Are we mirroring win/apple/google?

[ozsouth]

I came to the realisation today, that most of us are relying on a few skilled puppians to deliver us a working system. The rate of change, in my view is increasing. Initially Barry did most things for us, then others came on board & did likewise. That is why, I believe, we have many visitors & few contributors - the level of expertise required is rapidly increasing. As things change, unless we learn continuously, we will be left behind, totally dependent on what is served to us. At that point, are we merely mirroring the win/apple/google experience?

[geo_c]

This is a concern, which is why my next project is a build from a script.

At some point, after deciding that it's gotta be a puppy or kennel build, the next step is to realize that relying on others can't last forever, and so it's necessary to learn how it's done.

Our build contributors are so generous that it's too tempting to simply boot what they provide.

[mikewalsh]

@ozsouth :-

In my view, it takes a truly special, hard-working & very dedicated type of individual to deliver an entire, fully-functional operating system. It's not within everybody's capabilities.....far from it. Very few people are capable of such incredible single-mindedness.

I know, for a fact, that I couldn't deliver such. I have my own 'specialities'; packaging, mostly.....the 'portables', and various utilities I now put together from scratch. But an entire OS? It's so far out of my league it's not even funny.

As a community, we complement each other....or we try to, certain of us contributing to varied aspects of the experience to create a unified "whole" for all. However, while 99% of Puppians are appreciative of those efforts, we, like any other community, have those few who seem to think it's their God-given right to have all this served up "on a plate". And those few are never satisfied; always demanding more & more features be added, always dreaming up work for others to actually implement. It's telling that this minority never seem to produce anything useful themselves.

But I agree with you. The required level of technical expertise IS steadily rising. It's like any profession; gone are the days where you could complete your training, gain your qualifications, then coast through the rest of your career on that basis. Everyone who is anyone in their chosen profession is expected to continuously train, re-train and gain new qualifications right throughout their career, over and above the actual work itself. Certain top employers now expect their employees to put work ahead of everything else in their lives. It's the new 'norm'.....and anyone who isn't prepared to go through all this is quickly left behind by those of their peers that DO.

What's the motto in business these days? "Expand or die....."

(*shrug...*)

Mike.

[williwaw]

I came to the realisation today, that most of us are relying on a few ............That is why, I believe, we have many visitors & few contributors - ............, we will be left behind,

I am not sure how to attract more dev minded members, but recently, when looking online for a void forum to research void stuff, I found the forum gone, the mailing list closed and these comments.
https://www.reddit.com/r/voidlinux/comm ... ?rdt=44116

are forums for dinosaurs?
are most here dinosaurs?
are we mirroring dinosaurs?

[wiak]

I came to the realisation today, that most of us are relying on a few ............That is why, I believe, we have many visitors & few contributors - ............, we will be left behind,

I am not sure how this comment factors in to attracting more dev minded members, but when look online for a void forum to research void stuff, I find the forum gone, the mailing list closed and
https://www.reddit.com/r/voidlinux/comm ... ?rdt=44116

are forums for dinosaurs?
are most here dinosaurs?
are we mirroring dinosaurs?

I feel this is a good question. Void Linux had already 'lost' its original forum by the time I myself became interested in Void Linux (a forum which was started by an individual rather than by Void Linux original developer - much like the late John Murga started old puppy forum and rockedge started this one). The Void Linux developer(s) accepted that forum as officially sanctioned thereafter, but they couldn't control its use and it was 'lost'. By the time FirstRib project started (early 2019), which brought use of Void Linux repos/package-manager to the old Puppy Forum, the Void Linux forum was already gone and replaced by a pretty awful (I feel) reddit alternative.

However, the fact is that Puppy Linux distro development isn't 'done' via discussion on this forum either - rather its dev site is on github, being at woof-CE. Only a few of this forum's members are much if at all involved there. That's just how it is (and not surprising I feel).

Similarly, main Void Linux development has also nothing to do with any forum (or reddit) but is done via its github packages site. If you look at the 'issues' part of that site you may however note that quite a number of 'people' are involved in raising issues there, and presumably many of these have dev skills: https://github.com/void-linux/void-packages/issues

So, in that sense, a forum for most distros has little, if anything, to do with actual development of the distro(s) concerned. Indeed Void Linux does invite contribution support but makes it perfectly clear that its github site is the venue for such work: https://docs.voidlinux.org/contributing/index.html

If you are not an active member of Void Linux github packages site therefore, you are nothing more and nothing less than a Void Linux supporter/user. No doubt some opinions voiced on Void Linux reddit get noticed and sometimes acted upon, but not necessarily - github package issues raising is the place to be heard.

