Puppy Linux Discussion Forum

Since 10.0.18, every release also contains a small "retro" variant.

Unlike the "normal" or Xwayland variants, this one:

• Is compressed using xz, like an traditional, "official" Puppy release: it boots slower and applications take more time to start

• Is optimized for size, not speed: pretty much any feature that reduces CPU consumption or RAM consumption but increases size (like userspace drivers for GPU-accelerated video decoding), is removed: expect reduced battery life and performance across the board

• Reduces the selection of firmware: still way more generous than what you'd find in an "official" Puppy release, but you'll need to install AMD firmware yourself if you need it

• Doesn't support DKMS (out-of-tree drivers) and has no devx: if you need extra drivers, you'll need to load the kernel sources SFS, install development packages like GCC, and build the drivers yourself (it might be a good idea to do this in a "live" boot, in a separate installation or a virtual machine)

• Doesn't support Bluetooth (most notably, Bluetooth audio), like a "traditional" Puppy: Blueman and associated packages (like bluez and extra Bluetooth firmware) are removed; if you want Bluetooth support, you'll need to add it yourself

• Uses the "traditional" PPM: apt, Synaptic, automatic run-as-spot for newly installed applications, automatic menu update and Flatpak are removed

• Uses the "traditional" SNS: connman and UIs for it (connman-ui and connman-gtk) are removed

• Has very few preinstalled applications

• Doesn't include extra fonts: no CJK fonts and no emoji, unless you install extra fonts yourself

• Doesn't include extra themes

(The kernel is the one used by the other variants)

This is a very very barebones Puppy. If you reduce the firmware selection even further or change to an old kernel, you can build a highly customized but modern Puppy that's way smaller than any modern offering and even the 4+ years old BionicPup. I know there is interest in something like these, and some Puppy users are interested in using the smallest Puppy that works for them.

Unless you're a Puppy "purist" who wants a very "traditional" Puppy or someone who wants a very barebones Puppy that can be customized, think twice before you choose this variant over the others. The other variants will probably perform much better out-of-the-box, and it won't be easy to achieve the same degree of polish yourself.

Last warning, in case you're still sure you want this:

Should have made it AUFS for "traditionalism".

There's is no "should" here, Puppy is a do-ocracy. If anyone wants to maintain a Vanilla Dpup derivative with aufs - go ahead and do that. Don't wait for me, because I don't have the time and willingness to deal with the problems introduced by aufs.

dimkr wrote: ↑Sat Jul 08, 2023 3:11 pm

There's is no "should" here, Puppy is a do-ocracy. If anyone wants to maintain a Vanilla Dpup derivative with aufs - go ahead and do that. Don't wait for me, because I don't have the time and willingness to deal with the problems introduced by aufs.

I made the comment in jest, lighten up. I don't have time either, some of us have real other jobs (not computer related). As a matter of interest, what are the problems introduced by AUFS...

Dear dimkr
Thanks for the trimmed down version.
You might want to consider the addition of a browser in a separate SFS to make it a bit more usable OOTB. If not the user preferred one, would be easy to replace or delete.

dimkr wrote: ↑Sat Jul 08, 2023 11:35 am

if you need extra drivers, you'll need to load the kernel sources SFS, install development packages like GCC, and build the drivers yourself (it might be a good idea to do this in a "live" boot, in a separate installation or a virtual machine)

Would it be possible to make the dkms module in the full (xorg) version and then just copy and depmod? I guess is not going to be updatable since dkms is not there but if it indeed works should be simpler that compiling from source.

retiredt00 wrote: ↑Sun Jul 09, 2023 7:03 am

You might want to consider the addition of a browser in a separate SFS to make it a bit more usable OOTB. If not the user preferred one, would be easy to replace or delete.

Give users a browser, and they complain it's not the one they want. Drop the browser, users complain there's no browser.

The second options is easier: those who want a barebones Puppy probably know how to get a browser.

retiredt00 wrote: ↑Sun Jul 09, 2023 7:03 am

Would it be possible to make the dkms module in the full (xorg) version and then just copy and depmod? I guess is not going to be updatable since dkms is not there but if it indeed works should be simpler that compiling from source.

