POLL: Which pupmode do you prefer for normal Puppy use (not first boot)?

[Feek]

If you use multiple modes, try to select the one you use the most.
You can add why you prefer that mode.

[dimkr]

PUPMODE 13 without periodic saving!

It's the best of all worlds:
1. Changes sit in RAM and don't get written to disk immediately, which protects my sick SSD/flash drive against extra writing and speeds up operations on many small files (like compilation and software development in general)
2. I can save if I want to
3. If I messed up, I can reboot without saving
4. If I have a Puppy installation on a flash drive in a "known good" state I don't want to mess up, I still use PUPMODE 13 (instead of using PUPMODE 5 + adrv or ydrv with my changes) because I can reboot, make just one change (like updating the browser), then save, reboot and keep using this Puppy non-persistently until I want to make some change again

[amethyst]

Voted for pupmode 5. Safest way to operate Puppy. Save your small config changes to an adrv. Don't install stuff but use read-only sfs's. Not a fan of save files/folders.

[mikewalsh]

Well, I guess I'm a dinosaur. It's pupmode 12 on internal drives.......and almost always auto-save pupmode 13 on USBs. I don't often make changes these days.....and when I do, it's usually just linking/unlinking a portable app of some sort. Which takes about 2 seconds....

Mike.

[amethyst]

I'm pretty sure I won't get less than 1% in this poll.

[dimkr]

Well, I guess I'm a dinosaur. It's pupmode 12 on internal drives

I was a dinosaur too, until one of my SSDs started failing. I switched to PUPMODE 13 so I can retry if the SSD fails to save (instead of losing or corrupting files, as with PUPMODE 12). That worked so well and I enjoyed the speed advantage of having all working state in RAM so much, so I switched to 13 everywhere

Maybe the gap between PUPMODE 12 and 13 would increase if the title were changed to "POLL: Which kind of drive do boot Puppy from?", with "internal hard drive", "internal SSD", "external hard drive" and "flash drive or external SSD" as options. I bet some users don't know what PUPMODE is, it's just an implementation detail.

[Marv]

All my pups run in pupmode 13, even those where I have no savefile and use a ydrv for all customizations. My shutdowns carry a little tweak so unless I manually toggle a switchfile in /tmp with a little script, 'enablesavefile', no save or request to save is made on shutdown. Set this up quite a while back for the ubuntu based pups and it has served me -and a couple of users- well.

This pupmode snippet is from my daily, Fossa64 - Less v1:

Code: Select all

PUPMODE=13
PDEV1='sda1'
DEV1FS='vfat'
PUPSFS='sda1,vfat,/FFPup/puppy_fossapup64_9.5.sfs'
PUPSAVE=''
<snip>
#this file has extra kernel drivers and firmware...
ZDRV='sda1,vfat,/FFPup/zdrv_fossapup64_9.5.sfs'
FDRV=''
ADRV=''
YDRV='sda1,vfat,/FFPup/ydrv_fossapup64_9.5.sfs'

[mikewalsh]

Well, I guess I'm a dinosaur. It's pupmode 12 on internal drives

I was a dinosaur too, until one of my SSDs started failing. I switched to PUPMODE 13 so I can retry if the SSD fails to save (instead of losing or corrupting files, as with PUPMODE 12). That worked so well and I enjoyed the speed advantage of having all working state in RAM so much, so I switched to 13 everywhere

Maybe the gap between PUPMODE 12 and 13 would increase if the title were changed to "POLL: Which kind of drive do boot Puppy from?", with "internal hard drive", "internal SSD", "external hard drive" and "flash drive or external SSD" as options. I bet some users don't know what PUPMODE is, it's just an implementation detail.

Two points here:-

• One, I'm getting lazy in my old age.

• Two, my memory is getting like a sieve. If I had to remember to save every time, I would lose one HELL of a lot of work..!

