AppPkg... An improved RoxApp or AppDir.

Under development: PCMCIA, wireless, etc.
Message
Author
User avatar
sunburnt
Posts: 5090
Joined: Wed 08 Jun 2005, 23:11
Location: Arizona, U.S.A.

AppPkg... An improved RoxApp or AppDir.

#1 Post by sunburnt »

AppPkg is compatible with RoxApp or AppDir as they are called. AppPkg is capable of many apps. inside it, a popup menu supports this.
AppPkg and RoxApp don`t use a union FS, so they will work with any Linux install type ( full ). But they also work in a union O.S. ( Puppy ).
Puppy`s SFS files are unioned, so there`s possible library conflicts ( and other files ) not easily resolved. AppPkg and RoxApp don`t have this.

Rox site: http://roscidus.com/desktop/AppDirs Puppy`s Wikkahttp://puppylinux.org/wikka/ROXApplicationDirectory
Or disciple`s thread: http://208.109.22.214/puppy/viewtopic.p ... ff361d6bc4

The app. Squash files inside the AppPkg folder are separate from each other so it`s easy to copy them to another AppPkg and combine them.
AppPkg uses std. system shared libs., shared libs. inside AppPkg, and libs. unique to each app. inside the apps. Squash file. Eliminating conflicts.

The AppPkg builder includes the .AppPkg-Menu ( IF there`s more than 1 exec.) and makes a .AppPkg.mnu file for all the exec. files in the AppPkg.
IF AppPkg has only one exec. file, AppRun runs it. IF the AppPkg has more than 1 exec. file in it, AppRun runs AppPkg-Menu which lists the execs.

My GUI builder will automate all of this. Select an app. from Ubuntu`s repository, the builder gets all the needed files and builds an AppPkg.
2 parts to this, the builder I`ve had working, but AppPkg has evolved and is nearly finalized, so the builder is changing with it of course.
The downloader part is nearly complete and with help I`ll add download from the Slackware repository to it. How hard that will be I don`t know.

### Several things still needed:
1: A "Main App. Popup Menu" to supplement the system`s menu ( they`re usually full...) that lists all the AppPkg app`s. execs. in one place.
2: Get Xfe and other file browsers to do as Rox does: "click to run" the AppRun file, and also show the .DirIcon for the AppPkg folder.
3: It would be nice if you could run the AppPkg folder from CLI. If this is made to work then it can be used with the file browsers.

# Edit: Update of AppPkg layout, moved AppPkg specific files inside the hidden dir.: /.AppPkg

# Here`s the file layout of AppPkg:
/(AppPkg) _______________ ### Main AppPkg folder.
... AppRun _________________ # RoxApp`s "click folder to run app.".
... .DirIcon ________________ # Icon for the RoxApp/AppPkg folder.
... /.AppPkg/icon ___________ # Icon files folder for system menu.
... /.AppPkg/desktop ________ # .desktop files folder for sys. menu.
... /.AppPkg/(app).sq ________ # App`s. Squash file.
... /.AppPkg/(app).app _______ # App`s. Squash file mount folder.
... /.AppPkg/(app).lib.sq _____ # AppPkg shared libraries Squash file.
... /.AppPkg/lib _____________ # AppPkg shared libs. mount folder.
... /.AppPkg/0 ______________# Mount/unmount, set paths, make links.
... /.AppPkg/hook __________ # Run and exit file for app`s. execs.
... /.AppPkg/AppPkg-Menu ___ # AppPkg menu exec. for multiple apps.
... /.AppPkg/AppPkg.mnu ____ # AppPkg menu file. (Menu):(Exec.):(Icon)
# I`ll update this thread as I get further along with AppPkg.

# Here`s a screenshot of the AppPkg menu for a combined Xfe and Fox suites of apps.
They are a natural for combining as they both use the Fox tool kit`s X library, so they share the library thus saving space.
Last edited by sunburnt on Fri 26 Oct 2012, 06:42, edited 5 times in total.

nooby
Posts: 10369
Joined: Sun 29 Jun 2008, 19:05
Location: SwedenEurope

#2 Post by nooby »

Thanks for this thread. Very interesting and
I hope that many participate and help you test it.

