Puppy Linux Discussion Forum

[elroy]

Puppy Linux. Such a juvenal name (it reeks of fun!); such a mature distro!
I’m a Windows refugee, a Linux nu-bee. I began my computer experience on a Commodore 128, using Basic on the command line (and Basic and/or Assembly for programming), and soon migrated to MS-DOS (actually enjoyed 5.0). Hated 3.1, was fine with 98/XP, and despised Vista (I tossed a new computer in the dumpster because of Vista - at times I have a short fuse). My final experience was with Windows 7 (which I actually liked, but not enough to overcome my aversion to Microsoft’s predatory attitude towards their customer base, even though I believe C# to be the best programming language to date, interpreted or not. Hell, I was even satisfied with MFC 6.0, as cumbersome as the learning curve was, but by then that was obsolete in the MS world. Much as Turbo Pascal was before it. With MS, you could never stay current; you were always being subjected to obsolescence. I guess that’s what I most resent about my MS experience as it relates to software development. Don’t get me wrong, I’m all for progress. But I’m also a firm believer in K.I.S.S. If it works, don’t fix it! I’ll admit, MASM was attractive at one point; even JASM. It is approaching high-level. If only it was portable...).
So, after 22 years, I finally cut the cord with Microsoft. It was not an easy thing to do. But I realized that I could do everything I could do with Windows 7 (except watching Netflix and C# development) that I could do with Ubuntu 10.10. I have a “smart t.v.”, and an Android cell-phone, so I can still access Netflix (although, don’t get me started with the Mono v.s. the C# thing - it’s just not the same. C# is actually elegant. I’ve decided that C/C++/Free-Pascal and/or Python/Bash to be a much better alternative in the Linux world - my personal opinion, of course). But Ubuntu felt sluggish and bloated, just what I despised in MS. And then came Ubuntu 11.04. Unity. I don’t blame Ubuntu for moving towards the touch-screen market. After all, if you prefer a more traditional desktop, there’s always Xbuntu (which I don’t particularly care for, or Lubuntu, which is my choice of Ubuntu flavors). I used Ubuntu for about a year, and dabbled with Puppy 4.3 in the interim. I was impressed with Puppy’s flexibility, compactness, and speed. But I was put off by the rough edges. And then, after Unity, I came across Lupu 5.28. And I’ve finally found the distro I’ve been looking for (although I have to give Wary an honorable mention).
I’ve tried Slitaz, TinyCore, Arch, Mint, but none of them are as reliable/flexible and out-of-the-box ready as Puppy Linux (again, my personal opinion). I’m not a fan of JWM (or Open Box, although IceWM is ok - just ok). I actually prefer Xfce4 on Puppy; it allows for saving icons to the desktop, customization of menus, and a few eye-candy things that are not too over the top that make Puppy that more enjoyable to me. Of course, everyone has their preferences. And that’s what makes Linux so great. You have a choice of window/desktop managers (or to not have). I know it’s ironic that I don’t care for Xbuntu, but that I prefer Xfce4 on Puppy, but you know, that’s the way the chips fell. It’s just a totally different environment on Puppy than on Xbuntu.
In conclusion, I have a much customized disto that supports desktop icons, has the applications that I desire, runs in RAM if I choose (or a full install, or just plain frugal), that I can run from the hard drive, a CD, or a flash drive/stick, under 2 megs, that’s free, is reliable, and that I can compile GNU software and install easily as a PET/SFS. I can even re-master it as I see fit. I have no complaints as of yet. A little more tinkering than most, but you get what you pay for. Seriously, this is as good as it gets. If I trash my OS, I can easily replace it. Gone are the days where I have to search for a manufacturers’ CD (and with a dedicated MS distributor, that may or may not have shipped with the computer). This is truly a wonderful incarnation, and Barry should be revered.
Today, I use Puppy exclusively. And I am more than thankful for its’ existence. Thank you to Barry and to all that have helped make this such a wonderful, stable, vibrant distribution. Puppy Linux is truly a gem that can be held high as an example of success when it comes to the discussion of quality, open source applications. My only hope is that one day I can contribute something meaningful to the Puppy community.
As a Windows refugee, I have some thoughts on future Puppy development. First off, I’ve been a “troll” on this forum for over a year. A guest. Today I decided to register. Secondly, I’ve read many reviews of Puppy Linux on various online publications, and have come to the conclusion that, although I enjoy being “root” by default, it may be advantageous to develop future puppy’s with the ability to have multiple-users and ‘sudo’. This would remove one of the largest complaints that I’ve witness while reading reviews. The second suggestion (and keep in mind, this is just an opinion, not necessarily a demand), as an ex-Windows refugee, is to make it more palatable to desktop users. Puppy is moving towards being a more modern distro (ala-lupu-5.2. Ditch JWM in favor of a window manager that supports saving icons/launchers to the desktop. I’m all in favor of smaller operating systems, and specialized Puppies can always be released for this purpose, but for the general publics’s sake, if you make puppy a bit more familiar to Windows users, you could certainly increase your market share and Distro Watch ratings. And attract new Linux users. And those that are tired of Ubuntu. Because a lot of them despise Unity. Give them what they want in a light-weight distro, and Puppy will remain a worthy gem.

