corepup

[Sailor Enceladus]

With pups, there are always problems. Stuff never boots correctly, so had to learn about boot codes, grub, parameters, etc. When one does load, the desktop is sometimes quite screwed up, so had to learn about configuring display & desktop managers & how they interact with everything. Or, icons go missing or were never installed or linked to nothing, so had to learn about how to create links, .desktop files, etc. Wireless? Nooo way, it never works correctly, so had to learn about compiling. What's that program?? It crashes the pup when I start it. So, trying to get rid of crap programs causing problems, I had to learn about remastering. And on and on……..the nuts & bolts falling off these puppies is endless. In 10-12 months, I’ve gotten an education I would never have otherwise ever encountered.

But Tinycore? 10-12 months ago, I still loved it. Now? Today?? I hate Tinycore. Why? Everything always works with it. Nothing ever breaks down. No matter what I do to it, I cannot crash Tinycore (I proudly note every puppy and/or pup-related distro I’ve tried, I have crashed it---just fantastic!). But not Tinycore. The dam# thing is stable, so i hate it. Breakdown you Tiny piece of crap! Give me something to do!! In resignation, I usually shut it down, and grab one of the many pup SD cards I’ve lying around, boot that up, and go in, and something is usually happening (wrongly) right away with it....and at that moment, everything is right with the world once again. I feel calm, like an old friend, a drunkard, but still a friend, is sitting beside me.

Wireless didn't work for me in Tinycore, but it did in Puppy, same with everything else in Puppy, that's actually why I stuck with Puppy lol, maybe it was because my laptops were older Pentium M generation though (back around puppy420 to slacko56 I think). Wireless does not work any more with newest puppies though, but luckily I understand more now and know how to fix it (just install firmware-cut back into the kernel! yes). I guess YMMV, but my experience was pretty much the opposite of yours.

[greengeek]

.. but the developers move on to next target... you need to duplicate a micko to keep slacko for slackware 13.13 (2011) up to date with current code and essential apps....

But why is this the case? Lets say I find a recent app that I want to use - and lets say it wants a lib called "lixkbcommon.0.5.0" and it can't find it because it is a lib my pup never had.

What do I do?

How hard is it to do a "preload" and tell that program to find its lib in a special directory somewhere. Would any version of that lib be ok (if statically linked via "preload")? Does it take effort from 01micko to set up that preload? Or does it take someone to make a "static" version of that program?? Or does it need someone to recompile the appropriate lib on my version of puppy?

Perhaps all we need is more clarity around how to extend the life of what we know already works on our specific hardware.

I have a gut feeling that we could extend the life of each puppy (without bothering the devs) if we did the following:

1) Defined how to swap to a newer kernel
2) Explained how to add a new driver (module) into an older pup
3) Explained how to make a newer app run with newer libs, inside an older pup by using "static" methods or in fact any other method that works.

In the old days we just used to await a newer pup in order to support new hardware or programs but these days - where the big manufacturers actually WANT to make it hard for us to make Linux run on secondhand hardware - shouldn't we look for ways to AVOID swapping our pups? Shouldn't we ensure longevity of what we have already come to know?

Is it possible?

[Robert123]

Hope it is greengeek because I'm sick in tired of Gtk3 bullshit and Pulse audio and all the other crap and what has been put forward here sounds very exciting. I will follow the thread with interest.

[bark_bark_bark]

Hope it is greengeek because I'm sick in tired of Gtk3 bullshit and Pulse audio and all the other crap and what has been put forward here sounds very exciting. I will follow the thread with interest.

I don't like pulseaudio or GTK3 too, but I think GTK3 is becoming more and more necessary to have as time goes on. As much as Slackware developers wanted to avoid pulseaudio, there just came a point when they didn't have much of a choice and they had to add it.

[jamesbond]

Slackware added PulseAudio because with bluez5, the bluez team removed bluetooth support for ALSA. So you can't stream your music to an external bluetooth speaker anymore, unless you use pulseaudio.

But in reality, there are other ways to do it. I wrote an alternative way to stream sound to bluetooth external speaker that doesn't use the built-in ALSA driver in bluez4, and from comments I've received it's rather easy to port this to bluez5 too. With this, you can still have bluetooth streaming without pulseaudio, ever.

I guess nobody told alienbob about this.

__________________________

But why is this the case? Lets say I find a recent app that I want to use - and lets say it wants a lib called "lixkbcommon.0.5.0" and it can't find it because it is a lib my pup never had.

What do I do?

How hard is it to do a "preload" and tell that program to find its lib in a special directory somewhere.

Easy, just put the path in /etc/ld.so.conf and then run "ldconfig". All the libs in the given path will be considered for use. Alternatively, add the path to LD_LIBRARY_PATH and you're good to go too.

Would any version of that lib be ok

The version that is "ok" is the version that is required by the app you want to use (that depends on that lib). Headache starts when program #1 require libs version 5 and program #2 require libs version 6; this is when you need to get creative and make use LD_LIBRARY_PATH for program #1 includes the dir that contains lib version 5; and LD_LIBRARY_PATH for program #2 includes the dir that contains lib version 6.

