Puppy Linux Discussion Forum Forum Index Puppy Linux Discussion Forum
Puppy HOME page : puppylinux.com
"THE" alternative forum : puppylinux.info
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

The time now is Thu 19 Sep 2019, 08:27
All times are UTC - 4
 Forum index » Taking the Puppy out for a walk » Suggestions
Wishlist for future builds
Moderators: Flash, Ian, JohnMurga
Post new topic   Reply to topic View previous topic :: View next topic
Page 1 of 1 [10 Posts]  
Author Message
markwiering

Joined: 11 Oct 2015
Posts: 12

PostPosted: Thu 08 Aug 2019, 14:16    Post subject:  Wishlist for future builds
Subject description: A list of features and changed that I would like to be implemented in future versions of Puppy Linux
 

Hello there!

I own multiple older computers that all run both Windows XP (for gaming) and Puppy Linux (for programming and accessing the Internet). Although I think Puppy Linux is an outstanding Linux distribution (small, elegant, fast), I have noticed some points of improvement.

For example:
1. For some reason, downloading and installing a program seems to be 10 times faster than removing a program. I would be waiting a minute to install something, and waiting 10 minutes to remove it. I don't know why this is, but I would appreciate it if the removing process could be sped up.

2. After using Kali Linux on my new laptop for a few years, I have noticed how convenient it is to install a program with a single Bash command ("apt install filezilla"). I thought: "Why doesn't Puppy Linux have this awesome feature?". It would be awesome if installing programs in Puppy Linux could be that simple as well: enter a simple command (preferably with "apt", since I am used to using apt) and install a program! Very Happy

3. In Tahrpup, configuring the keyboard layout (US international with dead keys + Russian) while switching them with the right Ctrl-key and thereby lighting up the Scroll-lock LED, is possible, but a hassle. Sometimes, I configure everything the way I want, but when I test it, it's still the same, so sometimes I need to configure everything three times in a row to finally get it to work the way I want.

This is tedious, but manageable.

In later builds of Puppy Linux, however, (XenialPup and BionicPup), I don't see a possibility to do this at all. I can activate US International with deady keys, but once I add "Russian", the "dead keys" - part of the "US international" disappears, meaning that I can switch between US International and Russian, but I cannot produce letters like é, š and ž. If I don't add "Russian", I can use "US international with dead keys", but then I cannot quickly switch to Russian when I need it.

Not only would I like this bug to be fixed, but I would also like the menu of choosing your keyboard layout to be much simpler. For example, the way it is in MX Linux, is perfect. Puppy Linux could copy that style of simply choosing the layout. I would also like this system to be reliable. Once I have chosen something, I want it to work immediately. I don't want to reconfigure it another three times because it didn't work the first time.

Also, give the option for specific keyboard layouts in the beginning. Make sure that I can select "US International with dead keys" in the welcome screen. As it is now, I can only select "US international" in the welcome screen, after which I manually have to go to the advanced settings to be able to choose "US international with dead keys".

Make this process simpler, please.

4. Implement an option to "Restore default options". I have had multiple times in Puppy Linux that I accidentally changed something (like the font of the terminal). Then I thought: "Not good! Undo the changes!", but when I click on the font that the terminal window had before, it's still not the same as it was in the beginning, resulting in me, out of desperation, to make a whole new Puppy Linux saving file, just to have this single setting restored.

That is why I think it would be convenient to have an option to restore all defaults. In this case, if I do something stupid, I can just restore all defaults, meaning that all options (time, fonts, themes etcetera) change back the way they were, so that I don't have to create a whole new save file to revert one simple setting.

5. The process of copying and pasting text in the command line is pretty easy in Kali Linux, but it's a drag in Puppy Linux. I would appreciate it if you could implement the shortcuts "Ctrl + Shift + C" for copying texts in the command line and "Ctrl + Shift + V" to paste them.