Me being as noob as I am. I will wait until others
have tested it. But Did I spot a typo mistake there?

look here

"Here`s a screenshot of the AppPkg menu for a combined Xfe and Fox suites of apps."

that maybe should be Rox instead of Fox. They are RoxApps so they are Rox
and not Fox?
I use Google Search on Puppy Forum
not an ideal solution though

User avatar
sunburnt
Posts: 5090
Joined: Wed 08 Jun 2005, 23:11
Location: Arizona, U.S.A.

#3 Post by sunburnt »

No, it`s the Fox Tool Kit that both use for the GUI kit.

If you notice the "Calculator_fox.AppPkg" in the Rox-Filer listing.
It`s the same calculator that`s in the Xfe-Fox.AppPkg, part of the Fox suite.

nooby
Posts: 10369
Joined: Sun 29 Jun 2008, 19:05
Location: SwedenEurope

#4 Post by nooby »

Oh sorry I thought it where a simple typo. Typical that I did not notice
that there exists something named Fox.

So back to your topic. How could someone not getting how to do this
try it out? Would usb frugal install be a good thing?

Which Puppy would be easiest to use? Lupu or Slacko
or what?

what next to do? after I made such an install. What can I download
or do manually to get a feeling of how it works?

obviously I stood start here

Rox site: http://roscidus.com/desktop/AppDirs Puppy`s Wikkahttp://puppylinux.org/wikka/ROXApplicationDirectory
Or disciple`s thread: http://208.109.22.214/puppy/viewtopic.p ... ff361d6bc4

I need to understand what you write here

"### Several things needed:
1: A "Main App. Popup Menu" to supplement the system`s menu ( they`re usually full...) that lists all the AppPkg app`s. execs. in one place.
2: Get Xfe and other file browsers to do as Rox does: "click to run" the AppRun file, and also show the .DirIcon for the AppPkg folder.
3: It would be nice if you could run the AppPkg folder from CLI. If this is made to work then it can be used with the file browsers. "

So why do I need Xfe when Puppy already have Rox installed?
I don' get that part.
Last edited by nooby on Thu 18 Oct 2012, 11:26, edited 1 time in total.
I use Google Search on Puppy Forum
not an ideal solution though

nooby
Posts: 10369
Joined: Sun 29 Jun 2008, 19:05
Location: SwedenEurope

#5 Post by nooby »

What you write here
http://208.109.22.214/puppy/viewtopic.p ... 48c#656570

should also be posted here in this thread?

But if AppDir has existed since 2008 what made it not
part of Puppy like SFS has been. I mean if AppDir work
as practical as Disciple and you report on here?

Does it take more space or what makes it less attractive
for the others?

Edit

As an absolute noob I spot these differences to using
Seaside's most simplified SFS-exec instead of AppDirs

AppDirs use the .tar.gz way of distribution instead of .sfs

You need to manually untar each such appdir and place
it in the right place. While using Seaside SFS-exec you
only need to place the .sfs in a dir named SFSfiles
which for a noob is much easier.

I spent months to learn how to untar and still can not do it properly.

Sof if you find some way to do that in a reliable way that a noob can get?
I use Google Search on Puppy Forum
not an ideal solution though

User avatar
RSH
Posts: 2397
Joined: Mon 05 Sep 2011, 14:21
Location: Germany

#6 Post by RSH »

Hi, sunburnt.

As i do understand this by now, the apps could run from every location, because everything needed to run is in the apps directory, right?

Before coming to the point let me short hijack this thread. I don't know if anyoune has noticed the LazY Puppy SFS P.L.U.S. and its options in detail, so let me explain.

If i do a right-click on an sfs -no matter where the sfs is stored- I can choose to make a RunScript from its containing .desktop files. The RunScript is stored in /root in a specified directory. The .desktop file is copied into the running system and its "Exec="-entry is replaced by the RunScript. So, after creating a RunScript I can run every application from the sfs just by using the menu entry.

