Community Edition anyone interested?
-
technosaurus
- Posts: 4853
- Joined: Mon 19 May 2008, 01:24
- Location: Blue Springs, MO
- Contact:
Its one thing if a newer version is _required_ due to new features. This is not the case for many precompiled proprietary apps that the only reason they don't run is a stupid glibc version string crammed in because they built against a new glibc. Many apps have fallbacks for compiling against older versions (see abiword, geany, yad source) that will still work on new versions. This is especially valid for gtk where they often add new functions that are pretty damn redundant.
Check out my [url=https://github.com/technosaurus]github repositories[/url]. I may eventually get around to updating my [url=http://bashismal.blogspot.com]blogspot[/url].
Many useful features were added to gtk that make a world of difference for providing a user friendly interface. There are still a lot of limitations where work-arounds are required. Again, languages are always evolving. In android, there is also a lot of deprecated code that simply doesn't work any longer. There's a point where you draw a line regarding backward support. The only function for an OS is to support applications. You can always stick with old applications for an old distro that runs on old hardware.technosaurus wrote: This is especially valid for gtk where they often add new functions that are pretty damn redundant.
-
technosaurus
- Posts: 4853
- Joined: Mon 19 May 2008, 01:24
- Location: Blue Springs, MO
- Contact:
I don't want to get too off topic, but from personal examination of all versions of gtk from 1.2 to 3.10, I can say quite matter-of-factly that over the years, while gtk has added many new features, most of the new functions added were simply an old function renamed with extremely minor changes and typically deprecating the old function. In 2.8 they added cairo, in 2.10 they added statusicon (and many others), in 2.12 they added gtkbuilder, but since then not much _real_ improvement, gtk3 still hasn't gotten most of the real improvements that were planned (the cairo only backend for instance that would have allowed asyncronous apps via cairo-xcb ... or the xcb backend for that matter) ... the only real reason to build gtk3 is the broadway or wayland backends and honestly its just as fast to just use a vnc client on a gtk2 build. (though gtk3's javascript bindings and css styling vs. gtkrc are not bad ideas, I don't personally find them useful)
Check out my [url=https://github.com/technosaurus]github repositories[/url]. I may eventually get around to updating my [url=http://bashismal.blogspot.com]blogspot[/url].
From uncle Barry.
" Yes, there is a reason for not using GTK 2.24.x.
It has some rendering changes that make some apps misbehave.
I think that the developers were moving up to the 3.x series, and some
stuff went into 2.24 that perhaps shouldn't have.
I have found that the vast majority of apps still compile with 2.20.1. "
http://distro.ibiblio.org/quirky/quirky ... ky-6.0.htm
Chris.
" Yes, there is a reason for not using GTK 2.24.x.
It has some rendering changes that make some apps misbehave.
I think that the developers were moving up to the 3.x series, and some
stuff went into 2.24 that perhaps shouldn't have.
I have found that the vast majority of apps still compile with 2.20.1. "
http://distro.ibiblio.org/quirky/quirky ... ky-6.0.htm
Chris.
-
gcmartin
Even though we seem to diverge for the moment, its probably a good thing if we are looking to the future. The Linux distros in or out of Puppyland will continue to dominate the desktop/laptop usage. It may even move, with touch, to the smart device (tablet/tabletop) scene.
So with this as an understand tucked away in the back of our minds, its a right thing to do to cover this area as it has tremendous benefit or locked-in drawback down the road. That's why I thing member developers are covering this. It is an important area of the system. As in the auto ownership when a issue arises: "Pay me now or pay me later, but you WILL pay!"
That being said is GTK here because it is a PUP standard or because it was/is easier to create and support screen manipulation for apps. If its not a standard, are there any other approaches that can be brought to bear that DOES NOT can a massive rewrite of application. IBM has use a technique in some of its development of apps where it can take an application written for one type of desktop and have the app run thinking its using one version, when in fact, the subsystem in completely different as it populates to screen. But, that is/was an internal tool and there may not be an equivalent for this community's use.