Okay, so Puppy Linux distro has a similar github dev site, but the problem is the number of Puppy users who contribute to that or raise issues there is relatively low, hardly any in fact and so Puppy Linux development becomes really the pursuit of only one or two, higher skilled, individuals (approaching one person, one might suggest).

This forum on the other hand, remains 'relatively' active, though most posts tend to be by the same couple of dozen or so individuals, which is pretty tiny already, and even tinier in terms of skilled dev level discussions. Having said that, some of the discussions on this forum tend to be quite 'interesting; it's a forum in its own right and still with a fair number of creative or creative-interested personalities. Hence project work does get initiated here that can involve less highly skilled contributors than the typical github site would attract.

The key to that, from my perspective, was to make a relatively simple build system that accepts the use of some core (more complex) components (such as core initrd and upstream repos and package management usually) but where main build thereafter is not dictated by any single skilled dev team (nor needing it), but instead done via individual, relatively simple to construct, plugin code that instructs what upstream repo components are to be included and how they are to be configured; in other words a de-centralised approach, where aside from the initrd (and package manager/repos used) the main build is not under anyone's control aside from the individual (or team) constructing their own individualised build recipe plugin. I'm not suggesting that is a 'better' overall approach, but it was specially tailored for such forum discussion/use, and in that form, very different from how Void Linux, or Puppy Linux for that matter is developed (via their dev-type git-site), and I went for that 'simple kind of' KL/FR build mechanism from the viewpoint that it 'might' allow more forum members to be involved than a hard-core dev git-site sort of arrangement that is certainly more 'professional' in terms of software development approaches. It also leaves the critical hard-core level development to those who are capable of such work, which is not most of us... The disadvantage is that the final root filesystem ends up being fully compatible with a default upstream root filesystem; the advantage is that its composition is under our/the-plugin-creator's control and includes typical/near-complete frugal installation functionality/flexibility. So it is not so 'unique' as a completely hand-crafted/dev-skilled/built system (though not many distros not relying on upstream repos nowadays anyway...). However, most of us here are not 'professions' in computer software development; we may, many of us, be dinosaurs, but that is another matter (of concern for the future).

Anyway, that's just one forum-driven approach. I'm not suggesting its better in terms of results, which are as good or bad as the plugin builder makes it. But at least it is a somewhat active approach for now at least. But it is not alone in that respect.

Currently, I have to say, I'm quite happy to see the amount of new project work being explored; hardly a day goes by without something new being offered to try out. It's a hobby (as far as I view it all) - and hobbies should involve active participation. I don't see anything as competing with any other distro, and especially not with major team-dev-built distros like Linux Mint (I use and really like its XFCE version), or Ubuntu, or whatever, but like most hobbies the build results here, whilst probably never satisfying the needs of the wider Linux market audience, nevertheless tend to all provide something useful and specific per any carefully made handicraft. Maybe becoming like the dinosaurs though. Maybe smart-phones made that true for most people anyway.

[dimkr]

It's much easier to keep up with Linux ecosystem changes pushed by companies like Red Hat when the pace of development is faster. Both at work and in hobby projects, I believe in the "fail fast" methodology of delivering new things at an early stage so they have time to stabilize through real world feedback, while the existing stable stuff is still receiving maintenance releases that further stabilize it without adding breaking changes. For example, I publish development builds of Vanilla Dpup 11.0.x with Wayland, which change and break often, while the stable 10.0.x (which features an optional Wayland tech preview for curious users) receives security updates and bug fixes. A slow release cycle is a bad idea, because it's a big effort to build a distro and doing this at 1-2y intervals means releases would be terribly out of date and buggy at time of release. Migrations like X.Org to Wayland take time, and it's easier to do things gradually even if each release takes more time to develop thorough this slow deliver>test>fix>deliver cycle.

[jamesbond]

@ozsouth, everything has its season. Enjoy it while it last

[bigpup]

I think we have too many different versions of Puppy or Puppy like operating systems, offered on this forum.

there are now so many different ones, that no one can keep up with it.