As for speed.......not an issue these days. Since switching to this HP desktop rig 3 1/2 years ago, along with the RAM increase - to 32GB max of DDR4 - and installing the Crucial MX500 last year, the difference between this and the old Compaq rig is like night & day. The Pentium 'Gold' G5400 runs rings around the ancient Athlon64 X2, the DDR4 is orders of magnitude more responsive than DDR1 (!), and the MX500 blows the OE Toshiba plate-spinner into the weeds.

Even running in pupmode 12, it's SO much faster I just couldn't care less.....

(*shrug...*)

Mike.

[dimkr]

True, the speed advantage of PUPMODE 13 is gone or mostly gone if you have a fast SSD. My "daily driver" laptops are 8 and 12 years old, both limited to mSATA SSDs (= not NVMe), and I hardly see any difference. When I boot from a flash drive (I'm limited to USB 2.0 speeds) or the former's spinning 2.5' drive, PUPMODE 13 makes a huge difference. I still uses PUPMODE 13 with my SSDs, though, for reasons other than speed.

[williwaw]

Voted for pupmode 5. Safest way to operate Puppy. Save your small config changes to an adrv. Don't install stuff but use read-only sfs's. Not a fan of save files/folders.

what makes compressing the save into an adrv any safer?

[mikeslr]

Ditto dimkr's first post. Once I've completely customized an OS --including creating/editing adrv/ydrv and bookmarking/linking external folders for data storage-- I rarely have reason to execute a Save. Under PupMode13 if I've altered some setting or installed some application I'll know after testing to execute a Save. On reboot/shutdown the Ask pauses long enough to allow me to reflect on my latest session and whether there's any reason to execute a Save. If not, I can just walk away. Even though the 'Save' option is highlighted, the default is 'No Save'.

Having setup as explained above I usually operate under PupMode 13. But, if I'm exploring something questionable, or trying to figure out why someone else has difficulty installing something which I know I'll not install, I'll reboot 'pfix=ram' or even move my adrv/ydrv and reboot pfix=ram. My grub.cfg has listing for that. So, like amethyst, I'm booting PupMode 5.

williwaw: "what makes compressing the save into an adrv any safer?" An adrv/ydrv is a READ-ONLY file-system. Neither a hacker nor my screw-ups can alter it*. That doesn't prevent changes in RAM, but RAM is cleared on reboot/shutdown. On the other hand both a SaveFile and a SaveFolder are READ-WRITE. Changes can be written directly to them without having to execute a Save. And under PupMode12 the changes written to the Safe automatically and immediately.

@Mikewalsh, I was also under the impression that a SaveFile was compressed until, I believe william2, corrected me. I don't currently have any SaveFiles, but I believe you can see the difference between a SaveFile and a 'regular SFS' by file-browsing to them. The contents of a SaveFile will be displayed but to see the contents of a 'regular sfs' you'll have to mount it.

With all your settings, customizations and user-installed applications in an adrv/ydrv if you boot without a SaveFile/Folder from a USB-Key, you can unplug the Key. It's really hard to contaminate a system which isn't there. Even if booted from a hard-drive, the drive/partition is dismounted after everything has been copied into RAM.

-=-=-=-=--
* To alter it you have to mount it, copy it to another folder, edit that folder, run dir2SFS, delete the old version and substitute the new. The Save2SFS module of nicOS-Utiity-Suite simplifies the creation of a new adrv/ydrv; but you still will have to delete/move the old and substitute the new.

[amethyst]

but you still will have to delete/move the old and substitute the new.

Not if you use the Save to Adrv utility and use one of the first two options. viewtopic.php?p=87387#p87387. A modified version of the latter utility will replace the Save2SFS utility in the suite eventually. I'll probably also have to make a few changes to the classic remaster script and maybe other utilities in the suite where extra sfs's are concerned in order to accommodate people using the overlays file system. Some day...

[mikeslr]

Nice one, amethyst. Either I missed your post, or failed to download your new apps and forgot about them.

