Which kernel used in Puppy works in all of your PCs?

Using applications, configuring, problems

Which kernel used in Puppy works in all of your PCs?

Poll ended at Tue 01 Jan 2008, 04:26

the kernel in Puppy versions 2.12-2.16 (also includes 3.01 retro)
1
11%
the kernel in Puppy version 2.17
3
33%
the kernel in Puppy version 3.01
5
56%
 
Total votes: 9

Message
Author
raffy
Posts: 4798
Joined: Wed 25 May 2005, 12:20
Location: Manila

Which kernel used in Puppy works in all of your PCs?

#1 Post by raffy »

There are four Linux kernel versions associated with Puppy versions after 2.12:

- for versions 2.12-2.16 (also includes 3.01 retro)
- for version 2.17
- for version 3.01

This is a poll to check which kernel works in most machines.

Now, speaking of "machines", perhaps we mean reasonably slow machines that can benefit from the smallness and speed of Puppy Linux, for example, those with processor speed of 1 Ghz or less. It strikes me as odd that users of ultrafast machines (n-core, 2 Ghz+ PCs) will want to use Puppy, when they might as well use the bigger distros.

So this poll is really for users of PCs not faster than 2 Ghz (the maximum speed of the first group of Pentium 4's):
April 2001 brought the 1.7 GHz P4, the first one to provide performance clearly superior to the old Pentium III. July saw 1.6 and 1.8 GHz models and in August 2001, Intel released 1.9 and 2.0 GHz Pentium 4s.
(from Wikipedia)

Right now, manufacturers are designing PCs and Ultra Mobile PCs at sub-1 Ghz processor speed, so a kernel that is just right for this configuration may be useful for Puppy Linux users.
Puppy user since Oct 2004. Want FreeOffice? [url=http://puppylinux.info/topic/freeoffice-2012-sfs]Get the sfs (English only)[/url].

raffy
Posts: 4798
Joined: Wed 25 May 2005, 12:20
Location: Manila

Error: "three" kernel versions

#2 Post by raffy »

Errata: The first sentence should read "three kernel versions". I started out wanting to include the pre-2.12 version, but then I limited the choices to start with 2.12.
Puppy user since Oct 2004. Want FreeOffice? [url=http://puppylinux.info/topic/freeoffice-2012-sfs]Get the sfs (English only)[/url].

wingruntled

#3 Post by wingruntled »

I had to go with 2.17 because it has given me the least hardware problems on high and low end machines.
IE: Low end PIII 600Mhz, SIS630 MOBO with onboard everything.

Sage
Posts: 5536
Joined: Tue 04 Oct 2005, 08:34
Location: GB

#4 Post by Sage »

This poll is flawed. None of the above.
Those who've been here a while know that 1.0.8rc1 is the last completely reliable version that'll respond with virtually all machines fitted with 48Mb + 60Mb swap space. Unsurprisingly, that is why DSL, which stuck doggedly (there, did you like that allusion?!) to the 2.4 kernel, complete with updates, has been so popular. [It also does scsi!].

tempestuous
Posts: 5464
Joined: Fri 10 Jun 2005, 05:12
Location: Australia

#5 Post by tempestuous »

Like an employment reference, Sage's claim is more significant in what it overlooks;
DamnSmallLinux achieves its broad compatibility with older hardware at the expense of compatibility with modern hardware.

This is acknowledged by the DSL developer, Robert Shingledecker, at the bottom of this webpage -
http://damnsmalllinux.org/cgi-bin/forum ... 19354;st=0
roberts wrote:So, do I think DSL is kick-ass? No. Does DSL fill a need in supporting older hardware and using less capable hardware for interesting uses, yes.
Are DSL's days numbered? Of course, so true for everyone and everthing. Its called life cycle.
This was in response to a highly critical review of DSL at linux.com, and it sounds like Robert is torn between moving to a 2.6 kernel for DSL5, or giving up.
roberts wrote:The problem for me is to keep buying new hardware to try to keep. Perhaps it is indeed time to pass the torch to some thirty-something person who can.
I'm sorry to see Robert disheartened, but it does bring into clear focus the differences between Puppy and DSL.
Puppy supports some cutting-edge hardware and functions that even the large distributions struggle to support.