6. HTOP and HardInfo don't agree with each other on RAM usage.
HTOP shows that only 66 MB of the 2011 MB RAM is used (which makes Puppy Linux more lightweight than Windows XP, which uses 107 MB), but HardInfo shows that only 1142220 KB of the 2059548 KB is free, meaning that far more RAM is being used than just 66 MB RAM. 66 MB of 2011 MB RAM is 3.3% of my RAM, while (2059548 - 1142220 = ) 917328 KB of 2059548 KB RAM is 44.5% of my RAM.

This doesn't make any sense to me. Which one of these programs do I trust? And why do they disagree with each other?

I don't know which program lies and which one tells the truth, but I know that at least one of them lies, so I would like to have this bug fixed as well. Either fix HTOP, or fix HardInfo (or both). Very Happy

7. Make the RAM usage consistent.
Suppose that HTOP shows that only 66 MB RAM is used. Then I open a program. RAM usage jumps to 74 MB. After closing that program, the RAM usage drops to 70 MB, but not to 66 MB RAM, like it was before. Then I open and close GIMP (just to test) and then the RAM usage becomes 75 MB. :-/

I don't why why this happens and what causes this, but this behaviour is illogical to me. If I open a program that uses, let's say 50 MB of RAM, then why aren't all those 50 MB of RAM freed once I close that program? Why is only 45 MB freed? What happened to those 5 MBs? How can I get them back without rebooting the whole computer?

I would want this to be fixed in later builds: prevent the leak of RAM.

Windows XP doesn't have this sticky RAM problem. When I open and close a program, the RAM usage is back to its initial level (107 MB).

8. Don't make Puppy Linux resource-hungry.
I notice that with each and every version of Puppy Linux, my computer (running Puppy Linux) becomes a little bit slower. Puppy Linux Precise reacted faster than Puppy Linux Tahrpup. XenialPup became slower, and BionicPup became even slower still. I also notice the system requirements growing. First, an Intel Pentium II with 256 MB was advised to run Puppy Linux; then it became an Intel Pentium III with 512 MB of RAM, and now an Intel Pentium IV with 1 GB of RAM is advised.

I wonder: why is this happening? Why are you making Puppy Linux heavier?

One of the greatest features of Puppy Linux, is its light-weightiness and ability to run on older computer. Gradually, however, newer versions of Puppy Linux seem to require more RAM and faster processors. If this goes on, Puppy Linux will become unable to run on computers that it could easily handle in the past. There might even be a time that the newest version of Puppy Linux won't be able to run on my Intel Pentium IV 2.8 Ghz with 2 GB RAM any more, which would REALLY be a shame.

My request is: keep Puppy Linux as light as possible. Don't increase the system requirements any more than you already have. Make sure that in 10 years, my old computer can still run the latest version of Puppy Linux! Very Happy
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
s243a

Joined: 02 Sep 2014
Posts: 2073

PostPosted: Thu 08 Aug 2019, 14:49    Post subject: Re: Wishlist for future builds
Subject description: A list of features and changed that I would like to be implemented in future versions of Puppy Linux
 

markwiering wrote:
Hello there!

I own multiple older computers that all run both Windows XP (for gaming) and Puppy Linux (for programming and accessing the Internet). Although I think Puppy Linux is an outstanding Linux distribution (small, elegant, fast), I have noticed some points of improvement.

For example:
1. For some reason, downloading and installing a program seems to be 10 times faster than removing a program. I would be waiting a minute to install something, and waiting 10 minutes to remove it. I don't know why this is, but I would appreciate it if the removing process could be sped up.

You might like the doglinux series (e.g. strechdog). It uses dpkg which I think is better at removing packages than puppies package manager.

Quote:
2. After using Kali Linux on my new laptop for a few years, I have noticed how convenient it is to install a program with a single Bash command ("apt install filezilla"). I thought: "Why doesn't Puppy Linux have this awesome feature?". It would be awesome if installing programs in Puppy Linux could be that simple as well: enter a simple command (preferably with "apt", since I am used to using apt) and install a program! Very Happy


If you install scotmann's package manager (i.e. pkg), then you can simulate apt commands. Alternative you can use a version of doglinux which uses apt as the package manager. Regarding standard puppies, I believe that the plan is to incorporate Scotmann's pkg and I think that one of the recent dpup buster versions comes with pkg pre-installed.

...