Sure, that would work, but the user has to go through this lengthy manual process. I had to mention this so people don't get too surprised later.

dimkr wrote: ↑Sun Jul 09, 2023 8:34 am

The second options is easier: those who want a barebones Puppy probably know how to get a browser.

FYI:
Tried a Chromium .sfs that works in lots of other Pups..... renamed it to adrv so that it was installed (to /opt) on boot but it didn't run due to missing dependencies - the first being mozilla-nss but others as well

So maybe more "infrastructure" for browsers would be a "good thing"?

Those who consider apt to be bloated and prefer PPM probably know how to install missing dependencies, after all these years with broken dependency resolution in PPM

PPM's big issue with providing dependencies, is caused by it offering software compiled for some other Linux OS.
Getting the software from that Linux OS repository.
Some dependency stuff, is not in the repository, because it is already in that specific Linux OS, the repository is for.
So it does not need to be in the repository for that specific Linux OS.

So, the PPM is not going to find the needed dependency stuff, because the repository, it is looking in, does not have it.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The old debate about an included web browser.

Just have some browser included in the build.

Anyone of them you want to have included.

People are going to need a browser from the beginning of using the operating system

A good feature to have.
It would be nice if they are provided a simple way to add a specific browser they want to use.

Stop being concerned that someone will not like the browser that is provided in the build.
YOU WILL NEVER GET everyone happy with the browser choice!!!!

Not providing a browser is not a good idea.
VERY FEW PEOPLE are going to like that!

That was tried with Tahrpup.
It booted with no usable browser, but did have a menu entry that could be clicked on with several browsers to choose, to select, download, and install one.
666philb took the time to build a pet package of the most popular browsers and put them in the Tahrpup repository.

apt providing software is not that 100% perfect.

See this post:
https://forum.puppylinux.com/viewtopic.php?t=8714

bigpup wrote: ↑Sun Jul 09, 2023 11:52 am

PPM's big issue with providing dependencies, is caused by it offering software compiled for some other Linux OS.
Getting the software from that Linux OS repository.

That's not true. PPM has known bugs and several design flaws.

For example, some Debian packages depend on a or b and PPM doesn't understand this: it just takes a, even if you have b installed.

To make things worse, PPM doesn't understand the concept of conflicting packages. Often, this a or b situation happens when an application need functionality provided using two competing implementations that cannot be installed side by side, like sysvinit or systemd, or PulseAudio and PipeWire. But PPM proceeds to install a when you have b installed, although the dependency on a or b is already satisfied, because PPM doesn't understand the concept of a package marked as conflicting with another.

(These are only two examples, there's more)

(And if you install a package using apt install but it doesn't work, usually this happens because Puppy is not 100% compatible with the upstream distro: for example, Puppy generates xorg.conf using xorgwizard and ignores xorg.conf.d, and Puppy has its own set of udev rules that mess up ownership and permissions.)

Welcome To Linux Software (Really Any Operating System Software)

You are going into more detail, about problems caused by trying to use software, that was not specifically compiled, for the specific Puppy version, you are using.

Even pet packages compiled for a specific Puppy version, have issues working in another Puppy version.

I am not sure any of these issues could ever be completely 100% fixed.

There was a time when a new Puppy version was being developed.
Many people would offer a new pet package of a specific program, compiled for that specific Puppy version.
That was why the different Puppy versions had their own pet repository located here:
http://distro.ibiblio.org/puppylinux/

That is no longer being done for new releases of Puppy Linux.
Seems to now be norm, to go look in the repository that is for the compatible other Linux OS, and try using software from it.

I for sure have installed software from, say a Ubuntu repository, that was a Ubuntu version, compatible to the Puppy version.
PPM had it as a repository to get software from.
Needed dependency stuff was not in that Ubuntu repository.
But PPM did tell me what was missing and needed.
Internet search found, downloaded, and installed the dependency stuff and the program would now run.