Sage
Posts: 5536
Joined: Tue 04 Oct 2005, 08:34
Location: GB

#6 Post by Sage »

Missing the point?!

Frankly, I have no respect for the gotta-have-everything, go-faster-stripes kiddies. A compact distro liberates old kit from landfill thereby saving the planet for at least one further generation before we become extinct due to our profligate stupidity.

Robert should continue doing what he does to stay in the top ten - he is appreciated across a very wide spectrum, even if that doesn't include the overpaid reviewers who've been gifted shiny new tinware. Barry is acutely aware of the folly of a single developer trying to keep up with those who have limitless resources. Within living memory of most of us, a 486DX33 running WP5.1 was considered overkill. Apart from simple web functions, few need much more even if more is on the hard sell agenda.

Those who must follow the lemming trail would be better loading up F8 or even RH, or even buying a Sparc.....

wingruntled

#7 Post by wingruntled »

Sage
It seems that YOU are Missing the Point!
The Topic of this thread is:
Which kernel used in Puppy works in all of your PCs?
derailed :(

Sage
Posts: 5536
Joined: Tue 04 Oct 2005, 08:34
Location: GB

#8 Post by Sage »

Hardly:
1.0.8rc1
ipso facto, 2.4.
or DSL.
QED.

User avatar
Flash
Official Dog Handler
Posts: 13071
Joined: Wed 04 May 2005, 16:04
Location: Arizona USA

#9 Post by Flash »

As far as I know every kernel, from when I discovered Puppy several years ago up to the latest one, has worked in every computer I've tried Puppy in. Some of the drivers may not have worked quite right but I don't think that's the kernel.

raffy
Posts: 4798
Joined: Wed 25 May 2005, 12:20
Location: Manila

1.0.8r1

#10 Post by raffy »

While 1.0.8r1 indeed works with most PCs, it can't handle newer USB 2 flash devices.

Among the Puppy 2+ versions, tempestuous' 2.02R (whose initrd was further tweaked by pakt and the ISO renamed to minipup 2.02R) can hold the same record - it works with most PCs, even those using SATA drives. It can also handle USB 2 flash devices. Its limitation is in localization.

This somehow constrained me to start with Puppy version 2.12, where richer localization support has become available.

User avatar
Wosh
Posts: 60
Joined: Mon 09 Jul 2007, 19:20
Location: Nuremberg Germany

Wrong Question

#11 Post by Wosh »

I think the question for this vote should be:

Which kernel used in Puppy did not work in one of your PCs?
Please explain the reason within this thread.


I have started with Puppy Linux 2.16.
So for me and I think for most other Puppy users too, all kernels starting from 2.16 to 3.01 ran on a wide range of PCs starting from 500 MHz to 2 GHZ with rather different graphics cards, soundcards ethernet cards monitors etc..

After some trials and after some patching on some of them all versions of Puppy Linux worked on all of them without problems.

jonyo

#12 Post by jonyo »

Flash wrote:As far as I know every kernel, from when I discovered Puppy several years ago up to the latest one, has worked in every computer I've tried Puppy in. Some of the drivers may not have worked quite right but I don't think that's the kernel.
Pretty much the same for me from 2.12 up to 2.17 though testing with 2.17 has been limited. Haven't had a boot problem yet & gear is mostly newer fully xp capable & a few vistas.
It strikes me as odd that users of ultrafast machines (n-core, 2 Ghz+ PCs) will want to use Puppy, when they might as well use the bigger distros.
Once you get used to the speed, going back feels like sloow motion..:P. Ton of folks out there with xp rigs looking at linux for the first time & something easy to start with that at the same time offers alot. Being able to run & setup live CD (at which pup excels over most, if not all) whilst keeping win stuff is a HUGE plus.

Doubt that many are capable of switching over to linux only from win quick, or if there is even much interest in that. There is a HUGE appeal to a linux that is as easy & simple as possible to start with. Linux as it is, with its many advantages over win, might as well be another world for new folks.

