Puppy Remaster Program needs updated from 18th Century

[musher0]

Fine.

Let's say -- for now, until I or someone else checks further --
that my scripts are not for older Pups.

I have other, urgent, things to do today.

BFN.

[nic007]

Last reply. Ask yourself this question and maybe something will hit home. Why do you think it's necessary to save the contents of your savefile to an adrv and not to any other made-up sfs file called pdrv.sfs or whatever, instead?

[musher0]

It's not necessary either way. Some people will be happy forever with a 9Gb pupsave.

Some other people do not like big pupsave files, but find the remaster process long,
arduous, and demanding a lot of focus and knowledge. For a newbie, I'd go as far as
saying that remastering is an anxiety generator. ("Been there, done that.")

Another factor which is important to me, but maybe not to other Puppyists, is that
remastering spoils the original Pup. I do not like remastering and try to avoid it.

That does not mean that a developer should not adapt a woof-CE product for say, the
icewm or waimea WMs, if we want to showcase them -- or Linphone, or a different
browser, or what have you. But once that variant is finalized, it should stay finalized as
much as possible.

Anyway, in my post above (q.v.), I removed my "pdrv" script until I find a replacement
for sfs_load and study the subject more.

BFN.

[nic007]

As a matter of interest here is my howto on what we have been discussing, posted many months ago: http://www.murga-linux.com/puppy/viewto ... 790#944470
I've been using my Puppys for years this way. BTW - If you keep your adrv very small (mine is about 2MB) and only use it to save configuration changes/settings (like me), you may just as well operate with a small savefile instead. A savefile is more flexible anyway as it is read and write and not read-only like an sfs file. I will however never use or recommend the use of a huge savefile. Choices, choices...

[musher0]

Hi nic007.

With a rested head, something did "hit home":

-- Absolutely all Puppies can have a zdrv_xxx.sfs

-- Absolutely all versions of mksquashfs append by default. The user has to
specify the "-no-append" parameter to squish an existing squash file. (Play on words
not really intentional!) Otherwise it appends.

Do you see where I'm going ??!! Just a thought.

If applied, of course, this raw reasoning will need to be refined. Among other things,
providing the user with a small pupsave somewhat automatically to replace the
one that has just been squashed. Plus lots of tests so everything would be down pat.

BFN.

[greengeek]

Every time I do a remaster in a puppy, I want to scream and pull my hair out at the idiocy of not being able to easily incorporate all my personal settings into the remaster (constantly dragging and dropping everything is 18th century stuff, people!!).

Remastering correctly is about asking the user the following questions:

- Do you want to keep the original puppy.sfs identical to what the developer released? (the answer IMHO should always be Yes, but in the case of current puppy remaster utilities is "NO - lets fiddle with it but call it the same name - despite the confusion this causes".

- Do you want to create a "personal sfs" which adds your personal preferences as a new layer on top of (ie dominating) the main puppy.sfs?

- Do you want to add some new personalisations on top of the previous "personal sfs created at some prior time"?

- Do you want to add some other fware, software or mods/scripts etc as an experimental layer below the main puppy.sfs just to see if they work (but withut crippling your system)?

Unfortunately there is no one remaster script that is able to work properly in all puppies because the "layering" of puppies has changed over time.

Originally the main "puppy.sfs" was the "top" layer and nothing else could superceed it (except temporarily loaded sfs files).

More lately puppies can have "xdrvs" which may sit either above or below the main puppy.sfs depending on how the initr.gz specifies the layering.

What is needed is more clarity around which layer is "top dog" and whether or not a remaster script alters the main puppy.sfs released by the dev (it should not) or only alters the other "super layers" that sit higher than the original puppy.sfs

Until the layering of the main puppy.sfs, and the personal.sfs, adrvs, zdrvs, fdrvs, and the programatically loaded sfs files is better defined there is no way that a remaster script can give the newbie (or even mildly experienced) user what they want.

It is currently "DIY"

(many thanks to nic007 for his remaster scripts - I use modified versions of them to remaster my Slacko 5.6 based system which is structured according to JRB's "empowering the zdrv" method. Newer pups have xdrvs that Slacko56 lacks so I had to follow JRBs unconventional method)

For me the system that works is:

- Keep the basic puppy.sfs pristine. Don't change it (after all that is what the dev released!! Don't bastardise it !!)
- Add your personalisations on top (steal the /initrd/pup_rw contents and make an sfs)
- Add any further personalisations (in future sessions) by also grabbing the new contents of initrd/pup_rw and adding them to the initrd/mnt/tmpfs file (which is the sfs containing your previous personalisations).

