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 Fri 19 Sep 2014, 23:59
All times are UTC - 4
 Forum index » Taking the Puppy out for a walk » Misc
Puppy limitations
Moderators: Flash, JohnMurga
Post new topic   Reply to topic View previous topic :: View next topic
Page 1 of 2 [16 Posts]   Goto page: 1, 2 Next
Author Message
peb

Joined: 24 Oct 2005
Posts: 18

PostPosted: Mon 21 May 2012, 10:34    Post subject:  Puppy limitations  

There are many things I've grown to very much like about Puppy. It's small, fast, and robust (for the things it does), and the Lucid distribution does have a connection to Ubuntu that has at times been useful for packages outside the scope of .pets.

I like the security of a fresh "toram" install that doesn't accumulate cruft and possible mischief. It takes a tiny bit of setup during startup, but very minor with some scripts I use to restore some pristine settings.

Recently though, I wanted to move to linux for some AV work, and things fell apart quickly. Jack audio never worked reliably, the Qjackctl packages from Unbutue and a Puppy .pet didn't help. So I tried to use Puppy to use netbootin to try to install another distribution to a USB drive. Nothing doing. I simply couldn't get the current version to recognize any USB drive, and the Ubuntu version was dated and produced it's own "known" errors. It was a bit of a defeat to have to go to Windows where the software worked flawlessly. I've had similar problems with USB drives and gparted before with Puppy. Gpated simply didn't see them, or if it did, choked, coughed and mostly spit out numerous inscrutable errors if I tired VFAT. There's something screwed up about Puppy's implementation of the USB stuff, or gparted -- or both. Life's too short. I went to Windows, and began happily using the drives in Linux.

Then there's the difficulty of package aging. I'm not critical of anyone for not maintaining up to date packages. That's a huge amount of work, and pretty thankless too. I would have gladly used something like apt or yum, but there's really no way for Puppy to use those. Many of the Ubuntu packages don't install all the dependencies; usually it's a perl library or some other obscure library that I can't find easily.

Again. None of this is really a complaint about Puppy. It is what it is. But I don't think I can go much further with it until there's a package manager that will connect and use a major repository reliably. (I know I could compile packages myself, but the joy of that is LONG gone, and I just want to be a user.) Linux AV is marginal at best, particularly the video. But at least it would be helpful to have reliable updated versions of what's available; I haven't been able to do that with Puppy. Ardour is basically beyond Puppy for all practical purposes.

If I had one suggestion to make for the future of Puppy, it would be to connect it via something like apt, slaptd, or yum to SOME major repository rather than to keep rolling its own software packages.

I have 2 gb of ram. It's not terribly important to have the absolute minimum of ram footprint anymore. And while I love the small core footprint, that's not as critical as either.

I'm sure I'll keep Puppy for a while because I'm used to it and have it set up the way I want. I'm playing with Tiny Core Linux for a replacement platform where I want a pristine environment with email, a solid, reasonably updated web browser, some word processing and a game to two to waste what little time I have.

Puppy's been a good experience. And I think if it solved the package issue, it could find it's way to a much wider audience. Many people don't want the bloated Ubuntu or Redhat experience, nor the gnarly experience of distributions like Arch LInux or even Tiny Core Linux just to get some work done. Among its small distro peers in the "just want to be a user" class, Puppy still fares very well. And it's ability to run and stay tidily in ram is a security feature that most could use, but don't appreciate.

Anyhow. My thoughts, and my gratitude to all those what have and continue to contribute here to make Puppy, not only a geek attraction, but something actually useful.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
darkcity


Joined: 23 May 2010
Posts: 2452
Location: near here

PostPosted: Mon 21 May 2012, 12:09    Post subject:  

I've recently repackaged jack
http://www.murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?t=78256

any feedback appreciated.

Idea

_________________
helping Wiki for help | IF SendSpace link = "dead" THEN PM me ("up file to http://meownplanet.net/")
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website 
sunburnt


Joined: 08 Jun 2005
Posts: 5029
Location: Arizona, U.S.A.

PostPosted: Mon 21 May 2012, 18:20    Post subject:  

peb; You`re saying exactly what I said about 5 years ago.

That`s what I`d do if I wanted to build an orphan Linux distro. ( like Puppy ).
Rather than constantly having to build new app. packages, make it connect !