That being said, I found this write-up which, i think, clearly explains what the GTK discussion is about while OFFERING insight to another that is seen in other PUPPY distros. Those unaware of the GTK discussion may appreciate the short article's info.
Questions
So with this as an understand tucked away in the back of our minds, its a right thing to do to cover this area as it has tremendous benefit or locked-in drawback down the road. That's why I thing member developers are covering this. It is an important area of the system. As in the auto ownership when a issue arises: "Pay me now or pay me later, but you WILL pay!"
That being said is GTK here because it is a PUP standard or because it was/is easier to create and support screen manipulation for apps. If its not a standard, are there any other approaches that can be brought to bear that DOES NOT can a massive rewrite of application. IBM has use a technique in some of its development of apps where it can take an application written for one type of desktop and have the app run thinking its using one version, when in fact, the subsystem in completely different as it populates to screen. But, that is/was an internal tool and there may not be an equivalent for this community's use.
That being said, I found this write-up which, i think, clearly explains what the GTK discussion is about while OFFERING insight to another that is seen in other PUPPY distros. Those unaware of the GTK discussion may appreciate the short article's info.
Questions
- Is the write-up accurate?
- And is there additional issues, some of which has been written over last day, that the article doesn't make clear?
-
technosaurus
- Posts: 4853
- Joined: Mon 19 May 2008, 01:24
- Location: Blue Springs, MO
- Contact:
@gc
that article barely touches the architecture behind the toolkits
re: the ibm infrastructure ... as part of backporting gtkdialog to gtk1 many gtk2 functions were mapped to gtk1... it is entirely possible to write gtk2 and glib2 to link to and use gtk1 with additional widgets and functions defined in terms of their gtk1 counterparts ... the same goes for gtk3 ... but since these are lgpl you probably will never see it. I have considered writing an MIT licensed gtk wrapper over agar, so that gtk apps can build against libagar.
that article barely touches the architecture behind the toolkits
re: the ibm infrastructure ... as part of backporting gtkdialog to gtk1 many gtk2 functions were mapped to gtk1... it is entirely possible to write gtk2 and glib2 to link to and use gtk1 with additional widgets and functions defined in terms of their gtk1 counterparts ... the same goes for gtk3 ... but since these are lgpl you probably will never see it. I have considered writing an MIT licensed gtk wrapper over agar, so that gtk apps can build against libagar.
Check out my [url=https://github.com/technosaurus]github repositories[/url]. I may eventually get around to updating my [url=http://bashismal.blogspot.com]blogspot[/url].
Do something different, like create/maintain a rolling release. (Who needs another Puppy variation?) Pre-configure VLC as default media player, as in "VLC Plus Extras" by Ttuuxxx. Need I point out that a rolling release Puppy would attract new users, since it would address a major drawback of Puppy, rapid obsolescence.
Point release vs. rolling release: Developer, user, and security considerations
http://www.techrepublic.com/blog/it-sec ... derations/
Point release vs. rolling release: Developer, user, and security considerations
http://www.techrepublic.com/blog/it-sec ... derations/
Last edited by nubc on Mon 23 Dec 2013, 06:28, edited 2 times in total.
Where do we go from here?
Let's look on the bright side. Problems with glibc's and gtk's are currently rare, and may shortly become a thing of the past.
Currently rare because:
Most puppy users won't “customize
Currently rare because:
Most puppy users won't “customize
Last edited by mikeslr on Sun 22 Dec 2013, 18:06, edited 1 time in total.
why not start looking at pupngo as a base for ce
i feel it has a lot of potential
1. it is an advance on the puppy system but could still retain all of puppy's strengths.
2. it could be made glibc gtk etc neutral (static built core and basic apps)
3. it is modular so different versions for different needs could be made concurrently by different teams (even members with limited knowledge can work on or test the modules)
4. etc
i am trying to read the pupngo thread and test things because i want to incorporate some of the ideas into my stuff but as i said i feel it is an excellent candidate for the ce base
also the ce project can (and probably should) take a while to mature i dont see any rush
wanderer
i feel it has a lot of potential
1. it is an advance on the puppy system but could still retain all of puppy's strengths.