[fredx181]

Voted for pupmode 13 -> save on demand, best invention ever !
Indeed, as said, when running from SSD, speed makes not much difference compared with the regular mode (save real-time), but from slow USB the difference in speed is huge.
Anyway, I like that if I goof up something (happens sometimes for me as I experiment a lot), I just don't save and get back after reboot to my previous setup, nice !

[rockedge]

I am with what Fred said.

Though I do mix in pupmode 12 often enough to say I definitely use this mode 50-60% of the time.

[backi]

Fully agree with @dimkr

as with
@fredx181 :

Voted for pupmode 13 -> save on demand, best invention ever !

Same for me........see no rational Reason to do any other.....additional I am running the whole OS (BIONIC/FOSSA/DEBIAN DOGS) fully loaded in RAM from SSD......
(No unwanted Writings to SSD)

So my Hardware ,8 gigs of RAM and the mentioned Os`s.... do their Job to my complete satisfaction .
But ......everyone according to his preference

Best Wishes!

[wiak]

13, lucky for me (so overall I use same as fredx181, dimkr, backi, and rockedge). i.e. Save on demand only when wanted (hence use the likes of Pupmode13). 12 now and again though. I never copy2ram though since newer machines fast anyway and older machines are RAM challenged (and makes little difference speedwise anyway on my machines newer than a dozen years old). Good to have all the options for special occasions or circumstances, but most of them never used.

[MochiMoppel]

PUPMODE 5
I always boot my current work horses (64bit: BW64, 32bit: Slacko5.6) in pristine state - and I keep it in 5, like any other Puppy. Never use 12 or 13.
Maybe I misunderstand the poll title. What means "not first boot"? PUPMODE 5 = first boot and it's on the list

[mikeslr]

PUPMODE 5
I always boot my current work horses (64bit: BW64, 32bit: Slacko5.6) in pristine state - and I keep it in 5, like any other Puppy. Never use 12 or 13.
Maybe I misunderstand the poll title. What means "not first boot"? PUPMODE 5 = first boot and it's on the list

Yes. But if you remaster or create and use adrvs &/or ydrvs without a SaveFile/Folder you are booting PUPMODE 5 after your first boot. Although I frequently create a Save to facilitate many changes to my system before using Save2SFS to 'convert' the result into a ydrv, amethyst never creates one: solely using Save2SFS to preserve the changes he makes. That probably works just as well. But I'm a creature of habit. While it's hard to teach an old dog new tricks, it's even harder to teach an old cat.

[MochiMoppel]

Yes. But if you remaster or create and use adrvs &/or ydrvs without a SaveFile/Folder you are booting PUPMODE 5 after your first boot.

I don't remaster and I use adrvs &/or ydrvs when they come with the distro but I don't create my own. What I meant with 'pristine' is that I always boot a distro as distributed and as configured by the distro developer. This doesn't mean that I keep it in this state.

And one correction: I switch to PUPMODE 12 at shutdown. Makes Puppy believe that everything has been saved already, thus avoids the pesky dialog that asks me if I want to create a save file.

[amethyst]

Yes. But if you remaster or create and use adrvs &/or ydrvs without a SaveFile/Folder you are booting PUPMODE 5 after your first boot.

I don't remaster and I use adrvs &/or ydrvs when they come with the distro but I don't create my own. What I meant with 'pristine' is that I always boot a distro as distributed and as configured by the distro developer. This doesn't mean that I keep it in this state.

And one correction: I switch to PUPMODE 12 at shutdown. Makes Puppy believe that everything has been saved already, thus avoids the pesky dialog that asks me if I want to create a save file.

It will be easier to delete/comment that part in shutdownconfig...

[dimkr]

what makes compressing the save into an adrv any safer?

Stuffing your save into a SFS and booting with PUMODE 5 can be 'safer' if you're worried about things like accidental deletion of files from the save. However, if an attacker re-packs your adrv with malware ...

IMO it's more convenient to use PUPMODE 13, save until you configure your system the way you like, then use it non-persistently unless there's something you want to save.

