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 Thu 23 Oct 2014, 05:29
All times are UTC - 4
 Forum index » Taking the Puppy out for a walk » Misc
Necessity of a save file
Moderators: Flash, JohnMurga
Post new topic   Reply to topic View previous topic :: View next topic
Page 1 of 1 [5 Posts]  
Author Message
snayak

Joined: 14 Sep 2011
Posts: 231

PostPosted: Wed 06 Jun 2012, 01:16    Post subject:  Necessity of a save file  

Hi,

Just wanted to know...

What is the real necessity of a save file ?
and that too in ext3/linux file format?
Can't we fulfil the necessity of save file with a normal directory?

I mean, at any case we have a filelist for applications that are installed.
They can be uninstalled consulting this filelist. And apps can be run from a directory.
So if we keep a directory for installing outside apps, with a mimic of linux filesystem (I mean, with /root, /mnt, /dev, /etc folders etc.), will it be not enough?

I am not sure what other things make a save file mandatory.
However, I just got an idea, "why it is not possible...".
Please help.


Sincerely,
Srinivas Nayak

_________________
Machine: Wary 530, AMD Athlon 2000+, ASUS A7N266-VM board, 512MB DDR RAM, 40GB HDD, 52xCDRW, PS/2 Mouse/Keyboard, USB 2.0.
Home: http://www.mathmeth.com/sn/
Blog: http://srinivas-nayak.blogspot.com/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
disciple

Joined: 20 May 2006
Posts: 6449
Location: Auckland, New Zealand

PostPosted: Wed 06 Jun 2012, 02:00    Post subject: Re: Necessity of a save file  

snayak wrote:
Hi,

Just wanted to know...

What is the real necessity of a save file ?
and that too in ext3/linux file format?
Can't we fulfil the necessity of save file with a normal directory?

I think it would be possible to use a folder. But not in a Windows filesystem*, and it is important for new Puppy users to be able to have full functionality even when they don't have a partition with a Linux filesystem (or a multisession Puppy CD/DVD).

* The main Linux filesystem really should be in a format that supports symlinks and is case sensitive. Take a look at all the symlinks in /usr/lib and you'll see why. If you used a Windows filesystem when you installed a package with a lib and it wanted to create a symlink it would create a copy instead. This would be a waste of disk space and a pain when you later wanted to move to a Linux filesystem.
... although there is/was a special distro designed to install in a VFAT filesystem - I'm not sure what special things they did to make it work.

_________________
DEATH TO SPREADSHEETS
- - -
Classic Puppy quotes
- - -
Beware the demented serfers!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
snayak

Joined: 14 Sep 2011
Posts: 231

PostPosted: Wed 06 Jun 2012, 02:35    Post subject:  

Dear Disciple,

It is good to hear that it is possible with FAT file system.
However, the point you have shown (...symlink...) is also a point to ponder.
Can't we make a symlink in a fat file system that is mounted to linux?

Can you please let me know the distro (installable on VFAT) name?

I didn't get

Quote:
...it is important for new Puppy users to be able to have full functionality even when they don't have a partition with a Linux filesystem (or a multisession Puppy CD/DVD).


Can you please clarify this?

Sincerely,
Srinivas

_________________
Machine: Wary 530, AMD Athlon 2000+, ASUS A7N266-VM board, 512MB DDR RAM, 40GB HDD, 52xCDRW, PS/2 Mouse/Keyboard, USB 2.0.
Home: http://www.mathmeth.com/sn/
Blog: http://srinivas-nayak.blogspot.com/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
disciple

Joined: 20 May 2006
Posts: 6449
Location: Auckland, New Zealand

PostPosted: Wed 06 Jun 2012, 03:04    Post subject:  

snayak wrote:
Dear Disciple,

It is good to hear that it is possible with FAT file system.
However, the point you have shown (...symlink...) is also a point to ponder.

Can't we make a symlink in a fat file system that is mounted to linux?


There was a patch for at least some of the 2.4 series Linux kernels which abused Windows .lnk files to act as symlinks. So in theory that would be possible, but as far as I know the patch has not been ported to a 2.6 kernel.
Wine doesn't really work with a 2.4 series kernel if people want to use it; I don't know of any other programs that have a problem with it.
I suspect there is a reasonable amount of modern hardware that you can't use with a 2.4 kernel.
And it might be quite a lot of work to build a modern Puppy with a 2.4 kernel (Puppy has had a 2.6 kernel since Puppy 2. When running Puppy 1.x from a live CD or a frugal install only /root is writeable, not /, because limitations of unionfs in the 2.4 kernel don't allow it).
I'm not really sure how real an issue it is that Windows filesystems are not truly case sensitive.
The other thing that I forgot to mention is that Windows filesystems don't support the same attributes as normal filesystems; in particular there is no "executable bit" - on a VFAT partition everything is "executable" to everybody. I don't think this is too much of a practical problem for Puppy, but it will get the tin foil hat people even more up in arms, and I think again it would be a rather "Bad Thing" when the user later wants to move to a normal filesystem.

Quote:
Can you please let me know the distro (installable on VFAT) name?

It looks like there's one called Doslinux, but I don't know that it's the one I was thinking of.

_________________
DEATH TO SPREADSHEETS
- - -
Classic Puppy quotes
- - -
Beware the demented serfers!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
Karl Godt


Joined: 20 Jun 2010
Posts: 3972
Location: Kiel,Germany

PostPosted: Tue 12 Jun 2012, 18:43    Post subject:  

Nice idea, might work if the puppy_main.sfs is installed to some of the linux file systems .

The problem is that there are several layers for unionfs or aufs with the savefile on bottom and then the main_puppy_sfs, the zdrv.sfs, [adrv.sfs if saluki,] devx.sfs, other program_modules.sfs -- referring /initrd/pup_ro1 as bottom layer .

On flash (odd pupmodes like 3,7,13) there is another bottommost rootfs layer as tmpfs as a write to disk buffer .

I have no idea how to merge a folder into the combined rootfs layers . A folder seems not to have a limitation in size , could easily eat up much ...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website 
Display posts from previous:   Sort by:   
Page 1 of 1 [5 Posts]  
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: 0.0612s ][ Queries: 12 (0.0078s) ][ GZIP on ]