Quote:
4. Implement an option to "Restore default options". I have had multiple times in Puppy Linux that I accidentally changed something (like the font of the terminal). Then I thought: "Not good! Undo the changes!", but when I click on the font that the terminal window had before, it's still not the same as it was in the beginning, resulting in me, out of desperation, to make a whole new Puppy Linux saving file, just to have this single setting restored.

That is why I think it would be convenient to have an option to restore all defaults. In this case, if I do something stupid, I can just restore all defaults, meaning that all options (time, fonts, themes etcetera) change back the way they were, so that I don't have to create a whole new save file to revert one simple setting.


You might be able to do this with the remastering script. The standard remaster script keeps the default settings in /etc and /var. BTW, other options you have is to run puppy in ram and only save once you've tested a change or you can use fatdog64's multi-save usb option. With this multi-save option you can simply delete your last changes. Anyway, I think your idea is good here and maybe it will be implemented.

Quote:
5. The process of copying and pasting text in the command line is pretty easy in Kali Linux, but it's a drag in Puppy Linux. I would appreciate it if you could implement the shortcuts "Ctrl + Shift + C" for copying texts in the command line and "Ctrl + Shift + V" to paste them.


This is normally how puppy works, or for even easier copy and paste you can try lxterminal or roxterminal.

Quote:

....

8. Don't make Puppy Linux resource-hungry.
I notice that with each and every version of Puppy Linux, my computer (running Puppy Linux) becomes a little bit slower. Puppy Linux Precise reacted faster than Puppy Linux Tahrpup. XenialPup became slower, and BionicPup became even slower still. I also notice the system requirements growing. First, an Intel Pentium II with 256 MB was advised to run Puppy Linux; then it became an Intel Pentium III with 512 MB of RAM, and now an Intel Pentium IV with 1 GB of RAM is advised.

I wonder: why is this happening? Why are you making Puppy Linux heavier?

One of the greatest features of Puppy Linux, is its light-weightiness and ability to run on older computer. Gradually, however, newer versions of Puppy Linux seem to require more RAM and faster processors. If this goes on, Puppy Linux will become unable to run on computers that it could easily handle in the past. There might even be a time that the newest version of Puppy Linux won't be able to run on my Intel Pentium IV 2.8 Ghz with 2 GB RAM any more, which would REALLY be a shame.

My request is: keep Puppy Linux as light as possible. Don't increase the system requirements any more than you already have. Make sure that in 10 years, my old computer can still run the latest version of Puppy Linux! Very Happy


For newer puppies "dpup stretch" and TazPup are both pretty light weight. It is a challenge to both modernize puppy and keep the resource usage down. There are people which make this a priority for newer versions of puppy and there are other people that try to solve the problem by revitalizing older versions of puppy. We all don't have the same goals here but we can make suggestions based your hardware about which versions of puppy to try.

_________________
Find me on minds and on pearltrees.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website 
bigpup


Joined: 11 Oct 2009
Posts: 12571
Location: S.C. USA

PostPosted: Fri 09 Aug 2019, 08:31    Post subject:  

For memory readings.
Pup-Sysinfo>Devices>Memory

It gives a much better breakdown on what memory is doing.

I have never seen two info programs give the same memory info.

_________________
The things they do not tell you, are usually the clue to solving the problem.
When I was a kid I wanted to be older.... This is not what I expected Shocked
YaPI(any iso installer) http://www.murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?t=107601
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
nic007


Joined: 13 Nov 2011
Posts: 3047
Location: Cradle of Humankind

PostPosted: Fri 09 Aug 2019, 11:37    Post subject:  

As for worries about messing up your savefile you can try this method:
1) Edit your menu.lst configuration file by changing the pmedia line to pmedia=ataflash and save your changes.
2) Reboot. You should now see a save icon on the desktop.
3) Click on Menu > System > Puppy Event Manager and click the Save Session tab. You can now choose at which time intervals Puppy should automatically save your session. If you choose zero "0" Puppy will never automatically save changes during a session (recommended). Whatever you decide here, you can at any time manually save the session by clicking the save icon on the desktop. Note that whatever interval you choose, Puppy will still by default save the session at a proper reboot or shutdown. However, you can bypass this behaviour by commenting out all instances of snapmergepuppy in the /etc/rc.d/rc.shutdown file like this:
#/usr/sbin/snapmergepuppy /initrd/pup_ro1 /initrd/pup_rw#
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
markwiering