(if statically linked via "preload")?

Pedantic: you link anything that is an .so using either ld.so.conf or LD_LIBRARY_PATH above, it's "dynamic" and not "static".

I have a gut feeling that we could extend the life of each puppy (without bothering the devs) if we did the following:

1) Defined how to swap to a newer kernel

Easy on the newer puppies with support for "huge" kernel, just get the pair of vmlinuz and zdrv.sfs (I think) that contains the kernel modules/firmware and you're good to go.

2) Explained how to add a new driver (module) into an older pup

Difficult if nobody has the modules compiled for you, you'll need to compile it yourself and while there is a standard instruction on how to do it, it doesn't always work (esp. proprietary modules are prone to use their own "build script").

If somebody already compiled a module for you, it's a matter of putting that module to /lib/modules/kernel-version/misc and run "depmod -a". Sometimes, you also need to blacklist an existing module (that supports the same hardware as your new moduel); sometimes you also need to add a new firmware - path depends on the hardware but generally it lives in /lib/firmware.

3) Explained how to make a newer app run with newer libs, inside an older pup by using "static" methods or in fact any other method that works.

Not straightforward. LD_PRELOAD is your friend, but if you need a new glibc then you're not toast. Well, not exactly toast, but either you have to update glibc or you just tricks like the on described in my wiki.

[wanderer]

thats the advantage of using tinycore as a base

it takes into account both old and new hardware

it is being actively updated

its modular so you can use only what you want

its easy to work on

its only one iso/base so our efforts can be focused

the core is very small so it can be downloaded easily

it has the same philosophy as puppy

and can be easily puppified

its not taking away from puppy but adding to it

i think it should be added to the puppy universe

and thats what i am doing

think about it

wanderer

[watchdog]

I just use any puppy as a complete standalone and static distro which I can change for my needs just installing a savefile or using an adrv.sfs for recent puppies and without care for woof-ce building process (too complex for me). Changing the main sfs is another option to build a base puppy without using the "remove builtin packages" menu item. You can add to the main sfs few softwares without going through remaster. In the past I tried tinycore: I was not greatly satisfied for the "cloud" philosophy. I like puppy just as it is. Now I am still using puppy4 with great satisfaction with some glibc tweaking.

[anikin]

Hi wanderer,

What's wrong with Debian Live/Debian Dog? We have already accumulated some collective knowledge and expertise in that area. Why not expand on what we already have? Me thinks this chain "Debian/Devuan/Ubuntu et friends" is a much more feasible option for the next generation Puppy as opposed to TC.

[wanderer]

hi anikin

great to hear from you

yes its a very good system
as are the old and new puppies

but i am worried about structure and support

it has to be very easy to modify
so that lesser mortals (like me) can play with it
debian is harder to mod than tinycore

and it has to have smarter guys supporting it
because dumb guys (like me) cant do very much
all the puppy geniuses have their own thing
and don't have time to work on a community project
but tinycore has ongoing support and updates
so we can rely on that to keep it going

in addition tinycore has a branch called dcore
that supports debian
and maybe that can tie in with debian-dog

so for me tinycore seems like a good all round option
and then when its puppified
it should benefit both distros

oh by the way the core file in tinycore
is really the same as puppys main sfs file

the tcz files in tinycore are really the same
as puppys sfs files

and the home file in tinycore is really the same
as puppys save file

the same philosophy and
pretty much the same (conceptual) structure


wanderer

[greengeek]

the core is very small so it can be downloaded easily

it has the same philosophy as puppy

and can be easily puppified

its not taking away from puppy but adding to it

In what specific ways would it be puppified? What actually defines a puppy?
It used to require the rox/jwm combo. Is that still the case (in BKs eyes?) and would that translate to TC?

[wanderer]

tinycore has the jwm rox2 option
as well as
abiword geany leafpad (i put in gtkedit and e3)
emelfm1 and emelfm2
firefox and firefoxESR
vlc
viewnoir
busybox ash bash
gcc tcc
nasm
etc
most of the basic stuff in puppy

but what really makes a puppy
is the involvement of the puppy community
its their creative and innovative input
puppy has taken many forms over the years
but its the people and ideas that make it unique
this is just a great base for a new version of puppy (and tinycore)

wanderer

[backi]

Cool rant,,,,, wanderer !!!

This is quite motivating.....,,,,, so,,.. keep on rocking!! ...

[wanderer]

so here is the deal guys

who's up for making a community edition of puppy
starting with a tinycore base

if you want to follow this
post a comment on this thread
and say hi

the first step is to go to the tinycore site
download the iso and read (as much as you want to)
of the the documentation

then come back to this thread and post you thoughts and ideas

all are welcome
remember everyone is part of our community
do not be afraid
if an idiot like me can figure this out
anyone can

see you all soon

wanderer

[backi]

I am no Linux-Puppy expert ....just a bloody beginner ..... so i can not contribute much to that experiment... except testing .

