Puppy Linux Discussion Forum

[jrb]

I have uploaded SFS_Linker-431bk-1.1.pet

This one creates a new loop if needed. I have had up to 30 SFS's installed at once. It creates new loops when you want to simply mount an SFS as well. I have had up to 50 SFS's mounted at one time. Doesn't seem to be any limit although common sense says there must be. Does away with having to put

[musher0]

Dear Mr. jrb,

Subject: Serious concern

Please be made aware that your default* scripts at the /usr/local/bin location in your recent SFS-Filers pets, v. 1.0 and 1.1, overwrite dpups original scripts at that same location and for example, make linking a jpg picture to mtpaint useless in dpup.

I have provided proof at http://www.murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?p=359989#359989

(It's page 35 of that thread. My initial reporting of this unwarranted change is on page 24 of that thread, I believe.)

If you could kindly remedy the situation at your earliest convenience, it would be greatly appreciated by all who use your otherwise very useful linking system. The installation of those files no doubt will create a disturbance on systems other than dpup also.

When it initially happened after installing your first pet, I thought that my computer had been hacked into.

Best regards,

[jrb]

musher0,
Sorry to hear that this is causing a problem for you.

[musher0]

Hello, jrb.

Thanks for getting back to me.

You're more than welcome to explore dpup. Yes, you'll find the latest version of dpup at the URL address mentioned in the first post of the thread. The current version is dpup 482 beta 4 as I am writing these lines.

I probably got confused because somewhere in your thread someone mentioned that your new linking system could be applied to some other puppies.

As to how the MIME-types, etc., are set up in d-pup, how different they are from a regular Puppy, may I suggest that you ask dposil, the "benevolent dictator" of dpup. I couldn't provide you with a qualified answer, since I'm only a "tester'.

Your SFS-Linker 431 version 1.1 works well in dpup, once one knows that when using the current SFS linker in dpup, the default* scripts in /usr/local/bin have to be changed back to the dpup ones. Maybe just a note to that effect would be enough.

Sincerely,

[jrb]

I have uploaded SFS_Linker-no_def-1.1.pet which does not have modified /usr/local/defaultprograms for people who wish to have SFS_Linking without changing the desktop icon or MIME-type behavior.

Musher0,
I haven't had time to look at dpup so I just deleted the modified defaultprograms from /usr/local/bin.

Hope that does the job for you, J

[musher0]

Many thanks, jrb.

But since you're in such a good mood (, I also noticed that the pinstall.sh in your winelite sfs gets triggered every time the ppm (puppy package manager) gets used. It does not do anything bad, simply the winecfg.exe gets triggered everytime you load say a GTK theme or something else from the repositories. This wine trigggering happens towards the end of the ppm process.

Also what is this doing in my Startup, if I don't have the portable tray program?

#!/bin/sh
wine /mnt/home/StartPortableApps.exe

We have enough windows programs already, do you think we need more? (

Believe me, I'm sorry I'm doing this to you. ( I do language editing during the way, I really wish I didn't have the instinct to spot computer scripts in my spare time!

Sincerely,

[musher0]

There was a double post here, but I won't say sorry for it because it occurred after a DEBUG message, concerning my previous post, coming from the forum program. Oh, God... did I accidentally spot something here too?

[mikeslr]

I've been following this thread, gposil's dPup thread and technosaurus' thread about plans for the Community Edition.

I agree with sunburnt. "Dpup, I really think it`s Puppy`s future." Well, dPup but modified to enable your design for handling sfs' on the fly: the best of both worlds > synaptic for access to debian's packages, puppy plus sfs-linker to enable them to run as needed on resource limited computers, or together when possible.

Hopefully, at some point, we'll need a one-step deb-to-sfs converter.

We live in interesting times. Glad I didn't "buy a MAC. "javascript:emoticon('')


mikesLr

[tlchost]

Hi!

Did you ever get a chance to produce ChoicePup431? I have a project that requires a very basic version of Puppy and based on previous versions of ChoicePup, you efforts came to mind.

Thanks again for all that you have done...hope all is well.

Thom

[sunburnt]

If a good .deb to .sfs package converter can be made, I don`t think Synaptic is needed.

The standard install method of dumping loose files into a file system is old and flawed.
Weeners and Linux both use this sad old fashion model for installing their packages.
Loose files are prone to viruses, corruption, and deletion, and it`s a messy setup.

A tight core with no apps., so no union is needed if the app. sfs files are loaded.
The core loads entirely into ram ( about 10 - 20 MB ), and the core can be 1 file!
I`ve been developing ideas about this setup for several years now, and it`s ready.

[Caneri]

Hey Sunburnt,

very cool stuff.
Looking forward to your approach.
Hi jrb..how goes the battle?

Eric

[gposil]

sunburnt said:

[jrb]

[sunburnt]

Yep, apt would be the basis for an automated package converter.
I`ve handled dependencies manually, but doing a lot of them...

jrb; I have Qs about your sfs loader script, you feel up to some Qs?

[tlchost]