Using apt to get software, seems to also have some of the issues you talk about for PPM.
You give a good example.
software from what is suppose to be a compatible other Linux OS repository.
That software is still not compiled for the specific Puppy version or the specific way that specific Puppy version works.

Appimage packaged software or flatpack packaged software, still has issues in Puppy Linux.
Well, it does greatly depend on how they made the packages and if they made sure to include all that was needed.
I have tried some, that took for granted, that this dependency file or program, would just be there, because all Linux OS's have it.

For sure the magic of run-as-spot can sometimes be the needed fix.

I'm not saying that any package you install using apt will work in Puppy. No, Puppy doesn't have systemd, PAM, multi-seat support and other stuff needed in a modern desktop distro.

However, apt is way faster and way more reliable than PPM, which fails (doesn't install all dependencies, installs the wrong dependencies or breaks my system) at least once in three package installations.

I don't believe in vague concepts like "compiled specifically", I believe in well-described bugs and good fixes.

Dear dimkr
I tried retro once more and was wondering what is the purpose of this build.

It does not have a browser or a package manager as PPM has only the no-arch repository and can not be updated to include other puppy or debian repositories.
So basically you can not install anything while running this puppy, even if you are a seasoned puppy user.

If it is just a platform for developers to build on (in another functioning system) please let us know so us commons do not bother.
If indeed it intents bo be a barebones but functional puppy version please include a functioning package manager and if possible a browser.
Thanks again.

Click the repos update button, it will fetch all package lists.

Dear dimkr
I'm sorry I was not specific enough.
Of course I updated the databases.
The problem is that it can not find any package to download even if the package is there
I looked a bit into it and it appears that it tries do download any and all packages from the delian-security repository and of course it fails

Edit It would appear that the problem was the VM network connection
Strangely the network worked for the repository updates but not afterwards.

Hello, I have created a frugal install Vanilla Dpup on my hard-disk by editing my Grub menu and extracting the contents of the ISO into a folder. However I am wondering how to create a live ISO in linux.
I used an Arch based distro and tried to create a liveISO with Multiwriter. But the usb stick does not boot properly. It boots fine with BookwormPup64 and Fossapup. Any advice?

@Tambucha What do you mean by "live ISO"? The ISO image you downloaded is a "live ISO".

Hi dimkr,

It's a term the Linux Youtubers use. I basically just mean. How do I get it installed onto a USB stick. Do I need to use Balena etcher or something else? Gnome Multiwriter got BookwormPup64 and Fossapup working on a USB stick.
For some reason, Vanilla Dpup gives a grub error message and doesn't launch for me. I managed to install it Frugally to my hard drive, but that's not the point. I would like to get it working on a USB stick.

Use Balena Etcher or the Bootflash installer (part of Puppy).

Hi Dimkr,

I tried the Puppy Installer, it launched but didn't give me any bootloader menu, very weird; it just started loading up Vanilla Dpup.
Btw way, I know this is the Retro thread, but I didn't see a thread for Vanilla Dpup 10 (unless it's still in Beta?), so I just posted here in the Retro thread.
I just happened to find a very good deal on 32GB sticks yesterday and so decided to install Ventoy into one of them and then copied a bunch of Linux ISO image fles into the USB drive.
To my surprise, Vanilla Dpup booted as intended, whereas BookwormPup failed to boot. The reverse was true with Gnome Multi-Writer tool: BookwormPup worked and Vanilla Dpup didn't; very odd.

I am looking forward to taking a deep dive into your excellent version of Puppy in the near future. Thanks for all of the work you've done. I understand the time and effort it takes to be a developer.
I was actually a Puppy developer many years ago, but I don't care to use my old alias, and no need to mention the Puppy Derivative, since it was basically just a cosmetic upgrade and not really extensive under-the-hood changes like
you have done, which is far beyond my skills.