The menu entry executes the RunScript which will load the sfs automatically (including dependent sfs files ---> Lazarus loads the devx f.e.) and then running the application.

My thought on this here is to create a RunScript-Builder which makes RunScripts from the AppPkg-Applications. This way one could run and use the AppPkg-Applications the usual way, by menu or desktop-button (drag and drop the .desktop file or the RunScript onto the desktop).

Could I get one working AppPkg to do some work on this, please? :)

Thanks

RSH
[b][url=http://lazy-puppy.weebly.com]LazY Puppy[/url][/b]
[b][url=http://rshs-dna.weebly.com]RSH's DNA[/url][/b]
[url=http://murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?t=91422][b]SARA B.[/b][/url]

Jasper

#7 Post by Jasper »

Hi RSH,

You are referred back to:

http://murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic. ... 9fd#659163

More courtesy and less hijacking. Please.

I'm sure we all wish you and sunburnt well with your "alternative" endeavours; however, there seems little doubt that seaside finished the sfs race with 1st, 2nd and 3rd places some eighteen months ago.

My regards

User avatar
RSH
Posts: 2397
Joined: Mon 05 Sep 2011, 14:21
Location: Germany

#8 Post by RSH »

Jasper wrote:Hi RSH,

You are referred back to:

http://murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic. ... 9fd#659163

More courtesy and less hijacking. Please.

I'm sure we all wish you and sunburnt well with your "alternative" endeavours; however, there seems little doubt that seaside finished the sfs race with 1st, 2nd and 3rd places some eighteen months ago.

My regards
Hi Jasper.

I don't understand what you mean. Which race of the sfs race. A race surely is something where everyone starts at the same time and at the same point. Also every "racer" knows, he is currently in a race. And it is accepted by every "racer" that each one of them will try to finish the race as the "winner".

Nothing of all this is the case here.

And: more courtesy?

What does that mean?

You look at my post in a way like it's been done in a rude way?

I can't see that.

---

My SFS P.L.U.S. does the same thing as seaside's sfs-exec does ---> result is to run applications from sfs. Seasides application does need to have the sfs directory opened, so one can do a right-click on it; my SFS P.L.U.S. is completely different and surely a lot more comfortable. You would know this if you would have read my post carefully and maybe twice?

It's been now the second time that you did come to me and my posts in a way like that ---> (to speak clear): posting bullshit!

I don't like this your way very much! :!:

And do you know what?

... ....!
[b][url=http://lazy-puppy.weebly.com]LazY Puppy[/url][/b]
[b][url=http://rshs-dna.weebly.com]RSH's DNA[/url][/b]
[url=http://murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?t=91422][b]SARA B.[/b][/url]

User avatar
RSH
Posts: 2397
Joined: Mon 05 Sep 2011, 14:21
Location: Germany

#9 Post by RSH »

@ Jasper again (sorry sunburnt, but I have to get this guy well informed)

SFS P.L.U.S.

- isn't only one script or one application
- is a collection of tools
- converts downloaded .pet files (from quickpet) to sfs immediately ---> right after the download is finished
- converts .pet to .sfs ---> also in batch mode (1 sfs for each .pet)
- tells the sfs which dependent sfs must be used (each one can have a list of several dependent sfs; dependent sfs can have also dependent sfs files which will be loaded as well)
- loads all needed sfs files (PYTHON, JAVA, DEVX OR WHAT ELSE YOU CAN IMAGINE) automatically before running the application
- downloads the sfs automatically from LazY Puppy Repo at smokey01.com if it wasn't found at the local system (hd,usb)

RUNS CURRENTLY 408 APPLICATIONS IN MY LazY Puppy SYSTEM WITHOUT THE NEED TO INSTALL ANY APPLICATION OR TO USE A SAVE FILE ---> JUST BY CLICKING ITS MENU ENTRY AND/OR ITS DESKTOP BUTTON. NO MATTER WHERE THE SFS IS STORED (ROOT DIR OR PUPPY SUB DIR) AND HOW THE BOOT DIRECTORY IS NAMED (SDA1, SDD2 ... ...).