That is really the big learning curve we all have to deal with

I gave up, a long time ago, trying to keep up with all of them.

Development is all over the place!

I see many more people involved, than ever was when Barry K was the main developer.
When anything as a new Puppy version, was produced mainly by him.
Only one newer version, would be released, and nothing else, for some time.

[wiak]

I think we have too many different versions of Puppy or Puppy like operating systems, offered on this forum.

there are now so many different ones, that no one can keep up with it.

That is really the big learning curve we all have to deal with

I gave up, a long time ago, trying to keep up with all of them.

Ha ha ha. Funnily enough, I feel the opposite! Variety being the spice of life unless getting old and tired I would have thought. However, I don't try every new distro announced, but enjoy reading about them.

But no, depends... depends what you are wanting or doing or here for. If it is for a stable distro just to use every day then I agree it is best to focus on one distro/release; make a choice that suits you and stick with that (and presumably stick with something stable that doesn't change much in any given few months or year). On the other hand some are here to enjoy trying new ideas and experimenting.

It is not that one thing is more important or better than the other, in fact a person can be involved (and want) both these options for different uses. I tend to stick with one distro and a stable one for most of my main computer usage, but I also sometimes 'play' and 'experiment' and that's when I do computer hobby work; what others call 'development work' - but since I do not consider myself a professional software developer (because I'm not), that dev side of things really is just a 'hobby' pursuit. And hobbies are good, I feel - or we'd just be watching TV all the time maybe???

Now, imagine the opposite problem to 'so many different ones and seeing instead "many [less] people involved". At least there appearing to be "many more people involved' signifies an active forum - at least there must be something to talk about, which is the point of all forums really. Otherwise we hear comments asking "why is the forum so dead nowadays?"

Overall, for me at least, I am happy to see new distro types - otherwise I might be stuck in a rut of just using X with alsa, but then pulseaudio was added, and then Wayland distro variants, and really I've been stuck in the rut of stackable desktop environments so really refreshing to try out some very different tiling manager alternatives to wake me up to other possibilities. I'm not dead yet.

Come to think of it, I suppose the question should be asked of those who are making so many alternative distros: "are they enjoying doing so and learning something or otherwise getting something out of what they are doing". If they are, then this forum is succeeding at something.

[Chelsea80]

@ All

This a very timely Thread -

I am a user, no if, no but -

I haven’t a clue where to start in developing a Puppy -

That doesn’t mean to say I would not like to try -

To that end I have looked for a ‘beginners guide’ and came across these on the Forum -

https://oldforum.puppylinux.com/viewtopic.php?t=116231

And -

viewtopic.php?t=6783

Although being informative, a lot of bouncing around to different links is needed -

However, I couldn’t find a conclusive result in the actual procedure needed -

From what I understand (very very little), Puppy is built from many parts that interact with each other -

To put these building blocks together, in the correct order, is not explained in simple terms -

Would it be possible for a ‘How To’ in very basic terms to build a Puppy be made? -

This is not about a custom Puppy, rather a basic Puppy with all the needed parts to make it work -

Perhaps in the format of:

To start with you will need
1. .... (Why and what it does)
2. .... (Why and what it does)
3. .... (Why and what it does)
4, .... (Why and what it does)

Now proceed in this order
1. .... (Because)
2. .... (Because)
3. .... (Because)
4. .... (Because)

So the end result is a logical and correct building path to a working Puppy -

There are so many knowledgeable Members that could make this happen -

The benefit I, and I suspect many others, would be a grounding for the future -

As an electronics project building hobbyist I have learnt so much in following a step-by-step guide -

The same could result from a Puppy ‘How to’ -

Using an electronics project as an example for -

Short Circuit Protection System For Electric Vehicle Safety

Other examples follow on from the above -

https://www.electronicsforu.com/electro ... battery-ev

Yes, I know it is a different kettle of fish but the building logic could be used in the same way -

Using such ‘tutorials’ I have succeeded in completing working electronic projects -

Best regards

Chelsea80

[wiak]

As an electronics project building hobbyist I have learnt so much in following a step-by-step guide -

The same could result from a Puppy ‘How to’ -
...

I was also an electronics project building hobbyists, since 5 years old or thereabouts in fact, but later Electronics Engineering was also my professional industrial career for a long time (but was at that time also still doing the hobby side of it - alas no more...). Miss all that - much preferred it to anything to do with computers (though the latter moved in on the electronics via programmable subsystems - and the likes nowadays of Arduino and so on...).