Joined: 11 Oct 2015
Posts: 12

PostPosted: Fri 09 Aug 2019, 19:34    Post subject:  

@s243a
I never knew about the Doglinux series. Interesting. I will sure try it out! Very Happy

I also never knew about Scotmann's package manager. I will try that as well! Very Happy

@bigpup
I am OK with small disagreements on RAM usage, like 399 MB vs 402 MB RAM, but to have one program saying that 66 MB of RAM is used, while the other one states that it's 917 MB of RAM, that means that something is wrong. The margin between 66 MB and 917 MB is WAY too large to ignore. It's pretty obvious that one of both programs is providing me with false information, and I would like to know which one.

I would also like to have the lying program patched, so that it doesn't provide me with false information.

@nic007
Thank you for the suggestion.

I consider this to be a provisional approach, since it's not really convenient to do it this way. It has the downside of me changing some settings in Puppy Linux, after which a power failure occurs, resulting in all changes to be lost. The steps to accomplish this are also pretty geeky. I would never have figured this out by myself, since I always try to get things done via Puppy Linux's menus instead of jumping to seemingly random system configuration files to modify them.

Although I will follow your instructions, I still hope that the "Restore all defaults" option will be implemented. Very Happy
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
wiak

Joined: 11 Dec 2007
Posts: 1719
Location: not Bulgaria

PostPosted: Fri 09 Aug 2019, 20:23    Post subject:  

markwiering wrote:
The margin between 66 MB and 917 MB is WAY too large to ignore.


It is not really lying. You system is using 66MB. But that means a lot of the RAM isn't being used at all, which is a real waste, so Linux 'borrows' it from you for cache and buffers use (which it happily frees up should your applications themselves actually need more RAM later). So the 917MB includes the system borrowing free memory for use as temporary cache/buffers, that was otherwise just be sitting around doing nothing, but you get these hundreds of MB back as soon as needed, so no actual loss. 66MB, on the other hand is used, so you can't get it for other stuff unless you close whatever programs are using it.

wiak

_________________
Tiny Linux Blog: http://www.tinylinux.info/
Check Firmware: www.murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?p=1022797
tinycore/slitaz: http://www.murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?p=990130#990130
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
bigpup


Joined: 11 Oct 2009
Posts: 12571
Location: S.C. USA

PostPosted: Fri 09 Aug 2019, 20:54    Post subject:  

It is all about what the program is designed to provide for info and how it does it.
Also, is the program looking at bits or bytes and how it is rounding off the numbers for display.
If you do not like how it provides the info.
Use another program.
Again, that is why Pup-Sysinfo was developed.
This is how it shows memory use.

I had several very large programs loaded, so the memory used is high, but still about 1GB actually not free.

this is really all the info you need.
Quote:
Actual Used RAM: 1090 MB Used - (buffers + cached)
Actual Free RAM: 14878 MB Free + (buffers + cached)



Quote:
▶—— COMPUTER MEMORY ——◀

Personal Storage Folder:
Name: /bionicpup6480uefi/bionicpup64save-2
Total Size: 97G
Free Space: 77G
Location: partition sdc6

Memory Allocation:
Total RAM: 15968 MB
Used RAM: 2509 MB
Free RAM: 13459 MB
Buffers: 82 MB
Cached: 1337 MB
Total Swap: 0 MB
Free Swap: 0 MB

Actual Used RAM: 1090 MB Used - (buffers + cached)
Actual Free RAM: 14878 MB Free + (buffers + cached)