Debian has the largest repository and is well managed ( relatively ).
I made a Debian downloader gui front end that works fairly well.
But getting it to recursively parse out and fetch all the deps. was tricky.

Pussy is very Debian compatible, but I couldn`t get it to boot on my old PC.
It has Apt to handle packages the Debian way.

Now if Puppy had Apt in it, that would solve Barry`s packaging problems...
Then a nice gui to make sfs files from the packages. That would be trick !

Last edited by sunburnt on Tue 22 May 2012, 13:49; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
Lobster
Official Crustacean


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

PostPosted: Mon 21 May 2012, 23:38    Post subject:  

Quote:
I just want to be a user


Smile
Familiarity.
It is why people are using an operating system (Windows) which is well past its sell date. Does Windows still have great commercial software? I should imagine so.

I decided to become familiar with one distro, for various reasons that was Puppy.
Audio visual programs:
Just been using Openshot. Still not completely stable. I may need more ram . . . It works well enough and I become more familiar and pleased with each version.

If it works use it . . . unless you are Richard Stallman . . .

I think Puppy Fatdog with Underdog into other distros and Windows on another partition might be ideal for you. Or get a Mac. Wink

I have also been using Presentation in LibreOffice. The audio visual part needs java and I am loath to spend time on setting up the settings . . .

Thanks for the feedback. Just thought . . .
Saluki might be a good option for you
http://saluki-linux.com/

_________________
Puppy WIKI
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website 
aarf

Joined: 30 Aug 2007
Posts: 3620
Location: around the bend

PostPosted: Tue 22 May 2012, 01:42    Post subject:  

pussy pussy here pussy
_________________

ASUS EeePC Flare series 1025C 4x Intel Atom N2800 @ 1.86GHz RAM 2063MB 800x600p ATA 320G
_-¤-_

<º))))><.¸¸.•´¯`•.#.•´¯`•.¸¸. ><((((º>
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website 
peb

Joined: 24 Oct 2005
Posts: 18

PostPosted: Tue 22 May 2012, 14:04    Post subject:  

darkcity wrote:
I've recently repackaged jack
http://www.murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?t=78256

any feedback appreciated.

Idea


The feedback is they worked as advertised. Nice job.

Reply to other comments.

I tried the "pussy" distribution. It said the kernel wouldn't work for my "older" computer. So no "apt."

I did see another thread here that makes me believe ardour might work sometime soon -- maybe as a pet -- but even a distribution might be OK. And maybe some up to date video editors will be included too. I'm just looking for some solid, near professional level, AV editing solutions that just work day after day.

The latest and greatest doesn't mean bleeding edge to me, just the latest rock solid edition with a good feature set that is very unlikely to crash and burn in the middle of things. Once a year updating is probably sufficient for good AV software that's robust. It's not a browser environment where failure to update means a security risk.

I'm sort of put off a bit when packages that stress crash recovery as a major feature. Crash recovery provisions are OK, but avoiding injury by not crashing in the first place is a much better overall strategy.

One of the features I like about running Puppy in ram without saving anything to a pupsave file is that however badly it gets screwed up or corrupted with settings and preferences that are stored in some package dependent location, it's just a simple reboot to a clean cold restart that I know for sure won't be bogged down in the aftermath of whatever happened. That feature is a strong advantage over Windows and other Linux platforms that tend to keep saving problems. And I know where my data is -- it's not slathered about in tmp files, log files, some etc file, swapfiles, registries or configuration files and who knows where.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
Flash
Official Dog Handler


Joined: 04 May 2005
Posts: 11068
Location: Arizona USA

PostPosted: Tue 22 May 2012, 15:28    Post subject:  

I've been running Puppy from multisession DVDs for at least 5 years. Rather than save an installed program to the multisession DVD, I've learned to save the .pet in a separate USB flash memory and reinstall it every time I need it. It takes hardly any time to install and configure most .pets. If I really knew what I was doing, I guess I could make a new .pet to replace the old one, and include my configuration in it. Embarassed

My point is that this way of doing things makes it easy to upgrade to the latest version of a program. It's kind of like a ROX app, which is contained with all its dependencies in one directory.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
greengeek

Joined: 20 Jul 2010
Posts: 2544
Location: New Zealand

PostPosted: Tue 22 May 2012, 16:50    Post subject: Re: Puppy limitations  

peb wrote:
Ardour is basically beyond Puppy for all practical purposes.

