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 Wed 13 Nov 2019, 07:50
All times are UTC - 4
 Forum index » House Training » Users ( For the regulars )
Which kernel used in Puppy works in all of your PCs?
Moderators: Flash, Ian, JohnMurga
Post new topic   Reply to topic View previous topic :: View next topic
Page 1 of 2 [29 Posts]   Goto page: 1, 2 Next

Which kernel used in Puppy works in all of your PCs?
the kernel in Puppy versions 2.12-2.16 (also includes 3.01 retro)
11%
 11%  [ 1 ]
the kernel in Puppy version 2.17
33%
 33%  [ 3 ]
the kernel in Puppy version 3.01
55%
 55%  [ 5 ]
Total Votes : 9

Author Message
raffy

Joined: 25 May 2005
Posts: 4843
Location: Manila

PostPosted: Mon 17 Dec 2007, 00:26    Post subject:  Which kernel used in Puppy works in all of your PCs?
Subject description: in search of a kernel with universal applicability to PCs with not more than 2 Ghz speed
 

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):
Quote:
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? Get the sfs (English only).
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
raffy

Joined: 25 May 2005
Posts: 4843
Location: Manila

PostPosted: Mon 17 Dec 2007, 00:32    Post subject: Error: "three" kernel versions  

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? Get the sfs (English only).
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
wingruntled

Joined: 20 Feb 2007
Posts: 287
Location: Great Lakes

PostPosted: Mon 17 Dec 2007, 00:41    Post subject:  

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.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
Sage

Joined: 04 Oct 2005
Posts: 5496
Location: GB

PostPosted: Mon 17 Dec 2007, 04:33    Post subject:  

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!].
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
tempestuous

Joined: 10 Jun 2005
Posts: 5472
Location: Australia

PostPosted: Mon 17 Dec 2007, 06:29    Post subject:  

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/forums/ikonboard.cgi?act=ST;f=21;t=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.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
Sage

Joined: 04 Oct 2005
Posts: 5496
Location: GB

PostPosted: Mon 17 Dec 2007, 08:14    Post subject:  

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.....
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
wingruntled

Joined: 20 Feb 2007
Posts: 287
Location: Great Lakes

PostPosted: Mon 17 Dec 2007, 09:02    Post subject:  

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


derailed Sad
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
Sage

Joined: 04 Oct 2005
Posts: 5496
Location: GB

PostPosted: Mon 17 Dec 2007, 09:23    Post subject:  

Hardly:
Quote:
1.0.8rc1

ipso facto, 2.4.
or DSL.
QED.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
Flash
Official Dog Handler


Joined: 04 May 2005
Posts: 13361
Location: Arizona USA

PostPosted: Mon 17 Dec 2007, 09:29    Post subject:  

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.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
raffy

Joined: 25 May 2005
Posts: 4843
Location: Manila

PostPosted: Mon 17 Dec 2007, 11:38    Post subject: 1.0.8r1  

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.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
Wosh


Joined: 09 Jul 2007
Posts: 60
Location: Nuremberg Germany

PostPosted: Mon 17 Dec 2007, 18:37    Post subject:  Wrong Question
Subject description: Which kernel used in Puppy did not work in one of your PCs?
 

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.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
jonyo

Joined: 28 Dec 2006
Posts: 2725

PostPosted: Mon 17 Dec 2007, 19:27    Post subject:  

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.
Quote:
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..Razz. 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.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
John Doe

Joined: 01 Aug 2005
Posts: 1689
Location: Michigan, US

PostPosted: Tue 18 Dec 2007, 18:20    Post subject: Re: Wrong Question
Subject description: Which kernel used in Puppy did not work in one of your PCs?
 

*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.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
kirk

Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 1546
Location: florida

PostPosted: Tue 18 Dec 2007, 21:21    Post subject:  

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?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
jonyo

Joined: 28 Dec 2006
Posts: 2725

PostPosted: Tue 18 Dec 2007, 22:10    Post subject: Re: 1.0.8r1  

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.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
Display posts from previous:   Sort by:   
Page 1 of 2 [29 Posts]   Goto page: 1, 2 Next
Post new topic   Reply to topic View previous topic :: View next topic
 Forum index » House Training » Users ( For the regulars )
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: 0.0812s ][ Queries: 14 (0.0266s) ][ GZIP on ]