The only issue is - what is the layering system of your current pup?

If you don't know what it is then you have no chance of getting a good outcome.

So many puppies...so many layers!

But what about save files? I have no idea how best to handle them during a remaster. Why would anybody use them? What is the purpose of having a "system critical" file space that can be permanently and instantaneously corrupted by loading a single bad pet or piece of malware ???$%#!????

[musher0]

Hi greengeek.

Please find attached BarryK's README.txt included in the initrd.gz of Puppies.
I think it will answer a good number of your questions.

IHTH

[belham2]

Guys,

This is all I am trying to say:

Why is it we cannot have, just like DDogs and/or Anti-X, a beautiful, simple one screen pop-up for remastering that includes every option your heart could desire? Whether doing a full "Personal" remaster or not. Just one screen. Beautifully laid out. Simple. Clear. Concise. All simple clicks, making your choices. This exists but people keep defending the "Model T" that is the current remaster situation in all Puppys (and Woof-CE).

Why is it this beautifuly nirvana described above can be done in DDogs and Anti-X (and to a certain extent, with Nic007's scripts) but it cannot be a feature of the ALL existing puppy OSes/Woof-CE?

There should be never of this:

------forcing a user (especially "new" users) to open multiple file managers because they want to "Personalize" their remaster? How can none of you (except nic007--hence, why he created his scripts) see the modern-day stupidity and lack of ease of use in this method?? Barry always, always, assumed that people would never first want to create a "Personalized" (everything from /root & /etc), so thus the remaster-script made it hard, made it mind-numbing my heavens, having to "drag & drop" everything, for all your email. browsers, program settings/!!) & opening multiple file managers to do so. This is out-dated. I'll say it again" OUT-DATED.

This is all I am talking about.

If we didn't have nic007's scripts, or Musher being forced (God Bless him--he's always creating workarounds for us with a lot of things, witness the beginnings of Dpups!) to always come up with workarounds (adrvs, pdrvs, solar-Battlestar-Galactica-drvs....good heavens!!!), I would QUIT all puppy OSes completely.

Someone, or someone(s), have created a better mousetrap with regards to remastering. Remastering should ALL be controlled from one beautiful pop-up screen, for any option a user could desire, and then it is off & running. This is not currently the case, yet it exists in DDogs, in Anti-X/MX-Linux (and to a certian extent with Nic007's stuff).

But to defend the current setup with remastering as "modern", or "user-friendly" and/or anything other than a clicking-dragging-dropping "pain the a##", is the miss the forest for the trees.


P.S. On a lighter note: Greengeek, when we getting a new, fully updated Banksy?

[musher0]

As luck would have it, this doc about remastering AntiX comes without
any illustrations, so we still do not know what belham2 is in awe about!

Same thing for AntiX' big brother, MXLinux.

If someone can come up with illustrations, please do.

I'm telling you in advance that I will not attempt to code anyhing. I don't
have the talent for pretty interfaces, plus my idea of an ideal interface is
an rxvt window with a numbered menu!

But i believe wiak has found an easy "language" to produce pretty
interfaces, so maybe someone with the talent could use it?

[greengeek]

Please find attached BarryK's README.txt included in the initrd.gz of Puppies. I think it will answer a good number of your questions.

Thanks musher - indeed that readme offers a lot of info that is highly relevant to anyone wishing to effectively remaster their pup.

Obviously not the original file as written by BarryK though - it contains references to much later inclusions, and reveals the fact that the layered sfs files are not identical (or present) on all pups.

This is at the heart of why remastering is fraught with difficulties.

System files do not belong in the savefile layer, they only belong in the main puppy.sfs. If the user wants to add personalisations they belong in either a personal.sfs or the save file. No-one should be encouraged to drag and drop files confusing the different system/userspace areas.

An effective remaster script must take into account the particular layering arrangement used by the specific pup it is used in. As well as taking into account what the user intends to achieve. One script won't fit all.

I don't agree with remastering the main puppy.sfs - except where it is done to eliminate errors or add new features or functionality - and that process should be done by the dev or by the woof-CE process. Shouldnt be part of userspace.

All other "remastering" should be aimed at the personal.sfs only (whichever of the xdrvs represents the personal.sfs....)

when we getting a new, fully updated Banksy?