Image

One can do a right-click on a .jpg (.png, .bmp ...) image, choose the gimp 2.6.12 and then the following will happen:

- tries to run gimp
- tries to load the sfs if not already loaded
- downloads the gimp sfs from the web if it wasn't found
- loads the sfs if successfully downloaded
- runs the gimp
- opens the image in gimp

Any questions? Is SFS-Exec able to do such things? NO!

But as i stated before: I can't see any race on that. And i do not have a look at SFS PLUS and SFS-Exec in a way as if they were opponents or competitors. My wish was just to have to discovered the SFS-Exec-Thread much much earlier. Could have save me a lot of work and investigations.

Also:

LazY Puppy 2.0.2 Final Build 0.0.2 is used -BECAUSE OF IT SFS P.L.U.S.- as basic operating system for a PhyTech Puppy in Germany at the Realschule Lemgo. A German Teacher uses the LazY Puppy PhyTech-Version to teach his School-Kids in CAD and stuff like that (i just don't know the right terms for else area of use)

This German teacher has started a project to get and build his own PhyTech Puppy in March 2009 (the thread then starts, his work began one year before this) and worked on it for several years, using puppy 431 (de?). Because of LazY Puppy and its SFS PLUS (which is based on a suggestion from this German teacher) he quits his efford on the 431 PhyTech Puppy and changed to use the LazY Puppy.

With success. It runs on every machine which he intends to use. I think this is not too bad (in success) for a newbie in linux and bash (like me one still is).

So, please Jasper: If you don't have to report more constructive stuff, better leave me alone. I have to fix now the GUI part of SFS to PET Converter 0.4.

Thank you.

RSH

---

I'm still interested to get a working AppPkg, sunburnt. :)
[b][url=http://lazy-puppy.weebly.com]LazY Puppy[/url][/b]
[b][url=http://rshs-dna.weebly.com]RSH's DNA[/url][/b]
[url=http://murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?t=91422][b]SARA B.[/b][/url]

User avatar
sunburnt
Posts: 5090
Joined: Wed 08 Jun 2005, 23:11
Location: Arizona, U.S.A.

#10 Post by sunburnt »

Sorry about the delay, I`ve made some last minute changes to AppPkg.

I`ve tried to upload an AppPkg and this site won`t do it.
The file`s 5.7 MB, it should not be a problem.

I look at the "Allowed Extensions and Sizes" and it says: 0 MB ?!?!?!

I`ll ask some one what the heck is going on... :roll:

nooby
Posts: 10369
Joined: Sun 29 Jun 2008, 19:05
Location: SwedenEurope

#11 Post by nooby »

Talk to Smokey he has his own server that you can use.
Last edited by nooby on Wed 24 Oct 2012, 10:25, edited 1 time in total.
I use Google Search on Puppy Forum
not an ideal solution though

User avatar
666philb
Posts: 3615
Joined: Sun 07 Feb 2010, 12:27
Location: wales ... by the sea

#12 Post by 666philb »

hi sunburnt. 2mb is the filesize limit at murga
Bionicpup64 built with bionic beaver packages http://murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?t=114311
Xenialpup64, built with xenial xerus packages http://murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?t=107331

Jasper

#13 Post by Jasper »

Hi sunburnt,

I don't have a problem with sfs files.

For you and those that do have problems with sfs files even in this very thread RSH wrote:

" I have to fix now the GUI part of SFS to PET Converter 0.4."

Of course there were other forum members who had given us working sfs2pet converters before RSH joined the forum.

What is wrong with sfs2pet converters that work?

Elsewhere, sunburnt, you wrote:
"A union causes more problems than it solves, and uses resources.
So then SFS files are part of the problem. There`s better methods... "

and also:

"This [this what] looks almost exactly like what I was working on about a year ago.
By the time I had it [which it] filled out so it did everything needed [what was everthing that was needed] it was complex."

