Page 2 of 49 [724 Posts]   Goto page: Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, ..., 47, 48, 49 Next
Author Message
RSH
PostPosted: Mon 03 Feb 2014, 20:48    Post subject:

Hi.

By something similar to a request today I reminded back to Marble and after doing a search I found a version that seems to work in LazY Puppy.

I have made a SFS Module of this, which can be downloaded here: LP2_Marble-4.4.2.sfs

I did not test if it would completely work.

Even though there was a message, 'to many dependencies' shown, it did start immediately after downloading the already listed files and building the SFS Module from this files.

Just hope one can use it and will find it somehow useful...

RSH
RSH
PostPosted: Thu 16 Jan 2014, 22:21    Post subject:

Hi.

Thanks to the last saviour for the tips to Nathan's Wallpaper Setter and for the use of Opera.

matiasbatero wrote:
Maybe, someone can answer my basic questions:

1) What is the impact of the speed of the app, using SFS in comparation with a normal installation using a classic package manager? I read that sfs uses unionfs to mount programs in layers. And i don't know, if this mode have impact on speed.. (global and/or in the app).

2) Similar to the first point, if you have 14 SFS running at the same time, there is a lost of speed?

3) SFS's are portable, but, duplication of internal contents are considerable?

4) SFS's system, can allow to use multiple versions of apps, with no-conflicts?

5) SFS' seems that system is always clean. Like a first fresh installation always... it is ok??

5) Finally, what are the limitations of SFS, and advantages or disadvantages?? Because, from my point of view, there are 90% advantages, and 10% of ... not very important disadvantages..

Really, at this point, SFS seems to me, a "revolutionary package method".

Thanks to mikeb for answering already to these questions.

Just want to add a Note.

I do use all my Applications generally from SFS Modules, which are sized from 4096 B (yes, byte) up to 587 MB. My OS is currently at 144 MB. I had already up to 65 Modules loaded at a time and the OS was running 16 days in a row without to do a reboot. Never noticed a loss of speed or anything else that might have minimized the comfort of this method.

I don't use a save file and if I want to have something permanently saved, I do either edit the SFS Module or remaster the OS or use my Personal Data and Config SFS Manager, which is something similar to mikeb's SFS-Save-File (I happen to use a sfs for saves on puppy.)

matiasbatero wrote:
I really like this method..

Yes, me too!

And therefor -I think- I do have some good news for all

- who do like this method
- who are using LazY Puppy and missing its comfort when forced to use any other Puppy

I have created a RoxApp Application named SARA B., which stays for:

(S)tand (A)lone (R)ox (A)pp (B)uilder.

It is self explanatory by GUI ToolTips and easy to use.

Just drag and drop a SFS Module onto the SARA B. Application and it will create a SARA R.S.D., which stays for:

(S)tand (A)lone (R)ox (A)pp (R)un (S)cript (D)irectory.

The created SARA R.S.D. Applications are much more functional than the RunScripts used in LazY Puppy 2.0.2-005 and makes any user able to use the LazY Puppy Method in almost any Puppy - no need to do a remaster, because they are Stand Alone Rox Apps, running from everywhere (EXT or NTFS).

Try this and you might forget LazY Puppy.

Though, thanks for using it and/or trying it.

RSH
the last saviour
PostPosted: Wed 15 Jan 2014, 04:36    Post subject:

Hi all;
Now fullscreen of my Opera doesn't freeze LazyPuppy anymore.
Click the preference, click the max button on top, click OK and then remaster LazyPuppy. The new OS will free Opera harmfullness to LazyPuppy. But it's not 100% functioning, you can't leave fullscreen with F11 but only with the right click menu. Then you have to right click the Opera button on the task bar and select the Move menu.
matiasbatero
PostPosted: Mon 06 Jan 2014, 16:32    Post subject:

mikeb wrote:
1. and 2. Never noticed any.... have average 20-30 sfs loaded on pentium 3 machines and runs as expected. The union seems to have no penalty...if there is its more to do with decompressing the contents of the sfs.. If the sfs are loaded to ram as I do then that more than compensates for any slowdown.

3. thats depends on how they are built. If they are built for a particular system then duplication would be avoided same as a pet/deb and so on. If there is the odd duplicated library its of no consequence.

4. Thats more to do with construction.. An app can have its own library versions if system variables are used to point to them. So not an sfs feature as such. The files are layered transparently into one filesystem...which is the idea.

5. The cleaness depends on if you have a save system like a save file. But definately clean in so far as removal is always 100%...good for testing and updating. I happen to use a sfs for saves on puppy.

6. Not sure really.... not useable in a full install but as it turns out even that is possible. sfs versions are not backward compatible..ie one made for system x will not load for an older one even though the software inside might actually work.

Slax might be an interesting one to look at... the full system layering approach you will see in there ...

Hope that clarifies

mike


Thanks..
I really like this method..
mikeb
PostPosted: Sun 05 Jan 2014, 09:06    Post subject:

1. and 2. Never noticed any.... have average 20-30 sfs loaded on pentium 3 machines and runs as expected. The union seems to have no penalty...if there is its more to do with decompressing the contents of the sfs.. If the sfs are loaded to ram as I do then that more than compensates for any slowdown.

3. thats depends on how they are built. If they are built for a particular system then duplication would be avoided same as a pet/deb and so on. If there is the odd duplicated library its of no consequence.

4. Thats more to do with construction.. An app can have its own library versions if system variables are used to point to them. So not an sfs feature as such. The files are layered transparently into one filesystem...which is the idea.