However, despite the title of this forum, I do not myself build Puppy Linux distros, so I cannot help you with your specific question. Rather my own answers are less specific (certainly not intended as any kind of howto) in this 'Off Topic' general section of the forum. I'd say that you need to go to a Puppy Linux distro specific thread/area/section to attract any such howto answer.

I don't know how many new Puppy Linux actual distros are being created. I do know lots of KL distros are being made, which is great in my view, but KL distros are a different distro to Puppy Linux and much about the many KL distros being produced is in common to each other rather than a mark of severe difference (so the learning curve there is relatively low in actual fact), but not a place for someone seeking a howto build a Puppy Linux distro. No need for a Puppy enthusiast to be confused either since KL is not Puppy so no need to try any distro not of interest.

If you really want to build your own Puppy Linux distro (specifically) then I believe you need to learn how to use woof-CE build system. There have been some tutorials about that, though I can't say if they would provide you with what you want or not. Alternatively you could try doing what many hundreds have done over the years - remaster an existing Puppy Linux distro to produce your own variant of that. Not sure if there is any specific howto on remastering a Puppy Linux - no doubt someone can refer you to some link or other regarding the process. There have probably been thousands of posts on the matter (that being a problem of course).

It is important to understand that DebianDog is also not Puppy Linux and has its own build script system (which is not woof-CE therefore). Similarly, current KL distros, which are also not Puppy Linux distro or DebianDogs, are built using FirstRib build system (and therefore nothing to do with Puppy woof-CE either), so if a person wanted to build a DebianDog or a KL/FirstRib they would use the appropriate build script system, but if they want to build Puppy Linux then woof-CE is the name of the build system you want. Different distro types altogether, but fertile ground for shared ideas/utility app creations at least (and we sometimes do).

[dimkr]

I think we have too many different versions of Puppy or Puppy like operating systems, offered on this forum.

I agree, and in my opinion, most of them don't have a unique value proposition to justify their existence. For example, we have multiple 32-bit Puppies with a nearly identical set of applications of features, very similar resource consumption and even identical kernels. Plus, I think it no longer makes sense to build an Ubuntu-based Puppy: Ubuntu is systemd-only nowadays (so some applications don't start - they're no longer patched to support sysvinit like Debian's equivalents), 32-bit support is dead (and remaining 32-bit bits for Steam and Wine will go away at some point) and the focus is slowly shifting to snaps (no Firefox in the repos anymore; 22.04 is much worse than 20.04 as a base for Puppy).

I loved how the Puppy community had "consensus" back in the 4.1.x-4.3.x days: users helped improve the single "latest" release, helped others install it, and packaged applications for it. IMO Puppy would be a much healthier project that's friendlier for regular users and easier to contribute to, if we focused on a single (Debian-based, that's the best option I see) Puppy, with regular bug fixes, a 32-bit flavor for those of us who still need this, no controversial features (for example, no Conky or compositing) and a development workflow that still works when the development team has more than one person (like use of a shared git repo, and an automated build process anyone can use).

I haven’t a clue where to start in developing a Puppy -

This is a good place to start - https://github.com/puppylinux-woof-CE/w ... -on-GitHub

[Grey]

Plus, I think it no longer makes sense to build an Ubuntu-based Puppy:

Of course, I would not like to do away with Ubuntu-like ones, since there are animals in the codename that can be drawn in the terminal in the form of ASCII/ANSI graphics and it is easy to come up with a theme for the desktop background

However, I switched to Arch-like (custom Arch, Conty (Arch), SystemRescue based on Arch), etc. So I don't know what to vote for.

no controversial features (for example, no Conky or compositing)

Well, this is really quite gloomy One step forward, two steps back.

[fredx181]

I think we have too many different versions of Puppy or Puppy like operating systems, offered on this forum.

Why? What's wrong? Besides that it's hard to keep up to date about everything shared on this forum (yes, of course impossible )

[dimkr]

Why? What's wrong?

Many options to choose from probably push away some interested users or create confusion. Multiple, similar Puppy releases create extra maintenance work for developers (waste of limited contributor time?) and make documentation or packages less likely to work on a particular Puppy due to subtle differences.