Good question. It's still cooking. (Just last week i completed the "progressive personal sfs remaster" script that has been plaguing me for two years. It's a work in progress)

[musher0]

Hi greengeek.

You say:

> I don't agree with remastering the main puppy.sfs - except where it is
done to eliminate errors or add new features or functionality - and that
process should be done by the dev or by the woof-CE process. Shouldn't
be part of userspace.

I'll second that. Any fanciful type of surgery on Puppies should be
reported to the SPCA and be punishable by law!

Of course remastering shrinks a big pupsave to +/- 40 % of its original
size, and disk space may be a concern for some. But then the user can
make his/her pupsave into a regular sfs and gain the same 60 % space.

BFN.

[anticapitalista]

As luck would have it, this doc about remastering AntiX comes without
any illustrations, so we still do not know what belham2 is in awe about!

Same thing for AntiX' big brother, MXLinux.

If someone can come up with illustrations, please do.

How about a video instead?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LpI_a4xPKdM

[anticapitalista]

As luck would have it, this doc about remastering AntiX comes without
any illustrations, so we still do not know what belham2 is in awe about!

Same thing for AntiX' big brother, MXLinux.

If someone can come up with illustrations, please do.

How about a video instead, around 4 mins 40?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LpI_a4xPKdM

sorry for the double post

[dancytron]

Guys,

This is all I am trying to say:

Why is it we cannot have, just like DDogs and/or Anti-X, a beautiful, simple one screen pop-up for remastering that includes every option your heart could desire?
/snip lots of stuff/

At least in the case of Debian Dog, the reason that Fred can make his remaster program so simple is that it attempts to do much less than the Puppy equivalent.

The puppy remaster attempts to return the /root and /etc folder to their defaults (with the new stuff you added) while giving you a chance to modify that pre-programmed stuff manually. For /etc it gives you the choice of your own hardware configurations, the defaults, or modify it manually.

Fred's version doesn't do any of that. It just deletes the stuff it knows you don't want in the remaster and lets you delete more stuff manually. That reduces the complexity a lot.

To change the subject, there is some discussion upthread, that the remaster program should leave the puppy.sfs file alone and just create a whatever.sfs with the changes in it. While that seems like a great program to have, to me that isn't remastering and shouldn't replace what we have. It is something totally different.

[musher0]

-- About transforming large pupsaves
into sfs archives approximately 2/3 smaller --

(Please read everything in this post before you proceed.)

Let's say, for the sake of argument, that we have a huge 2.5Gb pupsave
named slimsave_bodelibop.3fs, which is half full, in our slim 6 directory.
~~~~~~~~~~~
If you may be interested in slim6, a fine slacko-6 derivative, it is here:
Slim6: http://archive.org/download/Puppy_Linux ... slim-6.iso
Thread: http://murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic. ... 446#885257
~~~~~~~~~~~

Back to our situation --
Sadly, we cannot keep our pupsave as it is, we need to free some space
on our thumb drive.

First we back everything up. Yes, everything. We do not want to be
caught up a certain creek without a paddle. Understood? (Rule no 1 of
computing, my friends, on any OS, is: back up, back up, back up.) The
easiest way may be to back-up the whole directory.

We open a console in the dir. where the bodelibop pupsave is located.

We make a back-up of the main globicons file, like so:

Code: Select all

cp -f /root/.config/rox.sourceforge.net/ROX-Filer/globicons /root/.config/rox.sourceforge.net/ROX-Filer/globicons.bckp

We type (if you're smart, you'll copy each line, after highlighting it, with
Ctrl-C and then paste it in the console with a middle click of your mouse):

Code: Select all

mount -t ext3 -o loop slimsave_bodelibop.3fs /mnt/zip

/mnt/zip exists in all Puppies, and it is never used. So it is safe to populate it.
(It is a relic from the time of the physical ZIP drives. Remember those?)
If your PC does not have much RAM, it may be safer to change the above
one-liner to:

Code: Select all

mkdir /mnt/home/bodelibop;mount -t ext3 -o loop slimsave_bodelibop.3fs /mnt/home/bedelibop

Once that is done, still in our console, we type:

Code: Select all

mksquashfs /mnt/zip/ bodelibop.sfs -noappend -all-root -b 1048576 -comp xz -Xdict-size 100%

If you are using the alternative directory at /mnt/home/bedelibop/,
this one-liner becomes:

Code: Select all

mksquashfs /mnt/home/bodelibop/ bodelibop.sfs -noappend -all-root -b 1048576 -comp xz -Xdict-size 100%

It takes a couple of minutes. The resulting sfs should be around 400 Mb,
~ 1/6th of its original size.