2. it could be made glibc gtk etc neutral (static built core and basic apps)
3. it is modular so different versions for different needs could be made concurrently by different teams (even members with limited knowledge can work on or test the modules)
4. etc
i am trying to read the pupngo thread and test things because i want to incorporate some of the ideas into my stuff but as i said i feel it is an excellent candidate for the ce base
also the ce project can (and probably should) take a while to mature i dont see any rush
wanderer
just my opinion on the ce project
i am presently running 214x9 and 217 on
win 98 win xp win 7 and win 8 machines
runs great on all of them
shouldn't we look at making ce run on as many machines as possible
rather than only the newest
i use puppy as an alternative to windows
for both my old as well as my new machines
thoughts
wanderer
i am presently running 214x9 and 217 on
win 98 win xp win 7 and win 8 machines
runs great on all of them
shouldn't we look at making ce run on as many machines as possible
rather than only the newest
i use puppy as an alternative to windows
for both my old as well as my new machines
thoughts
wanderer
Too many choices may be Pup's underlying problem
Hi wanderer and All,
The real problem in deciding on a Community Edition, and Puppy in general, may be that "Puppy" enables too many choices. And while I agree with wanderer that a CE should take a while to mature, I disagree that there is no reason to rush, if by rush one means begin by moving it beyond a general discussion to a project we can start working on, fleshing out, testing. A month or more ago there were people primed and ready begin working. Wait long enough and that enthusiasm will evaporate.
Too many choices. It is easy to get lost in the many possibilities Puppy offers for development. I think I've made my interest clear. I think we should be trying to develop an up-to-date version of Racy, one on which Chrome & clones, and other or later applications requiring glibc 2.17 or beyond will run. But that may either be impossible, or require so much preliminary work that it may delay beginning a community edition for the foreseeable future.
Wanderer prefers to base the project on pUPnGo. Technosaurus thinks it possible, but goingnuts doesn't think it a good idea. And while the 4 series and earlier run well on wanderer's computers, they don't on my 3 year old quad-core 4 Gb machine. To boot pUPnGo at all, I've had to place it at the root of a Ext4 partition, as it won't boot from a folder. It is possible that placing it in a folder on a Fat32 might work. See the discussion here: http://murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?t=90820 and, in particular, keef's post: http://murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic. ... 964#744964. I don't think sacrificing either Grub4dos, or being able to run a Pup from a folder on an Ext4 partition is a good starting point for a Pup we want to call a Community Edition. Nor do I think it should be something that looks and runs as if it was twelve years old.
Iguleder has suggested basing it on slacko or wheezy. Is it time to set up a set up a questionaire and take a vote?
mikesLr
The real problem in deciding on a Community Edition, and Puppy in general, may be that "Puppy" enables too many choices. And while I agree with wanderer that a CE should take a while to mature, I disagree that there is no reason to rush, if by rush one means begin by moving it beyond a general discussion to a project we can start working on, fleshing out, testing. A month or more ago there were people primed and ready begin working. Wait long enough and that enthusiasm will evaporate.
Too many choices. It is easy to get lost in the many possibilities Puppy offers for development. I think I've made my interest clear. I think we should be trying to develop an up-to-date version of Racy, one on which Chrome & clones, and other or later applications requiring glibc 2.17 or beyond will run. But that may either be impossible, or require so much preliminary work that it may delay beginning a community edition for the foreseeable future.
Wanderer prefers to base the project on pUPnGo. Technosaurus thinks it possible, but goingnuts doesn't think it a good idea. And while the 4 series and earlier run well on wanderer's computers, they don't on my 3 year old quad-core 4 Gb machine. To boot pUPnGo at all, I've had to place it at the root of a Ext4 partition, as it won't boot from a folder. It is possible that placing it in a folder on a Fat32 might work. See the discussion here: http://murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?t=90820 and, in particular, keef's post: http://murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic. ... 964#744964. I don't think sacrificing either Grub4dos, or being able to run a Pup from a folder on an Ext4 partition is a good starting point for a Pup we want to call a Community Edition. Nor do I think it should be something that looks and runs as if it was twelve years old.