Memory Stats (/proc/meminfo):
MemTotal: 16351652 kB
MemFree: 13780376 kB
MemAvailable: 14276952 kB
Buffers: 84352 kB
Cached: 1370016 kB
SwapCached: 0 kB
Active: 1140332 kB
Inactive: 1195732 kB
Active(anon): 968284 kB
Inactive(anon): 450128 kB
Active(file): 172048 kB
Inactive(file): 745604 kB
Unevictable: 0 kB
Mlocked: 0 kB
SwapTotal: 0 kB
SwapFree: 0 kB
Dirty: 112 kB
Writeback: 0 kB
AnonPages: 613540 kB
Mapped: 358976 kB
Shmem: 536684 kB
Slab: 102968 kB
SReclaimable: 42628 kB
SUnreclaim: 60340 kB
KernelStack: 5168 kB
PageTables: 11936 kB
NFS_Unstable: 0 kB
Bounce: 0 kB
WritebackTmp: 0 kB
CommitLimit: 8175824 kB
Committed_AS: 2188000 kB
VmallocTotal: 34359738367 kB
VmallocUsed: 0 kB
VmallocChunk: 0 kB
Percpu: 1008 kB
AnonHugePages: 75776 kB
ShmemHugePages: 0 kB
ShmemPmdMapped: 0 kB
DirectMap4k: 145896 kB
DirectMap2M: 3971072 kB
DirectMap1G: 12582912 kB

▶—— PHYSICAL MEMORY ——◀

Installed Memory: 16 GB
Maximum Memory: 32 GB
Number Of Slots: 2

Memory Module 1
Data Width: 64 bits
Size: 8192 MB
Form Factor: DIMM
Locator: DIMM_A1
Type: DDR4
Type Detail: Synchronous
Speed: 2133 MT/s
Manufacturer: 0118
Serial Number: 00000000
Asset Tag: 9876543210
Part Number: 8GBF2X04JEEE36-12-K
Configured Clock Speed: 2133 MT/s

Memory Module 2
Data Width: 64 bits
Size: 8192 MB
Form Factor: DIMM
Locator: DIMM_B1
Type: DDR4
Type Detail: Synchronous
Speed: 2133 MT/s
Manufacturer: 0118
Serial Number: 00000000
Asset Tag: 9876543210
Part Number: 8GBF2X04JEEE36-12-K
Configured Clock Speed: 2133 MT/s

Internal Cache
Configuration: Enabled, Not Socketed, Level 1
Installed Size: 128 kB

External Cache
Configuration: Enabled, Not Socketed, Level 1
Installed Size: 128 kB

Cache Information
Configuration: Enabled, Not Socketed, Level 2
Installed Size: 1024 kB

Cache Information
Configuration: Enabled, Not Socketed, Level 3
Installed Size: 6144 kB

_________________
The things they do not tell you, are usually the clue to solving the problem.
When I was a kid I wanted to be older.... This is not what I expected Shocked
YaPI(any iso installer) http://www.murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?t=107601
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
nic007


Joined: 13 Nov 2011
Posts: 3047
Location: Cradle of Humankind

PostPosted: Fri 09 Aug 2019, 23:49    Post subject:  

markwiering wrote:
@s243a
I never knew about the Doglinux series. Interesting. I will sure try it out! Very Happy

I also never knew about Scotmann's package manager. I will try that as well! Very Happy

@bigpup
I am OK with small disagreements on RAM usage, like 399 MB vs 402 MB RAM, but to have one program saying that 66 MB of RAM is used, while the other one states that it's 917 MB of RAM, that means that something is wrong. The margin between 66 MB and 917 MB is WAY too large to ignore. It's pretty obvious that one of both programs is providing me with false information, and I would like to know which one.

I would also like to have the lying program patched, so that it doesn't provide me with false information.

@nic007
Thank you for the suggestion.

I consider this to be a provisional approach, since it's not really convenient to do it this way. It has the downside of me changing some settings in Puppy Linux, after which a power failure occurs, resulting in all changes to be lost. The steps to accomplish this are also pretty geeky. I would never have figured this out by myself, since I always try to get things done via Puppy Linux's menus instead of jumping to seemingly random system configuration files to modify them.