What's good about having so many actively maintained Puppy releases, when core things like PPM are unmaintained and equally buggy in all of them?

[williwaw]

About a year ago, an effort was made to create some focus on the future of puppy.
Can our community resolve to support a single flagship OS?
Supporting a single offering doesnt mean expermentation and alternative projects has to take a back seat. What we define as Puppy will be what the rest of the world sees as Puppy. (ie, why definitions are important.)

Today with so many changes along the line, I think it would be helpful to put our heads together and try to reach some common understanding of what the term "Puppy Linux" means in the present. If we can do that, it will help us to support it for users, help us develop it for future, and help us promote it as a viable Linux variety. If we don't know what we're talking about when we use the term, or disagree what we mean by it, then it inhibits progress, community, and communication. It creates division, based on misunderstanding, and that's a waste of time and emotion for all concerned. Misunderstanding what Pupply Linux is turns dialog into arguments over legitimacy and fosters resentments.

I think there's an easier way to accommodate the variety of interests that are the result of this movement that Barry Kauler initiated. I hope others will join in to voice their own understanding about what Puppy Linux is in the present, and help move us toward a definition that is workable.

https://www.forum.puppylinux.com/viewto ... 900#p66900

[bigpup]

I think we have too many different versions of Puppy or Puppy like operating systems, offered on this forum.

Why? What's wrong? Besides that it's hard to keep up to date about everything shared on this forum (yes, of course impossible )

The big issue I see is there is no single focus on releasing a new Puppy version, that has been fully developed, tested, and improved.

Lets say the next new Puppy version will be Puppy 12.
Will have this Linux kernel. Configured to support this range of hardware.
Will have this firmware.
It will have Pulse audio for sound support.
It will have apt and apt-get for installing additional software.
Maybe PPM or maybe not?
Maybe still be able to use pet packaghes or maybe not?
It's core Linux files and programs will be provided form what ever main stream Linux OS repository. (Puppy does not have one)
It will have these programs in it.....................
It will have these new features.....................
Etc...................

Now someone offers to be the main person in charge of development. (maybe the one to build the ISO and release it) can be more than one person, but have ability to produce the ISO.
All other people will come along and help to develop it.
Example:
Someone will work on making sure apt and apt-get will actually provide 100% working software to install.
someone will work on bug fixing PPM or maybe integrating apt and apt-get into under the hood, what PPM is actually using.
Someone will work to make sure Pulse audio is 100% working.
Someone may see that there is no temp indicator for system temp or CPU temp, that will display in the tray. See if they can find one or put one together.
Someone may find some new program posted in Additional Software section of the forum. What about having this in it?
In testing a specific process or program found to have bugs. Someone offers to fix it and you will see others helping.
The person that actually developed a specific program, may see it being used, and help to fix a bug that was found or provide an improved version of the program.
etc..........
Testing everything is really the important thing, before final release. Many will help with that. as long as they see what they report is listened too.

This is the older days of Puppy development, when only one single version was out there in development, and everyone was working on it.

This is how a lot of the Puppy specific programs developed.
About 60% of Puppy is these programs. Look at what is listed in the menu and you will see many of them......
why is Puppy still using them? Because they are that good!!!

[amethyst]

I would think that there are not many "real" developers (people that can actually develop completely new things and build them from zero) here. I think only a very few have that sort of expertise and qualifications anyway. I do think however many can be builders as building scripts are provided. It's a time thing AND a matter of interests, I think. Most I believe have Puppy as a sideline-hobby when we do not do our real-life jobs and we have other responsibilities and hobbies too so everything must fit in somewhere. My very limited contribution is born out of personal use of a distribution and then I see something that I want to change or create for personal use. I then share some of this that I may think could be useful for the puppy community. Maybe one day when I'm retired, I can do more by learning new things and try to implement them.

[dimkr]

I would think that there are not many "real" developers

Sadly, this is true. Nobody has stepped up to port ROX-Filer away from GTK+ 2 to save it from extinction when X.Org dies (GTK+ 2 is long dead), development of JWM has definitely slowed down and nobody is contributing to it, and the quality of aufs releases has dropped (still single maintainer, fewer actively supported versions; Puppy is pretty much the only distro to use it but without contributions from Puppy developers). These are only examples, the situation is much worse really because the vast majority of things in Puppy that make it familiar to existing Puppy users are unmaintained (PPM, sfs_load, the init script, you name it).