5. The cleaness depends on if you have a save system like a save file. But definately clean in so far as removal is always 100%...good for testing and updating. I happen to use a sfs for saves on puppy.

6. Not sure really.... not useable in a full install but as it turns out even that is possible. sfs versions are not backward compatible..ie one made for system x will not load for an older one even though the software inside might actually work.

Slax might be an interesting one to look at... the full system layering approach you will see in there ...

Hope that clarifies

mike
mikeb
PostPosted: Sun 05 Jan 2014, 09:06    Post subject:

forum hangup...
matiasbatero
PostPosted: Sun 05 Jan 2014, 02:42    Post subject:

I'm impressed with this forum. I came from Debian/Crunchbang Linux & Arch, and i used Slacko in my old PC for 3 months.

Now, i'm reading about puppy internalls, and... it is really incredible, what a nice creativity i found here. Really, i impress with users own implementations.

I never heard about SFS's on Debian/Arch world. I want to change my distribution, and Puppy seems to be the best option for me. But, now, i prefered before to read more technical info.

I can't finish to read it at all. It's a true knowledge forum.
All puppy users, seems to be familiarized with this topics, the SFS system, and puppy installation methods.

Maybe, someone can answer my basic questions:

1) What is the impact of the speed of the app, using SFS in comparation with a normal installation using a classic package manager? I read that sfs uses unionfs to mount programs in layers. And i don't know, if this mode have impact on speed.. (global and/or in the app).

2) Similar to the first point, if you have 14 SFS running at the same time, there is a lost of speed?

3) SFS's are portable, but, duplication of internal contents are considerable?

4) SFS's system, can allow to use multiple versions of apps, with no-conflicts?

5) SFS' seems that system is always clean. Like a first fresh installation always... it is ok??

5) Finally, what are the limitations of SFS, and advantages or disadvantages?? Because, from my point of view, there are 90% advantages, and 10% of ... not very important disadvantages..

Really, at this point, SFS seems to me, a "revolutionary package method".

Sorry for my english.

Regards,
Matías Gastón
the last saviour
PostPosted: Sun 29 Dec 2013, 05:44    Post subject:

Thank you RSH for your answer.

Hi all;
I've just found a cheap trick to fix the bug in Nathan Wallpaper Setter. Hope someone hadn't reported this fix yet.
After freezing, go up one directory to Share, then go to any sub folder and then go back to the Background folder again. That's all.

Happy New Year 2014 to you.
Smile
RSH
PostPosted: Tue 26 Nov 2013, 18:05    Post subject:

Hi.

From your image I can see, you are using the DE version. So, we might better go to the DE Forum for this.

Please post there and include some data, like:

- Type of Computer
- - include data of hardware plus date of construction/build
- Type and version of used USB Stick

You can use PupSysInfo (use View summary report standard) for this.

Thanks
anderems
PostPosted: Tue 26 Nov 2013, 15:22    Post subject: Lazy Puppy
Subject description: Installation on USB

I'm booting from CD, so it mounted from the beginning, I think.
But as you can see from the screenshot [/img], the file manager shows the CD, but there are no icons for any usb sticks.

Today I found even more that there are no network drivers loaded.

Thanks for your help!
RSH
PostPosted: Mon 25 Nov 2013, 16:53    Post subject:

Can you please, post a screenshot of your complete desktop with plugged in usb stick?

Got an usb drive icon on the desktop?

If so, mount it before running the installer.

Got used any USB 3.0 stuff?

Won't work.

EDIT:

Quote:
Got an usb drive icon on the desktop?

If so, mount it before running the installer.

He he, shit.

No, don't do this!

Mount the CD drive !!!

Sorry for confusing...
anderems
PostPosted: Mon 25 Nov 2013, 16:18    Post subject: Lazy Puppy
Subject description: Installation on USB

Hi,

Lazy Puppy looks very good, so I wanted to install it to a USB stick.

I followed the instructions, i. e. made a CD with the ISO.
Booting from CD was okay, then I tried to install Lazy Puppy to the USB stick.
But LP does not detect neither USB sticks (nor any SD cards, only solid disks), so the installation process stopped.

What's wrong? Any hints?

Thanks in advance!
RSH
PostPosted: Mon 25 Nov 2013, 15:04    Post subject:

RSH wrote:
the last saviour wrote:
Lieber RSH
I only download this one and found it doesn't work at all.
LP2_PEasyMM-Suite-1.0.0.sfs

Ok, I will check this.

Hi.

I have made some testings and have found out:

- it seems not to work, when the music files are stored inside a sub-directory of the submitted/used directory
- it seems to work fine, when such sub-directory is submitted/used

If this will not work, try to use the original versions (those to install) from rcrsn51.

The SFS is just a collection of those original files with some icons added and .desktop files edited for DE users.
Nothing was changed on the original scripts.
RSH
PostPosted: Wed 20 Nov 2013, 15:25    Post subject:

the last saviour wrote:
Lieber RSH
I only download this one and found it doesn't work at all.
LP2_PEasyMM-Suite-1.0.0.sfs

Ok, I will check this.
the last saviour
PostPosted: Sun 17 Nov 2013, 04:45    Post subject:

Lieber RSH
I only download this one and found it doesn't work at all.
LP2_PEasyMM-Suite-1.0.0.sfs
Display posts from previous:   Sort by:   
Page 2 of 49 [724 Posts]   Goto page: Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, ..., 47, 48, 49 Next

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group