Although I will follow your instructions, I still hope that the "Restore all defaults" option will be implemented. Very Happy

You do this only once and manually save this change to the savefile as suggested. Now, if you have indicated the "0" interval, your savefile will not be written to unless you do so manually. So there are really almost no chances of savefile corruption if you only make saves manually and only when you know everything is in place and you haven't messed up during a session. ALSO as a matter of interest: when you change pmedia to pmedia=ataflash, your savefile will be mounted at /initrd/pup_ro1 at bootup and any changes during the session will be recorded in /initrd/pup_rw. So technically speaking you will be able to retrieve the contents of your original savefile as it was at the beginning of your session from /initrd/pup_ro1. Another obvious thing to mention, is that you should of course backup your savefile.

An alternative is to not use a savefile at all but save your changes to an adrv like I do...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
markwiering

Joined: 11 Oct 2015
Posts: 12

PostPosted: Tue 03 Sep 2019, 12:07    Post subject: Re: Wishlist for future builds
Subject description: A list of features and changed that I would like to be implemented in future versions of Puppy Linux
 

s243a wrote:
markwiering wrote:
Hello there!

I own multiple older computers that all run both Windows XP (for gaming) and Puppy Linux (for programming and accessing the Internet). Although I think Puppy Linux is an outstanding Linux distribution (small, elegant, fast), I have noticed some points of improvement.

For example:
1. For some reason, downloading and installing a program seems to be 10 times faster than removing a program. I would be waiting a minute to install something, and waiting 10 minutes to remove it. I don't know why this is, but I would appreciate it if the removing process could be sped up.

You might like the doglinux series (e.g. strechdog). It uses dpkg which I think is better at removing packages than puppies package manager.

Quote:
2. After using Kali Linux on my new laptop for a few years, I have noticed how convenient it is to install a program with a single Bash command ("apt install filezilla"). I thought: "Why doesn't Puppy Linux have this awesome feature?". It would be awesome if installing programs in Puppy Linux could be that simple as well: enter a simple command (preferably with "apt", since I am used to using apt) and install a program! Very Happy


If you install scotmann's package manager (i.e. pkg), then you can simulate apt commands. Alternative you can use a version of doglinux which uses apt as the package manager. Regarding standard puppies, I believe that the plan is to incorporate Scotmann's pkg and I think that one of the recent dpup buster versions comes with pkg pre-installed.

...

Quote:
4. Implement an option to "Restore default options". I have had multiple times in Puppy Linux that I accidentally changed something (like the font of the terminal). Then I thought: "Not good! Undo the changes!", but when I click on the font that the terminal window had before, it's still not the same as it was in the beginning, resulting in me, out of desperation, to make a whole new Puppy Linux saving file, just to have this single setting restored.

That is why I think it would be convenient to have an option to restore all defaults. In this case, if I do something stupid, I can just restore all defaults, meaning that all options (time, fonts, themes etcetera) change back the way they were, so that I don't have to create a whole new save file to revert one simple setting.


You might be able to do this with the remastering script. The standard remaster script keeps the default settings in /etc and /var. BTW, other options you have is to run puppy in ram and only save once you've tested a change or you can use fatdog64's multi-save usb option. With this multi-save option you can simply delete your last changes. Anyway, I think your idea is good here and maybe it will be implemented.

Quote:
5. The process of copying and pasting text in the command line is pretty easy in Kali Linux, but it's a drag in Puppy Linux. I would appreciate it if you could implement the shortcuts "Ctrl + Shift + C" for copying texts in the command line and "Ctrl + Shift + V" to paste them.


This is normally how puppy works, or for even easier copy and paste you can try lxterminal or roxterminal.

Quote:

....

8. Don't make Puppy Linux resource-hungry.
I notice that with each and every version of Puppy Linux, my computer (running Puppy Linux) becomes a little bit slower. Puppy Linux Precise reacted faster than Puppy Linux Tahrpup. XenialPup became slower, and BionicPup became even slower still. I also notice the system requirements growing. First, an Intel Pentium II with 256 MB was advised to run Puppy Linux; then it became an Intel Pentium III with 512 MB of RAM, and now an Intel Pentium IV with 1 GB of RAM is advised.

I wonder: why is this happening? Why are you making Puppy Linux heavier?

