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 22 Oct 2014, 23:45
All times are UTC - 4
 Forum index » Taking the Puppy out for a walk » Puppy Power
Some thoughts on Puppy Linux from a newbee
Moderators: Flash, JohnMurga
Post new topic   Reply to topic View previous topic :: View next topic
Page 1 of 1 [15 Posts]  
Author Message
elroy


Joined: 02 Feb 2012
Posts: 374

PostPosted: Thu 02 Feb 2012, 16:24    Post subject:  Some thoughts on Puppy Linux from a newbee
Subject description: general suggestions, thoughts
 

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-5.2Cool. 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.

Last edited by elroy on Thu 02 Feb 2012, 17:40; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
sunburnt


Joined: 08 Jun 2005
Posts: 5037
Location: Arizona, U.S.A.

PostPosted: Thu 02 Feb 2012, 17:23    Post subject:  

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.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
`f00


Joined: 06 Nov 2008
Posts: 809
Location: the Western Reserve

PostPosted: Thu 02 Feb 2012, 17:48    Post subject:
Subject description: ...
 

@sunburnt - amen to that (but bolting on stuff can be a learning experience if things don't go all seriously spangenhacky Laughing ). Gosh, clicking on a dotpet used to be such easy magical fun and then I started tearing them apart Twisted Evil 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.. Wink .. not to mention Embarassed a terrific lead who's already done some meaningful work advancing things
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
cthisbear

Joined: 29 Jan 2006
Posts: 3432
Location: Sydney Australia

PostPosted: Thu 02 Feb 2012, 19:40    Post subject:  

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


Joined: 26 Aug 2009
Posts: 4309
Location: Tampa, FL

PostPosted: Thu 02 Feb 2012, 20:10    Post subject: Re: Some thoughts on Puppy Linux from a newbee
Subject description: general suggestions, thoughts
 

elroy wrote:

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-5.2Cool. 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.


I think you probably mean "lurker", troll is something else. Very Happy

Would you like to help test/develop saluki? It's an Xfce puplet with pretty much the same goals you stated - except the run as root thing - I'm not going to change that.

http://murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?t=73687
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website 
Lobster
Official Crustacean


Joined: 04 May 2005
Posts: 15117
Location: Paradox Realm

PostPosted: Thu 02 Feb 2012, 22:25    Post subject:  

Quote:
I think you probably mean "lurker"


Indeed.

elroy has entered the kennel

thanks for delurking Cool

I spent about 6 months lurking on the first Puppy forum.
It was very educational.
You will learn a lot more by using Saluki in Beta and reporting back
More than you can imagine.

As for the root thing
- try my security briefing podcast
for the real security issues
http://youtu.be/_uZ_qZgOwg4

Smile

_________________
Puppy WIKI

Last edited by Lobster on Mon 27 Feb 2012, 23:09; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website 
nooby

Joined: 29 Jun 2008
Posts: 10557
Location: SwedenEurope

PostPosted: Fri 03 Feb 2012, 04:39    Post subject:  

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.
Quote:

http://murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?t=73687
Saluki is a woof-build based on Racy with Xfce. The suggested target hardware is computers less than 5 years old. It should run tolerably fast on netbooks and such, but it does need a bit more cpu than the standard ROX/Jwm puppy.

Jemimah as main Developer and many others take part
in testing of Saluki Puppy so you can help out by reporting
what happens when you test that one.

Quote:

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


Yes we all know this. Smile Seems the only solution to this
is to make a kind of fork of Puppy and name it something
else.

Barry Kauler the owner of Puppy Linux as a distro
seems to like being root so it is a made deal from scratch.

He wants it that way and you have to get savvy enough
to make your own fork if you want a standard linux
out of puppy.

That could be a good thing. You are motivated and that
is the best start one can have. The journey is the fun
of it. Sure there will be set backs and hurdles but in the
end you will have accomplished something grand.

A Puppy fork that none can write a review that say
that being root is bad because you solved that root thing Smile

I wish you all luck accomplish it. I am too computer
challenged to be able to do it. I am even logically challenged. Nooby is rather confused in his thinking even.

_________________
I use Google Search on Puppy Forum
not an ideal solution though
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
Terryphi


Joined: 02 Jul 2008
Posts: 762
Location: West Wales, Britain.

PostPosted: Fri 03 Feb 2012, 06:00    Post subject:  

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


I totally agree, sunburnt. I rely mainly on SFS files rather than pets.
The pet system results in all sorts of unexpected consequences.

_________________
Classic Opera 12.16 browser SFS package for Precise, Slacko, Racy, Wary, Lucid, Quirky, etc available here Smile
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website 
nooby

Joined: 29 Jun 2008
Posts: 10557
Location: SwedenEurope

PostPosted: Fri 03 Feb 2012, 09:45    Post subject:  

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?

_________________
I use Google Search on Puppy Forum
not an ideal solution though
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
Ray MK


Joined: 05 Feb 2008
Posts: 765
Location: UK

PostPosted: Fri 03 Feb 2012, 10:11    Post subject:  

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
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
Terryphi


Joined: 02 Jul 2008
Posts: 762
Location: West Wales, Britain.

PostPosted: Fri 03 Feb 2012, 10:37    Post subject:  

Hi Ray: Thanks!
_________________
Classic Opera 12.16 browser SFS package for Precise, Slacko, Racy, Wary, Lucid, Quirky, etc available here Smile
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website 
elroy


Joined: 02 Feb 2012
Posts: 374

PostPosted: Fri 03 Feb 2012, 13:16    Post subject:  

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!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
sunburnt


Joined: 08 Jun 2005
Posts: 5037
Location: Arizona, U.S.A.

PostPosted: Fri 03 Feb 2012, 16:04    Post subject:  

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


Joined: 02 Jul 2008
Posts: 762
Location: West Wales, Britain.

PostPosted: Sat 04 Feb 2012, 02:45    Post subject:  

sunburnt wrote:

I made a static SFS of Skype years ago, it may still work with todays Puppies.


I have an SFS of Skype static 2.2.0.35. See this thread:
http://www.murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?t=66922

_________________
Classic Opera 12.16 browser SFS package for Precise, Slacko, Racy, Wary, Lucid, Quirky, etc available here Smile
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website 
RSH


Joined: 05 Sep 2011
Posts: 2420
Location: Germany

PostPosted: Mon 27 Feb 2012, 22:31    Post subject:  

elroy wrote:
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.

I do not know saluki, but i am sure, it is a wonderful puppy.

But maybe take a try at LazY Puppy. It is lucid based, you run as root and it has 10 preconfigured and especially for LazY Puppy modified sfs files with many applications (Audio, Video, Graphics, Office etc.) There is a special Wine sfs that gives you possibility to use Windows PortableApps. There is also a .tar.gz file that contains PortableApps including some applications.

If to run as root is you main thing, and want to use sfs files mainly (sfs is the way!) you should give it a try. Cool

_________________
LazY Puppy
RSH's DNA
SARA B.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
Display posts from previous:   Sort by:   
Page 1 of 1 [15 Posts]  
Post new topic   Reply to topic View previous topic :: View next topic
 Forum index » Taking the Puppy out for a walk » Puppy Power
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: 0.1441s ][ Queries: 12 (0.0359s) ][ GZIP on ]