...but i like your proposal....
it sounds new and fresh and enthusiastic.

I think this is somehow the meaning of ,let me call it ... "Puppy Spirit ".
The Power of the Puppy Community .

Thumbs up !

[wanderer]

backi

great to have you with us

you do us great honor by being the first to join

thanks for your support

wanderer

[oui]

wanderer, not angry, Puppy is ill.

see pls what did happen with the LazY generation...

nobody did see that it is the most modern Linux concept at all.

nobody did help Rainer to transmit his great knowledge to some kind of «woof»

we get absurd variants of Puppy one after the next, but you can not any more build a powerful complete environment with Puppy because the tree of Puppy variants is to big and the errors are never eradicated...

BK did in the past specify in tutors what is the way.

this GREAT tools is now old and not directly applicable to new versions, so that new and young users like baki seems to be have major difficulties to enter the system.

The last Puppy base (in the past named "onebone" or so!) starting as iso really for use in RAM? It is a long time...

[wanderer]

oui

i just realized what you are saying

yes there are many variants
and much work seems to get lost
but i really dont think one size can fit all

i tried a lot of the variants and none of them worked on my system
in fact everything after 217 that Barry K made
did not work well for me

ttuuxx's TOP 9 worked great for many years
but then the browser got out of date

i tried to use woof and actually built 3 distros
but each took a whole day and had stuff missing at the end
and i couldnt tell what was happening because it was all automated

i dont think a giant program to build everything is the way to go

the idea of linux is many small pieces
that can be put together in an infinite number of ways

it took me a day to understand tinycore
and a couple of minutes to modify it

until the woof-ce guys make a program
to transparently builds a minimal base
and then adds things incrementally
most people will not be able to use it
or even figure it out

until then tinycore fits the bill

in fact tinycore is actually a better design
because i feel the union file thing is a flaw

as to how many people need to be involved in each project
to make it a success the answer is 1
and for this project
that person is me
and now i have backi to annoy

however
it would be nice if you gave us your input
because you possess great expertise in this area

hope to hear from you soon

wanderer

[Sailor Enceladus]

so here is the deal guys

who's up for making a community edition of puppy
starting with a tinycore base

So you mean like Slacko and Tahr, but with Tinycore repositories instead? Or does tinycore use repositories from somewhere else? I'm very confused by what you're even asking. Puppy is the base, what would go on top if you use tiny "core"? I looked at the tinycore page and it said the version with wireless was now 106MB, but the one without is 16MB. Where's the logic in that?

we get absurd variants of Puppy one after the next, but you can not any more build a powerful complete environment with Puppy because the tree of Puppy variants is to big and the errors are never eradicated...

I don't know any "absurd variants" and they generally don't have any big errors. Sounds like an empty rant based on nothing.

[wanderer]

hi sailor

tinycore has its own repositories of tcz extensions
and its members build them
like puppys sfs files

dcore uses debian repositories
which are made into tcz
(in this case they are called sce)

the core is very small
but as you add stuff of course things get bigger

its not the final size that matters
since everyone will determine what they want

what matters is that the core is very small and simple
and the additions are modular
so that every piece can be built and maintained
in a straight forward manner

what i am suggesting is that everyone who is interested
go to the tinycore site
download the iso and play with it
and then post on this thread their ideas and observations

i have made 3 tcz which are sfs files
its very easy to do

any puppy sfs or pet could be made into a tcz file
and then used in tinycore
also the core can be modified and puppy stuff can be added there

its also important that this be a community project
and anyone can participate
by modifying something
or just adding their opinion
otherwise i would never have started this thread
and would have just done this on my own

I look forward to hear from everyone who is interested

wanderer

[backi]

Hi wanderer !
I think there is a lot of truth in oui`s comment above .Especially regarding Rainers Lazy Puppy.

I dont see your efforts and what you are saying so negative as Sailor Encladus reply to oui`s comment about " absurd Puppy variants ".
It is not meant to degrade other puppies or the work of other people here.... i know .......i see this more as a bit of "provokation" to stimulate people to get off their asses ....and do experimenting in a new direction ( as these guys from Debian Dog and Mint Dog project did .My deepest respect for them).The main problem with DebDog and MintDog..... is.... they almost work perfect .
So i am looking for something new ...a new day ...a new challenge .

Puppi is a work in progress .
I have to use my "intuition " my seventh sense somehow ..because of a lack of technical understanding....your ideas are just alerting my " senses ".
Maybe what you achieve to do will fail somehow .But it has some pioneer spirit .
You have a lot of arguments ....i am not the One to prove them wrong or right .
But one thing is for sure ......no one can accuse you of " you did not even try "
Nevertheless ...Puppy community and Forum i think is the best of them all .Best people ,best support ,first class ... i really like it .
There are some interesting experiments going on from rufwoof in his project
making Debian or Ubuntu frugal and to puppify them .
Have a look here :
http://www.murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?t=107753