you going to call your method?

Where is the topic telling us how to do it and providing the information on how it works?

There is always 10 ways to do anything in Linux.

A officially supported full install of Puppy Linux, is different from a full install of other Linux OS's, Windows OS, MAC OS, Android, etc......
Puppies file system layout, is getting more and more similar to, standard Linux layout, but not completely.

So, you got a different way to run a full install.

It is still not the supported way Puppy is officially designed to work.

There is only these official installs for Puppy Linux.
Live
frugal
full

The differences are only about them.
How they work in an official release of Puppy Linux.

bigpup wrote: ↑Mon Sep 05, 2022 2:55 am

So, you got a different way to run a full install.

It is still not the supported way Puppy is officially designed to work.

There is only these official installs for Puppy Linux.
Live
frugal
full

The differences are only about them.
How they work in an official release of Puppy Linux.

No, I believe Puppy linux does not support pseudo-full-install, which is just a pet-name devised by myself and also used by rockedge - it is actually a frugal install method but very close in behaviour to proper full install. Whilst you used the word 'Puppy' in your OP, this is the Puppy Forum, which includes various other distros under discussion and this Off-topic area concerns all distros, and 'terminology' of frugal versus full certainly does.

Just as an exemplar, since as you say the method is only briefly documented by rockedge (though adequately), and rockedge didn't start from a full install in his description, here is me taking 5 min to re-arrange my Zorin full install into frugal boot.

In this particular business-related laptop I need to run with Zorin lite distro, and generally in a full install.
.
However, I quickly booted KLV-Airedale via a usbstick and all I needed to do to run my full installed Zorin as a frugal install on next boot (our pseudo full install like arrangement) is simple and as follows:

In my main Zorin full install hierarchy I created a folder called pseudo_zorin to boot from as follows:

mkdir -p /pseudo_zorin/upper_changes

Then I cut and pasted the Zorin full install hierarchy into /pseudo_zorin/upper_changes/. No actual copy takes places since same partition.

Then I put WDL initrd (with zorin overlayfs module put inside it) into /pseudo_zorin along with the zorin kernel

I need to create an empty numbered folder for WDL to keep WDL happy... :

mkdir 07dummy

Above takes but a couple of minutes.

Then I boot it with:

menuentry "pseudo_zorin ext4" {
insmod ext2
search --no-floppy --fs-uuid --set eaa841b2-0de8-455b-a877-c77a8b1fa440
linux /pseudo_zorin/vmlinuz w_bootfrom=UUID=eaa841b2-0de8-455b-a877-c77a8b1fa440=/pseudo_zorin
initrd /pseudo_zorin/initrd.gz
}

Any new installed programs or changes gets saved directly to upper_changes (though I could use w_changes=RAM2 option if I want Pupmode 13 save2flash-type functionality if I wished).

At any time... I can revert back to full install (and all changes remain in the full install hierarchy without me doing anything further) simply be cut/paste the /pseudo_zorin/upper_changes/ contents back to / directory. Reboot and it is a full install boot again.

Linux-related 'terminology' is to do with Linux, not just limited to Puppy Linux view of the Linux world - Puppy itself could be modified/re-designed to allow similar boot modes so it is important not to limit development via restricted use of terminology IMO.

Now going to quickly boot this frugal install of Zorin lite back to its official full install form - just a ten second job prior to reboot...

I'm back... currently in Zorin as real/proper official full install again. Took me longer logging into the forum than the two seconds required to revert from frugal install Zorin to full install...!

It really was simply:

mv /pseudo_zorin/upper_changes/* /

and the system was full install again.

and to change back to frugal now (that wonderful 'pseudo full install type') I simply now need to use thunar to:

move /* into /pseudo_zorin/upper_changes/

# except for pseudo_zorin folder, of course, which I leave where it is at /pseudo_install

Yes, I have a full install or a frugal install zorin at what could be a toggle press of a GUI button followed by reboot.

and... I could do the same to a full install version of Puppy as it happens (using WDL initrd to boot it of course).

All LiveOS ISOs are directly boot FromISO, you dont need to install it, run and enjoy the operating system as it is.
All LiveOSs are in general frugally installable. Basically just copy necessary files to a directory in a partition like (EXT2/3/4) and boot it with correct boot-stanza of course and enjoy it.
Frugal install is just simple method of booting an operating system. In my opinion Frugal-Install is QUICK- Install (copy and boot). Nothing fancy like Full-Install.
I usually use manual quick-install method for all linux distros. I use also some linux distros with weedoit method style (thanks to WIAK for helping).
To avoid confusing/misleading the term Frugal, Full or what ever call, I think puppy must have universal "puppy installer" that can be use for install all pups/dogs derivatives. Pls correct me if wrong.
More confusing of suggestions using any third parties like rufus, unetbootin etc. The problem is fail to boot for many reasons.

In observation, over the years, there has been a lot of discussion about the term "FRUGAL". Combining all of the discussions I have seen, it appears to come down to a simple, uncomplicated understanding. (I am sure there are few/many who would argue for something more complex, but, I think 'simple' is a good start in understanding.)

Taking an external look at what is intended outcome, it is a mechanism to keep the 'base' ISO files intact while have the ability to save all of the system changes apart from the ISO file in a separate file or folder. Heretofore, this separate file/folder has been called a SAVEFILE or a SAVE-FOLDER that has all of the changes to the original ISO.

Thus in Puppyland (distros on this forum) I offer this as a Frugal statement:

Folder-small.jpeg (5.8 KiB) Viewed 839 times

Frugal is when a forum distro is booted;

• its original ISO files remain undisturbed and

• all system changes are maintained in a separate location; namely called a 'savefile' or a 'save-folder'.

I think this is simple.

Just an idea for adoption as it is intended for new/non-linux forum patrons.