Did you have the same issues with Puppy Ubuntu Studio 2.1 or 3.1 or 3.3? I remember reading some positive comments about those distros (other than the fact that there were heated personality/ethics clashes)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
mini-jaguar

Joined: 13 Nov 2008
Posts: 462

PostPosted: Thu 24 May 2012, 08:44    Post subject:  

There's also a new Ardour package in the multimedia section of the forum that seems to work.

But one problem I'm having with Puppy is that trashing huge files takes forever.

The problem with the video editors though is that in frugal you have to have a huge pupsave file. I haven't tried it yet, but expanding the file to at least 5 or 10 giga should help. Video editing works much better in full install though.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
darkcity


Joined: 23 May 2010
Posts: 2452
Location: near here

PostPosted: Thu 24 May 2012, 10:03    Post subject:  

mini-jaguar wrote:
...
But one problem I'm having with Puppy is that trashing huge files takes forever.

The problem with the video editors though is that in frugal you have to have a huge pupsave file. I haven't tried it yet, but expanding the file to at least 5 or 10 giga should help. Video editing works much better in full install though.


I would put temp and document folders outside the PupSave file on frugal. Most programs can be configured to choose which directory to use for temp, though ext2 type partition may be required. If a temporary directory is in the Linux RootFS it can be sym-linked out, I do this with /root/.mozilla/seamonkey. I think these features should be standardized for frugal mode puppy - so they are accessible for more users.

_________________
helping Wiki for help | IF SendSpace link = "dead" THEN PM me ("up file to http://meownplanet.net/")
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website 
sunburnt


Joined: 08 Jun 2005
Posts: 5029
Location: Arizona, U.S.A.

PostPosted: Thu 24 May 2012, 15:17    Post subject:  

mini-jaguar; You really need to use a H.D. partition, not the Save file.
The Save file should be only for config. files, but Puppy uses it to install apps. too.
SFS files don`t take up space in the Save file like Pet files do.

In my /root I have /my-applications and /my-documents as links to /mnt/sdb3/apps and /mnt/sdb3/docs .
This way when the Save file gets hosed ( corrupted ) I don`t loose everything.
I also have a /root/my-downloads link pointing to /mnt/sdb3/dnld .

Video and audio files can be saved to a NTFS partition without problems.
But again, you really should have a Ext3 partition on a H.D. in your PC.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
mini-jaguar

Joined: 13 Nov 2008
Posts: 462

PostPosted: Fri 25 May 2012, 10:23    Post subject:  

No, trashing huge files still takes forever even if they are on whatever partition and the Puppy is full install.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
darkcity


Joined: 23 May 2010
Posts: 2452
Location: near here

PostPosted: Sun 27 May 2012, 09:15    Post subject:  

mini-jaguar wrote:
No, trashing huge files still takes forever even if they are on whatever partition and the Puppy is full install.


This is interesting. Do you know if it is slower than other distros? I wonder why?

_________________
helping Wiki for help | IF SendSpace link = "dead" THEN PM me ("up file to http://meownplanet.net/")
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website 
nooby

Joined: 29 Jun 2008
Posts: 10557
Location: SwedenEurope

PostPosted: Sun 27 May 2012, 13:58    Post subject:  

I do have a poor memory but AFAIK Barry Kauler
does recommend that one do frugal installs.

So maybe that explains this: It is not recommended to do this:
"the Puppy is full install."

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


Joined: 23 May 2010
Posts: 2452
Location: near here

PostPosted: Sun 27 May 2012, 15:46    Post subject:  

the question is what is slowing down the 'trashing huge files'

A. Frugal puppy with file in savefile

B. Frugal puppy with file outside savefile

C. Full install puppy

D. Linux?

Cool

_________________
helping Wiki for help | IF SendSpace link = "dead" THEN PM me ("up file to http://meownplanet.net/")
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website 
Display posts from previous:   Sort by:   
Page 1 of 2 [16 Posts]   Goto page: 1, 2 Next
Post new topic   Reply to topic View previous topic :: View next topic
 Forum index » Taking the Puppy out for a walk » Misc
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: 0.0950s ][ Queries: 12 (0.0042s) ][ GZIP on ]