Lotsa linux folks are in denial & in their own (often fixed) world. To dismiss the win crowd is folly.

John Doe
Posts: 1681
Joined: Mon 01 Aug 2005, 04:46
Location: Michigan, US

Re: Wrong Question

#13 Post by John Doe »

*EDIT-Scratch that completely. Did a BIOS upgrade and puppy booted!!! WOOHOO still batting 100%!!
Wosh wrote:I think the question for this vote should be:

Which kernel used in Puppy did not work in one of your PCs?
Please explain the reason within this thread.
I have ONE machine out of all that I've ever tried (everything from 75mhz to 3ghz/hyperthreaded and everything inbetween) that I just can't get to boot at all with puppy.

It's a Compaq Presario 5123SR

Hangs right at loading kernel modules with 2.16, 2.17, 3.01, and the first 4.0alpha.

I wish I hadn't thrown out all my old puppies. I'll have to dig up a 1.08 somewhere and try that. Anyone have a link for me? to save me some searching. puppylinux.org is unreachable for me right now.

kirk
Posts: 1553
Joined: Fri 11 Nov 2005, 19:04
Location: florida

#14 Post by kirk »

They have all worked for me. As far as DSL goes it's doomed if it sticks with the 2.4 kernel. Anyone still using 2.2 or running a 286? If your using something older than a PIII why not look in a dumpster or a yard sale for an upgrade?

jonyo

Re: 1.0.8r1

#15 Post by jonyo »

What is this localization about?
raffy wrote:While 1.0.8r1 indeed works with most PCs, it can't handle newer USB 2 flash devices.

Among the Puppy 2+ versions, tempestuous' 2.02R (whose initrd was further tweaked by pakt and the ISO renamed to minipup 2.02R) can hold the same record - it works with most PCs, even those using SATA drives. It can also handle USB 2 flash devices. Its limitation is in localization.

This somehow constrained me to start with Puppy version 2.12, where richer localization support has become available.

User avatar
alienjeff
Posts: 2265
Joined: Sat 08 Jul 2006, 20:19
Location: Winsted, CT - USA

Re: 1.0.8r1

#16 Post by alienjeff »

jonyo wrote:What is this localization about?
What is this Google about?
[size=84][i]hangout:[/i] ##b0rked on irc.freenode.net
[i]diversion:[/i] [url]http://alienjeff.net[/url] - visit The Fringe
[i]quote:[/i] "The foundation of authority is based upon the consent of the people." - Thomas Hooker[/size]

jonyo

Re: 1.0.8r1

#17 Post by jonyo »

Tried it..didn't find anything specific. You'd be a big hit in ubuntu..:lol:
alienjeff wrote:
jonyo wrote:What is this localization about?
What is this Google about?

raffy
Posts: 4798
Joined: Wed 25 May 2005, 12:20
Location: Manila

localization contrast

#18 Post by raffy »

These are two contrasting localization tweaks: in puppy 2.13 vs in puppy 2.0x. Note that for 2.13, the solution is out of the box.
Puppy user since Oct 2004. Want FreeOffice? [url=http://puppylinux.info/topic/freeoffice-2012-sfs]Get the sfs (English only)[/url].

User avatar
alienjeff
Posts: 2265
Joined: Sat 08 Jul 2006, 20:19
Location: Winsted, CT - USA

Re: 1.0.8r1

#19 Post by alienjeff »

jonyo wrote:Tried it..didn't find anything specific.
Narrow your search.
[size=84][i]hangout:[/i] ##b0rked on irc.freenode.net
[i]diversion:[/i] [url]http://alienjeff.net[/url] - visit The Fringe
[i]quote:[/i] "The foundation of authority is based upon the consent of the people." - Thomas Hooker[/size]

jonyo

Re: localization contrast

#20 Post by jonyo »

I see what you mean by 'richer' now raffy..thx. And thx also aj..most helpful.:roll:
raffy wrote:These are two contrasting localization tweaks: in puppy 2.13 vs in puppy 2.0x. Note that for 2.13, the solution is out of the box.

Post Reply