[sunburnt]

If Puppy ( or any distro. ) were based on a Squash file package system
adding and removing apps. becomes seamless, not a file tracking mess.

Start a fresh install of Puppy, click for a web browser and it asks to install
your choice, good except it takes up Save file space, not good...

If browsers, window managers, and other apps. were easy to add and remove,
then trying out "other stuff" would not be such a messy crap shoot.

I`ve tried so many .pet packages that didn`t work I won`t install them now.

Squash files stay compressed, don`t scatter files, and can run in ram easily.

# What elroy seems to be saying in part is "individuality" in O.S. setup.
Everyone likes different stuff, and a good package setup is critical.
And the packages must be built on the target O.S. by competent people.

[`f00]

@sunburnt - amen to that (but bolting on stuff can be a learning experience if things don't go all seriously spangenhacky ). Gosh, clicking on a dotpet used to be such easy magical fun and then I started tearing them apart by habit at some point in time

@elroy
Nice first post here (and welcome!), many happy returns and all that. If you like to test and/or contribute, the Saluki project may appeal (xfce4 is the invested wm/de so.. .. not to mention a terrific lead who's already done some meaningful work advancing things

[cthisbear]

Welcome to Puppy elroy.

Good post.

"""""""""""

" I was impressed with Puppy’s flexibility, compactness, and speed.
But I was put off by the rough edges. "

That would be me then.
My photos never give me enough injustice.

Chris.

[jemimah]

[Lobster]

[nooby]

elroy, you are in good company liking xfce.
Linus Torvalds from which/whom Linux kernel
has it's name have that as first choice as I get his text.

[Terryphi]

[nooby]

So could one make a very small Puppy then that is
multi user and that let one chose sfs for almost
everything? Loading on the fly and unloading as
easily and so on.

What would be needed to start from scratch and still be
compatible with the sfs? I wild guess that one would not
be compatible with the pets without being a real puppy
but could one be compatible with all the SFS and that
way be a kind of multi user fork of Puppy?

[Ray MK]

Hi Terryphi

"I totally agree, sunburnt. I rely mainly on SFS files rather than pets."

Me too - SFS is the way to go -
especially now there are a number of good "on-the-fly" loaders/un-loaders available.

I always keep your latest Opera.sfs handy - much appreciated.
ps - like your website too - nice.

And - elroy - excellent 1st post - keep them coming and have fun with Puppy.
As mentioned above - you should look at Saluki - it's outstanding

Many thanks and best regards - Ray

[Terryphi]

Hi Ray: Thanks!

[elroy]

Thank you for the warm reception...much appreciated. And the wonderful ideas. I'm on my way to check out Saluki.

As I stated in my initial post, I prefer being 'root'. I'm the only user on my laptop, and it's much more convenient in that respect to not have to type 'sudu' or 'su' when entering terminal commands. I only offered it up because it seems to be such a common theme, and one of the few complaints, that I observed when reading Puppy reviews.

In all seriousness, I never expected the response that my first post received. You are all very welcoming, and that gives me great comfort. Thank you for your hospitality!

[sunburnt]

Terryphi; The usual consequence is that you end up deleting your Save file.
This smacks of poor system design... As old as Puppy is, it should be fixed.

nooby; What you`re describing is Tiny Core Linux ( 10.5mb ). But not exactly.
It`s Squash files are grouped packages of files that support the app. files.
They`re not complete Squash package apps., SFS files are closer to that.

Originally I tried to get Puppy to work like this, but too much complexity.
It took me 1 week to get a modified Tiny Core working because it`s closer.

The "base" O.S. needs an editor, virtual term., file browser, and setup GUIs.
Any of the stripped Puppies would do, it`s the Squash packages that matter.

I made a static SFS of Skype years ago, it may still work with todays Puppies.
Realistically apps. must be made for each Puppy version to work properly.
With a good build script that should not be hard, except for the big apps.

[Terryphi]

[RSH]