One of the greatest features of Puppy Linux, is its light-weightiness and ability to run on older computer. Gradually, however, newer versions of Puppy Linux seem to require more RAM and faster processors. If this goes on, Puppy Linux will become unable to run on computers that it could easily handle in the past. There might even be a time that the newest version of Puppy Linux won't be able to run on my Intel Pentium IV 2.8 Ghz with 2 GB RAM any more, which would REALLY be a shame.

My request is: keep Puppy Linux as light as possible. Don't increase the system requirements any more than you already have. Make sure that in 10 years, my old computer can still run the latest version of Puppy Linux! Very Happy


For newer puppies "dpup stretch" and TazPup are both pretty light weight. It is a challenge to both modernize puppy and keep the resource usage down. There are people which make this a priority for newer versions of puppy and there are other people that try to solve the problem by revitalizing older versions of puppy. We all don't have the same goals here but we can make suggestions based your hardware about which versions of puppy to try.


I have tried DogLinux "Stretch". It looked promising at first glance, but I couldn't configure the keyboard layout "United States International with dead keys", and I also couldn't configure a secondary keyboard layout.

I have also tried MX Linux, but MX Linux runs slower than Puppy Linux. It's less responsive, in the sense that opening a window has a delay of half a second, while Puppy Linux doesn't have that delay. MX Linux also uses the heavyweight browser Mozilla Firefox, which eats all my RAM and results in computer becoming extremely slow due to the swapping process, after which I have to reboot to be able to use my computer again.

If not using Mozilla Firefox, MX Linux is actually usable. I can install software through "sudo apt install [name]" and I can program in C++17, while in Puppy Linux, I have to program C++98, which lacks some really nice features that C++17 offers. Very Happy

Also, Puppy Linux first came with Windows installers, which is the way I installed Puppy Linux on all computers. Now, the Windows installers are gone. Why? What has happened to the Windows installers of Puppy Linux?

I considered this to be an extremely handy feature. Why have the Windows installers of Puppy Linux been removed? :-/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
s243a

Joined: 02 Sep 2014
Posts: 2073

PostPosted: Tue 03 Sep 2019, 12:31    Post subject: Re: Wishlist for future builds
Subject description: A list of features and changed that I would like to be implemented in future versions of Puppy Linux
 

markwiering wrote:
s243a wrote:
markwiering wrote:
Hello there!

I own multiple older computers that all run both Windows XP (for gaming) and Puppy Linux (for programming and accessing the Internet). Although I think Puppy Linux is an outstanding Linux distribution (small, elegant, fast), I have noticed some points of improvement.

For example:
1. For some reason, downloading and installing a program seems to be 10 times faster than removing a program. I would be waiting a minute to install something, and waiting 10 minutes to remove it. I don't know why this is, but I would appreciate it if the removing process could be sped up.

You might like the doglinux series (e.g. strechdog). It uses dpkg which I think is better at removing packages than puppies package manager.

Quote:
2. After using Kali Linux on my new laptop for a few years, I have noticed how convenient it is to install a program with a single Bash command ("apt install filezilla"). I thought: "Why doesn't Puppy Linux have this awesome feature?". It would be awesome if installing programs in Puppy Linux could be that simple as well: enter a simple command (preferably with "apt", since I am used to using apt) and install a program! Very Happy


If you install scotmann's package manager (i.e. pkg), then you can simulate apt commands. Alternative you can use a version of doglinux which uses apt as the package manager. Regarding standard puppies, I believe that the plan is to incorporate Scotmann's pkg and I think that one of the recent dpup buster versions comes with pkg pre-installed.

...

Quote:
4. Implement an option to "Restore default options". I have had multiple times in Puppy Linux that I accidentally changed something (like the font of the terminal). Then I thought: "Not good! Undo the changes!", but when I click on the font that the terminal window had before, it's still not the same as it was in the beginning, resulting in me, out of desperation, to make a whole new Puppy Linux saving file, just to have this single setting restored.

That is why I think it would be convenient to have an option to restore all defaults. In this case, if I do something stupid, I can just restore all defaults, meaning that all options (time, fonts, themes etcetera) change back the way they were, so that I don't have to create a whole new save file to revert one simple setting.