In what way was it too complex - as with a sledgehammer to crack a nut?

My regards

nooby
Posts: 10369
Joined: Sun 29 Jun 2008, 19:05
Location: SwedenEurope

#14 Post by nooby »

If you want to debate it then start a new thread.
this thread is for AppPkg... An improved RoxApp or AppDir.

To try it out and give feedback that help to develop it further
or to fix bugs.

Not for polemic fights or flame wars. so go start your own thread!
I use Google Search on Puppy Forum
not an ideal solution though

User avatar
sunburnt
Posts: 5090
Joined: Wed 08 Jun 2005, 23:11
Location: Arizona, U.S.A.

#15 Post by sunburnt »

Thanks nooby; I`ll see if I can find Smokey.

Thanks 666philb; I seem to recall it was 6 MB years ago. Oh well...

Jasper; Don`t know your problem, don`t want to know either...
# Note: Seaside is a very nice guy, I`ve talked with him for years here.
He`s never seemed like the type to chase folks around the Puppy forum.

RSH`s setup appears to be similar to seaside`s in that they both use unioned Squash files ( sfs ).
My AppPkg setup is quite different from unioned sfs Squash files.
No race as Jasper suggests, they`re just different and that`s all.

seaside
Posts: 934
Joined: Thu 12 Apr 2007, 00:19

#16 Post by seaside »

sunburnt,

What can I say?

This would be absolutely terrific to be able to use established packages like Ubuntu's delivered right to the doghouse.

Some things to think about might be the differences between where Ubuntu looks for binaries and libs vs puppy. Many are ok with Lucid but perhaps not all.

I think of all this as I do sfs files - many will work just fine as is, but many will also need some individualized help to work.

Regards,
s
(Did you find a place to upload your latest prototype?)

User avatar
sunburnt
Posts: 5090
Joined: Wed 08 Jun 2005, 23:11
Location: Arizona, U.S.A.

#17 Post by sunburnt »

Hi seaside; Good to hear from you.! I`ve seen SFS files that work without a union...
There`s not much difference between them really. RoxApp types just need more setup.
But I really like the idea of apps. that work in any Linux setup: Full, Sq. File, Union or not.

Q; How important is it to CLI run the apps.? All apps. are GUI, so not so critical I think...
To CLI run them a link`s needed in the path. Just another leftover mess to clean up.

Seaside, I don`t have a place to host anything, and I`m told Puppy`s size limit is 2 MB.
# I have a few AppPkg apps. in the new setup, and more in older formats for sharing.
# I`ve got the AppPkg Builder working, it needs more refinement to be fully workable.
... It has to be able to build an AppPkg complete from most Ubuntu packages.

I like the idea of using binary files, compiling is more troublesome and distro. specific.
By the looks of it, Ubuntu Universe packages are good for nearly all the Ubuntu distros.
So if a Linux distro. is made with Ubuntu compatible files ( kernel, libs., etc.), harmony!
Puppy Lucid and the new Puppy Precise should both work with the same Universe files.

The exec. and lib. paths are set, and a link is made in /usr/share for deps. (if needed).
The /usr/share link is the only one needed, desktop and icon links are for a system menu.
This works on all I`ve tried, I saw /etc in the Xfe pkg. but Xfe seems to work without it.
/etc and /var are 2 items I haven`t addressed, but /var is kinda system stuff related.
A well written app. should generate it`s files in /etc and /var. If not then auto. link it.
I haven`t seen any app. yet that uses /usr/etc or /usr/local/etc ( weird ).

# Someone who has built a lot of apps. could help me out on this.
# What else needs to be taken care of to make most apps. work?
# I think I`ve got most of the important stuff taken care of. But...