I have a very small YouTube channel which I started this year, and just want to inform you that I will be making a review video of Vanilla Dpup 10, if it's okay with you.
regards,

Respectfully, Tambucha

Tambucha wrote: ↑Wed Nov 22, 2023 11:56 pm

I tried the Puppy Installer, it launched but didn't give me any bootloader menu, very weird; it just started loading up Vanilla Dpup.

By default, it lets you chose between syslinux and efilinux, depending on BIOS or UEFI. It doesn't configure a menu, it's designed to install one Puppy and that's it. If you want to add a menu and customize things, that's on you.

By the way, regarding Ventoy - I'm not doing anything to improve support for Ventoy, IMO ISO images belong to history and Vanilla Dpup 11.0.x won't have them, making life easier for everyone except users who specifically need ISO images, like Ventoy users.

Tambucha wrote: ↑Wed Nov 22, 2023 11:56 pm

I didn't see a thread for Vanilla Dpup 10

There is a thread, somewhere, but you can just start a new thread for each question, making the answer easier to find for other users.

Tambucha wrote: ↑Wed Nov 22, 2023 11:56 pm

I have a very small YouTube channel which I started this year, and just want to inform you that I will be making a review video of Vanilla Dpup 10, if it's okay with you.

Of course! But, unlike other reviewers, don't forget to click Reload in Synaptic or apt update before you try to install any package, so you don't need to complain that the selection of available packages is tiny

dimkr wrote: ↑Thu Nov 23, 2023 6:25 am

ISO images belong to history and Vanilla Dpup 11.0.x won't have them

Please reconsider. ISO images are very handy for all VMs under all OSs as oppose to the very user-unfriendly QEMU VM

retiredt00 wrote: ↑Thu Nov 23, 2023 11:29 am

Please reconsider. ISO images are very handy for all VMs under all OSs as oppose to the very user-unfriendly QEMU VM

1. All VM solutions I ever used can use raw disk images
2. It shouldn't be hard to write a script that takes a bootable block device image with syslinux and converts it to an ISO image with isolinux - if many users want this and that's the only way to use Puppy in a VM, somebody will volunteer
3. Puppy users that run it in a VM are probably a minority and switching away from ISO images will make life easier for everybody else

dimkr wrote: ↑Thu Nov 23, 2023 12:04 pm

1. All VM solutions I ever used can use raw disk images

Good to know
Would you mind posting a few links on how to boot and generate a VM from a raw images (in anything else but QEMU)?
I googled for VirtualBox WNware and even Parallels and nothing clear came up
Thanks

retiredt00 wrote: ↑Thu Nov 23, 2023 1:45 pm

Would you mind posting a few links on how to boot and generate a VM from a raw images (in anything else but QEMU)?

If you're unsure how to use a raw image, you can convert to vmdk or vdi using qemu-img, see https://docs.openstack.org/image-guide/ ... mages.html for examples. I've used VBoxManage and qemu-img many times, with VirtualBox, Hyper-V and probably also VMware at some point.

dimkr wrote: ↑Thu Nov 23, 2023 6:25 am

... users who specifically need ISO images, like Ventoy users....

I offer this as you 'may' not know of it: Ventoy launches, either, ISO files AND img files to active desktops, OOTB.

There is also a PXE feature for Live operations that @Tambucha expresses as a terminology. So far, only FATDOG from the forum is working in that PXE environment directly from its ISO.

Hope this is helpful

Tambucha wrote: ↑Wed Nov 22, 2023 11:56 pm

... I ... then copied a bunch of Linux ISO image fles into the USB drive.
To my surprise, Vanilla Dpup booted as intended, whereas BookwormPup failed to boot. ...

There is an answer to this known condition that works for some of the WoofCE ISOs that are 'pesky'. (The WoofCE issue is, now, well known.)

Follow these instructions, here, and you should be fine getting ALL forum distros to their desktops, directly from their ISO formats.

The steps should be followed, specifically; and you'll be booting all fine.

Enjoy

@dimkr

I saw this: A simple screen recorder for Linux desktop. Supports Wayland & Xorg

It appears feature rich.

Is this installable on any of the Vanillas OR is it in their REPOs?

Curious

@Clarity Try the Flatpak