If you want to help Puppy by saving the old applications you love, help add them to https://github.com/puppylinux-woof-CE/w ... -petbuilds and get rid of legacy dependencies. I ported ExpenseTracker, gfnrename, gmeasures and gexec to GTK+ 3, and added build scripts for "unofficial" GTK+ 3 ports of epdfview, gpicview and gdmap (these are just examples). If the applications you want to save are shell scripts, you can add them to https://github.com/puppylinux-woof-CE/w ... s-packages so they're in one canonical place everyone can contribute to, and the fixes propagate "automatically" into every Puppy build.

[wiak]

...
I haven’t a clue where to start in developing a Puppy -

That doesn’t mean to say I would not like to try -

To that end I have looked for a ‘beginners guide’ and came across these on the Forum -

https://oldforum.puppylinux.com/viewtopic.php?t=116231

And -

viewtopic.php?t=6783

Although being informative, a lot of bouncing around to different links is needed -

However, I couldn’t find a conclusive result in the actual procedure needed -

From what I understand (very very little), Puppy is built from many parts that interact with each other -

To put these building blocks together, in the correct order, is not explained in simple terms -

Would it be possible for a ‘How To’ in very basic terms to build a Puppy be made?

Not what you asked for, but in case you, or anyone else, didn't realise there were alternative distros to Puppy Linux worked on here:

If 'anyone' reading this forum thread would like to know how to build a KL/FirstRib-based distro (instead of a Puppy Linux distro or a DebianDog distro) the below provides an example that, if studied, does provide sufficient details to get started:

HOWTO build KL/FirstRib-based distros
viewtopic.php?p=98487#p98487

[wiak]

people that can actually develop completely new things and build them from zero

There are no such people anywhere. Everything is an abstraction, and not just in computing.

I believe several here have been C system call level programmers at some time or an other (I was for a few years, in industry and research, though my C programming was to do with TCP/IP protocol aspects of the system as well as Inter Process Communications). Certainly some programs require that level of knowledge to change them such that they will work with new libraries, but that particular type of programming isn't required at all for distro developing unless you intend writing your own operating system like Linus Torvalds once did. I don't think anyone here is interested or trying to do that. Even at that 'kernel OS system level' no-one builds from 'zero'. To 'develop' doesn't in fact mean 'to build from zero' - not at all.

[mikewalsh]

@bigpup :-

Sooo.......essentially, you're saying that you think Puppy has "lost its way" and would benefit from a return to the days when Barry was still 'head honcho' - a single individual in overall charge - and who had the final say on everything?

Hm. Maybe something in that. Maybe not. Whatever does eventually transpire, it will have to be a consensual thing, 'signed-up to' and agreed upon by the whole community, with those that are interested - and able! - contributing in whatever way they can.

There's going to be a LOT of clashing opinions as to the best way forward, I know that much.

Mike.

[bigpup]

Not exactly one person in charge and having the final say.

More like a team leader developing a new Puppy version and do some control of keeping the eye on ball of what it is going to be.

How is this any different from any of the Puppy OS's or any OS offered on this forum.
Each one has a single person in charge of development and release.
Rockedge, peebee, Radky, 66philb, dimkr, 01micko, etc...............

Even Barry K listened to suggestions and looked at programs offered by others to put into any Puppy versions he produced.

I did exactly that with him in his release of Easy Dunfell64 2.8.3 for the Raspberry Pi computers.

At the time, he and I seemed to be the only people really trying to use the operating system on Pi computers.

I can tell you for sure that bugs I found got fixed by Barry.

Programs I found to make it a better fit for a Pi computer got put into the OS.

I never expected everything I provided to be used, but it was always considered.

Example:
The one very big issue was the desktop screen did not fill the full area of the monitor screen.
This got fixed by finding a special program, written to exactly adjust this. It could be over-scan or under-scan problem.
Until a talked about the issue and found the program to add.
I do not think Barry really understood how to fix it. It was a strange new issue to see, but kind of common on Pi computers.

Yes he was the final one to put the OS image together and release it.
But myself and others reporting bugs, suggestions on how to fix, and offering programs to have in it, made it a very good OS to run a Raspberry Pi computer.

Using it now to post this running on a Pi 400 computer.

Yes this is the only version and it is all that is needed.

Could it be improved?
Sure, why not, but you will still be focused on one specific Puppy version.
Maybe a new version of it.