You might be able to do this with the remastering script. The standard remaster script keeps the default settings in /etc and /var. BTW, other options you have is to run puppy in ram and only save once you've tested a change or you can use fatdog64's multi-save usb option. With this multi-save option you can simply delete your last changes. Anyway, I think your idea is good here and maybe it will be implemented.

Quote:
5. The process of copying and pasting text in the command line is pretty easy in Kali Linux, but it's a drag in Puppy Linux. I would appreciate it if you could implement the shortcuts "Ctrl + Shift + C" for copying texts in the command line and "Ctrl + Shift + V" to paste them.


This is normally how puppy works, or for even easier copy and paste you can try lxterminal or roxterminal.

Quote:

....

8. Don't make Puppy Linux resource-hungry.
I notice that with each and every version of Puppy Linux, my computer (running Puppy Linux) becomes a little bit slower. Puppy Linux Precise reacted faster than Puppy Linux Tahrpup. XenialPup became slower, and BionicPup became even slower still. I also notice the system requirements growing. First, an Intel Pentium II with 256 MB was advised to run Puppy Linux; then it became an Intel Pentium III with 512 MB of RAM, and now an Intel Pentium IV with 1 GB of RAM is advised.

I wonder: why is this happening? Why are you making Puppy Linux heavier?

One of the greatest features of Puppy Linux, is its light-weightiness and ability to run on older computer. Gradually, however, newer versions of Puppy Linux seem to require more RAM and faster processors. If this goes on, Puppy Linux will become unable to run on computers that it could easily handle in the past. There might even be a time that the newest version of Puppy Linux won't be able to run on my Intel Pentium IV 2.8 Ghz with 2 GB RAM any more, which would REALLY be a shame.

My request is: keep Puppy Linux as light as possible. Don't increase the system requirements any more than you already have. Make sure that in 10 years, my old computer can still run the latest version of Puppy Linux! Very Happy


For newer puppies "dpup stretch" and TazPup are both pretty light weight. It is a challenge to both modernize puppy and keep the resource usage down. There are people which make this a priority for newer versions of puppy and there are other people that try to solve the problem by revitalizing older versions of puppy. We all don't have the same goals here but we can make suggestions based your hardware about which versions of puppy to try.


I have tried DogLinux "Stretch". It looked promising at first glance, but I couldn't configure the keyboard layout "United States International with dead keys", and I also couldn't configure a secondary keyboard layout.

I have also tried MX Linux, but MX Linux runs slower than Puppy Linux. It's less responsive, in the sense that opening a window has a delay of half a second, while Puppy Linux doesn't have that delay. MX Linux also uses the heavyweight browser Mozilla Firefox, which eats all my RAM and results in computer becoming extremely slow due to the swapping process, after which I have to reboot to be able to use my computer again.

If not using Mozilla Firefox, MX Linux is actually usable. I can install software through "sudo apt install [name]" and I can program in C++17, while in Puppy Linux, I have to program C++98, which lacks some really nice features that C++17 offers. Very Happy


AntiX is supposedly lighterweight than MX Linux due to a different desktop enviornment. However, it would be worth getting stretchdog working. I suggest posting your suport questions in the appropriate thread:

http://murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?t=111789

Quote:
Also, Puppy Linux first came with Windows installers, which is the way I installed Puppy Linux on all computers. Now, the Windows installers are gone. Why? What has happened to the Windows installers of Puppy Linux?

I considered this to be an extremely handy feature. Why have the Windows installers of Puppy Linux been removed? :-/


If your looking for a windows installer for puppylinux it is available in the following thread:

http://murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?t=61404

P.S. I find firefox-esr pretty lightweight. Here is a link to a protable version:

http://murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?p=1033657#1033657

_________________
Find me on minds and on pearltrees.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website 
Display posts from previous:   Sort by:   
Page 1 of 1 [10 Posts]  
Post new topic   Reply to topic View previous topic :: View next topic
 Forum index » Taking the Puppy out for a walk » Suggestions
Jump to:  

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
[ Time: 0.1720s ][ Queries: 12 (0.0696s) ][ GZIP on ]