[MochiMoppel]

It will be easier to delete/comment that part in shutdownconfig...

The command I use consists of 51 characters. How would you make this "easier"?

[amethyst]

It will be easier to delete/comment that part in shutdownconfig...

The command I use consists of 51 characters. How would you make this "easier"?

Personally, I just blankout the shutdownconfig script. The rc.shutdown script will sort out any strays, etc so it's not a problem in terms of system stability/corruption. Never had a problem with this simple manoeuvre.

[amethyst]

"if an attacker re-packs your adrv with malware ..."

Wow, that would really have to be one very persistent attacker.
My advise for those already having a huge save file, is to pack that into a ydrv (then you basically have your system up to date as you want it) and then save your small configuration changes in future to an adrv. If you really do want to use a save file at all costs (I wouldn't), use an extremely small save file then for your future config changes (after you have saved your changes up to date to a ydrv).

[dimkr]

Wow, that would really have to be one very persistent attacker.

If your system is infected by malware that replaces files to gain persistence, replacing your adrv is the same as replacing your .profile or .bashrc. Any sense of security you gain by using adrv instead of a save file, is a false sense of security.

[amethyst]

Wow, that would really have to be one very persistent attacker.

If your system is infected by malware that replaces files to gain persistence, replacing your adrv is the same as replacing your .profile or .bashrc. Any sense of security you gain by using adrv instead of a save file, is a false sense of security.

Your save file/folder as read/write is more readily available for corruption and malware. That's an even more false sense of security. Are you telling me that working with a save file/folder is safer than using a read-only system or even on par with a read-only system as far as security is concerned? Anyways, do as you please. Use your read/write system but not for me thank you.

[dimkr]

Your save file/folder as read/write is more readily available for corruption and malware.

But adrv is on a partition mounted read+write (or, a partition that can be mounted like that), just like your /root or /usr/bin. An attacker that can replace a file in /root can replace your adrv just as easily. Squashfs is a read-only file system, so what? I can unsquashfs, add my malware, then mksquashfs and replace the .sfs file.

You'll need to digitally sign the kernel, initrd, the boot loader and all SFSs if you want to (truly) protect your system against tampering.

[amethyst]

Your save file/folder as read/write is more readily available for corruption and malware.

But adrv is on a partition mounted read+write (or, a partition that can be mounted like that), just like your /root or /usr/bin. An attacker that can replace a file in /root can replace your adrv just as easily. Squashfs is a read-only file system, so what? I can unsquashfs, add my malware, then mksquashfs and replace the .sfs file.

You'll need to digitally sign the kernel, initrd, the boot loader and all SFSs if you want to (truly) protect your system against tampering.

Nobody said sfs read-only is 100% safe (nothing is) but less likely (and not so easy) to be tinkered with than files just lying there open on the disk just waiting to be tampered with. Then when we go further than security and start to look at the ease of corrupting a save file/folder. You know, I also started off with a save file many moons ago when I started using Puppy. My save file even grew to something like 500MB at one stage (which was quite big at that time). Then the thing got corrupted and I lost all my savings. That they was the last of save files, never, ever again for me. Here in SA, we have had power outages for years now, every day. One reason for me to stay very far away from save files/folders, it's just prone to corruption. I don't care what anyone else says because I've experienced the corruption risks first-hand. Huge save files/folders are the worst scenario, just a terrible way of computing in my view. Some users have save files/folders GB's in size, playing with fire....

[one]

Your save file/folder as read/write is more readily available for corruption and malware.

One reason for me to stay very far away from save files/folders, it's just prone to corruption. I don't care what anyone else says because I've experienced the corruption risks first-hand. Huge save files/folders are the worst scenario, just a terrible way of computing in my view. Some users have save files/folders GB's in size, playing with fire....

Hi @amethyst,

no problem if you backup your current savefile-/folder on a different medium.

peace

btw: I don't use savefile-/folder but I would surely backup if ...