Iguleder has suggested basing it on slacko or wheezy. Is it time to set up a set up a questionaire and take a vote?
mikesLr
thanks mikeslr for keeping the faith
i read your post, i'm glad you know so much
allow me to be so bold as to start the voting
my vote is pupngo merged with 214 to begin
214 works great on 98 xp 7 and 8
and has a fantastic browser/media player combo
my second vote is anything we can get started on immediately
the beauty of pupngo is that if the 214 module doesn't work for you, we can add the stuff (kernal gtk glib) as a module that will make ce work on your machine or do what you want it to do
in my opinion pupngo (and in many ways 214) is cutting edge so we would end up with a ce we could be proud of
i have already started the pupngo 214 merge, but i have very limited skills, so i am slow. However we can post the isos and people with deeper understanding (like you mikeslr) can help and we can start immediately
oh by the way if anyone wants to post an iso or whatever on the ce repository pm me and i will pm you the stuff to access it
wanderer
i read your post, i'm glad you know so much
allow me to be so bold as to start the voting
my vote is pupngo merged with 214 to begin
214 works great on 98 xp 7 and 8
and has a fantastic browser/media player combo
my second vote is anything we can get started on immediately
the beauty of pupngo is that if the 214 module doesn't work for you, we can add the stuff (kernal gtk glib) as a module that will make ce work on your machine or do what you want it to do
in my opinion pupngo (and in many ways 214) is cutting edge so we would end up with a ce we could be proud of
i have already started the pupngo 214 merge, but i have very limited skills, so i am slow. However we can post the isos and people with deeper understanding (like you mikeslr) can help and we can start immediately
oh by the way if anyone wants to post an iso or whatever on the ce repository pm me and i will pm you the stuff to access it
wanderer
I don't remember to have published any thoughts pro/contra pUPnGo in this context...but I might be wrong though...Wanderer prefers to base the project on pUPnGo. Technosaurus thinks it possible, but goingnuts doesn't think it a good idea. And while the 4 series and earlier run well on wanderer's computers, they don't on my 3 year old quad-core 4 Gb machine. To boot pUPnGo at all, I've had to place it at the root of a Ext4 partition, as it won't boot from a folder.
The boot from ext4 (or any other basic shortcomings) might be addressed - best way to get attention is in the pUPnGO-thread - I will have a look at it - thanks.
Hi, Wanderer,
No good deed goes unpunished unfortunately ...
My only advice to you is to start new thread with your vision of this new puppy. Name it CE or what you like but start what you feel is right and makes you happy to work on. I'm sure you will find more people to help you.
Democracy doesn't work well. Don't waste your time waiting for miracle.
Best regards, Toni
No good deed goes unpunished unfortunately ...
My only advice to you is to start new thread with your vision of this new puppy. Name it CE or what you like but start what you feel is right and makes you happy to work on. I'm sure you will find more people to help you.
Democracy doesn't work well. Don't waste your time waiting for miracle.
Best regards, Toni
Iguleder could have the title "Head of R&D and Experimental Technologies".
Lobster could resume his role as PR man.
Simargl as Package Management Lead Dev.
We could have an "In-House Applications Team" featuring Zigbert and others.
Be nice to have Playdayz in some sort of role as Facilitator.
The guys from Fatdog are qualified to take over the whole project themselves also.
But wouldn't it be nice if all of those I mentioned worked together to make a traditional puppy?
Lobster could resume his role as PR man.
Simargl as Package Management Lead Dev.
We could have an "In-House Applications Team" featuring Zigbert and others.
Be nice to have Playdayz in some sort of role as Facilitator.
The guys from Fatdog are qualified to take over the whole project themselves also.
But wouldn't it be nice if all of those I mentioned worked together to make a traditional puppy?
The Way of the Samurai
-
darry1966