I intend for AppPkg to be for general user apps., not damons, servers, services, etc.
As it matures these items can be added, a Samba + NFS AppPkg could be made now.
The ambiguity of Linux apps. is a problem in itself, so odd ones are probably common.
Things like icons and what`s in the desktop files can`t be relied upon, and other stuff.
The big apps. like the Offices will be interesting. Browsers don`t appear to be difficult.

seaside
Posts: 934
Joined: Thu 12 Apr 2007, 00:19

#18 Post by seaside »

sunburnt wrote:
Q; How important is it to CLI run the apps.? All apps. are GUI, so not so critical I think...
To CLI run them a link`s needed in the path. Just another leftover mess to clean up.

I like the idea of using binary files, compiling is more troublesome and distro. specific.
By the looks of it, Ubuntu Universe packages are good for nearly all the Ubuntu distros.
So if a Linux distro. is made with Ubuntu compatible files ( kernel, libs., etc.), harmony!
Puppy Lucid and the new Puppy Precise should both work with the same Universe files.
sunburnt,

Not sure what you meant by "How important is it to CLI run the apps.?" Were you referring to the ability of a user to start programs with extra parameters? If so, perhaps that would vary by the program- items like Mplayer, VLC and imaging programs come to mind as likely candidates.

I've never looked at the filesystem structure of Ubuntu and wonder if it's exactly the same as Puppy Lucid in a way that guarantees that if it runs on Ubuntu - it runs on Puppy Lucid.

Of course, even if say, maybe 70% would run with no problem, that would be great, if they represented mostly the important programs that users want.

It seems attractive to have a directory where a script sets the environment to find binaries, libs and config files, and then starts the exec, all wrapped up in a package by automatic means and without customization (if I understand correctly)

I'm glad that you asked about ldconfig in another thread, because it always seemed to be an addon program to manage a faster access to libs and always begged the question "if it's in the lib path environment - why does ldconfig need to be run? Is there an important difference in loading time with the speed of todays computers?

Thanks for your efforts and I hope you can find somewhere to put the prototype.

Regards,
s

User avatar
sunburnt
Posts: 5090
Joined: Wed 08 Jun 2005, 23:11
Location: Arizona, U.S.A.

#19 Post by sunburnt »

seaside; Yes arguments, and just how important to be able to run in rxvt. As for run arguments to the app., a script or desktop link can do that also.
I`m thinking it`ll be okay to leave out having the execs. in the $PATH. The apps. env. path is set in the run script so the app. will find it`s exec. deps.

The SFS setup I made got complex as it matured and was not very simple or portable anymore, lots of infrastructure to install to the target O.S.
So I looked at RoxApps and saw the value of the dir. to hold menu files and a menu exec., and the script to mount/unmount, set paths, make links.
So now it`s completely portable, no infrastructure to install at all except a menu handler. Cost is adding 300 KB outside the Squash file to do it.

I like the idea of a simple "add-on menu" app. as it doesn`t mess with the system menu (so many different types), and it will be an AppPkg!
I have a nice small popup/down menu that`s a clock, click it and it pops out. So it can be placed in a corner of the screen and opened when needed.

Ubuntu pkgs. are pretty much the same as Debian as far as I can see (.deb). I`ve used Debian pkgs. in Puppy for years, with some hiccups of course.

ldconfi precedence is set behind LD_LIB`_PATH , so it`s slower in that regard. The ld.so.conf lib. file list is no different than a path, so is it better?

seaside
Posts: 934
Joined: Thu 12 Apr 2007, 00:19

#20 Post by seaside »

sunburnt wrote: ldconfi precedence is set behind LD_LIB`_PATH , so it`s slower in that regard. The ld.so.conf lib. file list is no different than a path, so is it better?
sunburnt,

I think you're right, as far as I can tell, if some package has something like "/opt/someprog/somelib.so" in it, nothing automatically recognizes this and updates either the lib_path or ld.so.conf. So it must be specifically done for that package. Maybe an automated search could be done on every package for libs outside the normal structure and then exceptionally set at run-time. (Unfortunately, adding more processing)

Regards,
s
(By the way, I really applaud your decision not to compile source code on the fly for this project :D )

Post Reply