Note:
The other Puppy version for the Raspberry Pi computers is Raspbian Puppy.
It was produced by one person and offered to Puppy users.
Basically this person walked away and really offers no interest in fleshing out any bugs or issues.
Luckily it is usable and does work OK as long as you can put up with the little issues it has.
But it could be improved.

[mikewalsh]

@bigpup :-

Uh-huh. Okay. What I take away from this is you think getting bugs sorted & issues fixed as soon as is practical is of utmost importance.....and should take precedence over all other aspects, yes?

Essentially, like every other distro out there. Would I be right in making this assumption?

In other words, we have one, "official" Puppy that takes precedence, and should be something that the whole community can "get behind". Something like that?

Hasn't this idea been mooted before.....on multiple occasions? You're not the only one who appears to think that turning Puppy over to the community was a backwards step....

Mike.

[stevie pup]

Just read all the way through this thread, which I've found very interesting so thank you to @ozsouth for starting it, and I must say I agree with most (but not all) of the comments made.

@Chelsea80 A step by step guide to creating a Puppy? Great idea. Not sure if I would use it, don't think I've got the patience to develop something from scratch these days, but it would make fascinating reading all the same. And you never know, perhaps one day in middle of winter when I'm stuck indoors with not much else to do, who knows?

@bigpup Too many Pups? Tend to agree with that. It came to my attention recently that with some of the older Pups it's now difficult (if not impossible) to install additional software, from the PPM's at least. Have some of the old Pups "had their day"? Also, any that are no longer maintained, who's going to use those? I would expect anyone coming from Windows isn't going to go anywhere near, and will stick to newer ones.

@dimkr I would also go for Debian base, but that's just based on my own experiences. For me both BookwormPup and VanillaDPup have been great, and I've had very little problems with either. F96 on the other hand has been a constant source of headaches.

[rockedge]

F96 on the other hand has been a constant source of headaches.

Could you elaborate on what has given you hassles? F96-CE_4 was built to be a short-term bridge from Fossapup64 to some Puppy Linux that is new and official. F96 is upgraded but that is only as far as Ubuntu Focal Fossa repo's allowed, so it is quite old itself. I'd be interested in what gives problems for future reference.

The main developer doesn't want VanillaPup to be a mainline official Puppy Linux and BookwormPup I'm not sure what it's considered. So the reality is, as far as what is considered to be the next mainline Puppy Linux past Fossapup64, that one does not exist. The Jammy projects never made it to that stage it appears and no other candidate has been offered.

I like the VoidPups but they are not often mentioned although the woof-CE VoidPup kernel-kit has worked the best building full real time huge kernels with AUFS and OverlayFS

Now also looking forward to @BarryK 's EasyOS built using Void Linux packages. Should be a really interesting powerful little distro

[williwaw]

Bookworm Pup64 10.0.2 is a primary Woof-CE build of Puppy Linux based on Debian 12.1 binaries.

[stevie pup]

F96 on the other hand has been a constant source of headaches.

Could you elaborate on what has given you hassles?

To be honest I can't really remember them all, but the main thing was getting it to boot in the first place. I tried a wide variety of different methods to create the USB stick (something I don't normally have any problems with). Some methods gave a ridiculous delay in the boot process (5 or 6 minutes in some cases), and some wouldn't boot at all. Can't remember the error messages produced, sorry. When I did eventually get it to boot there were other issues, may have been with trying to install some additional software but not sure. I've had a play around with a few different things recently and I can't always remember which issues related to which Pup.

But not to worry, I'm not overly concerned. I have 3 Pups that work perfectly well (Fossa 9.5, Bookworm and Vanilla) so I'm happy with that. Just like to have a go with new things when they appear.

The main developer doesn't want VanillaPup to be a mainline official Puppy Linux

Sorry I thought VanillaDPup already was a mainline Pup? Shame anyway, must admit I'm disappointed. I would have thought Vanilla would be ideal as a mainline Pup. Works well and also supports 32bit, which F96 and Bookworm don't. I personally don't have a need for 32bit but I realise some people do, so that's something else I take an interest in.

[dimkr]

Sorry I thought VanillaDPup already was a mainline Pup?

How do you define a "mainline Pup"?

[wiak]

Jusy use distros you like guys. Forget all this divisive 'mainline' stuff.