I use grub4dos to boot and a single ext3 partition that I backup/restore using mksquashfs and unsquashfs to/from another ext3 partition. IME, backup's of full or frugal aren't that much different if you use a high speed compression method such as lz4.backi wrote:The frugal Installations let you easily Backup and /or Restore your System in a Blink of the Eye.
Dont know if one do oneself a favor using Full Install .
Maybe there are Arguments for it .......would be interested .
The "frugal Concept " and " Saving on Demand " makes , in my Opinion ,the "Dogs " and Puppies so outstanding......and that`s why i am using and prefer them over Full Install.
Mostly I boot frugal using a partition save space (same partition as where the main sfs is). But create that frugal from a full install (that menu.lst chains to for booting purposes). So I can transition from frugal to full and vice-versa easily
cd /live
mksquashfs /mnt/sda1 filesystem.squashfs -e live
type process (when the main sfs is being stored in /live folder) to create a frugal from the full.
cd /live
unsquashfs -f -d /mnt/sda1 filesystem.squashfs
to extract the frugal sfs and make it a full boot type style again.
For my frugal boot I just have /home as being persistent (so a bit more complicated than the above) so that diary, browser, personal system configuration ...etc are preserved. I tend to only boot full style in order to apply system updates/security patches.
Using a frugal image of a full install from a top of tree provider (Debian in my case) provides the best of both worlds. A good level of security and program updates, Puppy like operation/desktop (frugal).
I moved over to that choice after DebianDog fell flat on its face. Dependency upon developers/security updates that potentially might vanish overnight. Not as lean as puppy, but by the time you add in all of the additional sfs's puppy requires to create a similar system (including kodi, libre office, video editing ...etc), and the difference isn't that much given the current capacities and inexpensive cost of large size HDD's. In a 2GB ram system I notice little difference in operational speed compared to even the lightest of puppies ... both tend to end up being ram resident one way or another such that speeds are comparable. The main differences are in the early minutes depending upon how programs become memory resident (perhaps loaded at bootup in which case boot up is slower, or on a program by program basis (program slower to load the first time its run than if already memory resident)). Overall IME that tends to wash (comparable overall operational speed when measured on a like for like basis).