Now we don't close that console right away... We check if we have the
bodelibop.sfs archive, by typing:

Code: Select all

ls -Algo bodelibop.sfs

If we do, we type:

Code: Select all

umount /mnt/zip

to unmount the zip directory, we do not need it anymore. Or

Code: Select all

umount /mnt/home/bodelibop

if you used this other mount point.

We do not erase that bodelibop pupsave file just yet. We need a new
pupsave file to replace the one we will not be using anymore, say of 192
Mb, to be comfortable. So...

we download the attached,
unzip it it in your Puppy directory,
make it executable -- by typing

Code: Select all

chmod +x psave-192M-2fs-a.sh

and run it -- by typing

Code: Select all

./psave-192M-2fs-a.sh

This creates a pupsave named "arf" in the current directory, with the
proper prefix (indicating your current Pup).

Now we exit this console and reboot the current Pup.

Important -- Upon reboot, choose the new pupsave, the one with
"arf" in the name, NOT your old bodelibop one.

You should now be back in your Pup.

If your desktop icons look funny, open a console and run line 22 of the
psave script. I.e.:

Code: Select all

gdk-pixbuf-query-loaders --update-cache

If some other details of your desktop seem jumbled, or the time on the
taskbar clock is wrong, do not try to fix them at this point: it is because
your new sfs file has not been loaded yet. So...

Still from that console, we type:

Code: Select all

sfs_load

and mount the bodelibop.sfs from the drop-down list on the left. sfs_load
will ask you if you wish to run one of the executables in bodelibop.sfs. At
this point, it may be best to answer "no" and to exit sfs_load.

Now we reboot again, and this time, all the content of our former
bodelibop pupsave should be available. Now is the moment to adjust
details on your desktop, if any need adjusting. Also, if some icons are still
looking funny on your desktop, type:

Code: Select all

cp -f /root/.config/rox.sourceforge.net/ROX-Filer/globicons.bckp /root/.config/rox.sourceforge.net/ROX-Filer/globicons

You may have to type Ctrl-Alt-BackSpace and then

Code: Select all

xwin

to get all the icons to appear correctly. (To restart X, in other words.)

Then try out all the executables that you used in your old pupsave, to be
sure. Try to be thorough. Once you are quite sure (I repeat: quite sure)
that everything is ok, you may erase your old bodelibop.3fs pupsave. (Or
zip it and keep it as reference.)

~~~~~~~~~~~
Try the above procedure. Nothing bad can happen, you have made back-
ups (right?) that you can use if you need to revert to the previous state.

I'll be watching for your comments and even mouthfuls!!!

TWYL.
~~~~~~~~~~~
PS. -- I made the above pseudo-code tutorial long and tedious on
purpose. Besides developing, Puppy developers have the moral duty
of combating laziness in users.

[Moat]

... there is some discussion upthread, that the remaster program should leave the puppy.sfs file alone and just create a whatever.sfs with the changes in it. While that seems like a great program to have, to me that isn't remastering and shouldn't replace what we have. It is something totally different.

I agree - the fundamental reason for remastering in the first place is to modify the main puppy .sfs. Installing or removing wanted/un-wanted applications, for example, naturally involves modifying system files - remastering allows "baking" those system changes permanently into the main puppy .sfs, instead of relying on layered changes via savefile/folder or adrv/zdrv/ydrv/etc. to apply those system changes.

Otherwise, for example, removing say Seamonkey, Abiword and Gnumeric in favor of Firefox and FreeOffice would mean that the massive binaries/libs/blobs for Seamonkey, Abiword and Gnumeric would stay put in the main .sfs, adding greatly to it's size - completely unused and undesired. The current remastering removes 'em (by reading .whiteout files in the save, I believe, and applying those deletions during rebuilding of the main .sfs).

Not quite sure what you guys are thinking there...

IMHO - the current puppy remaster script would be notably streamlined by simply automating (as default) the phase of copying over the currently running Pup's '/etc/' and '/root/' directories' contents into '/temp/etc/' and '/temp/root/' (instead of as it is now - having to drag/copy manually, overwriting contents of those two '/temp/' dirs as initially copied from the 'target' ISO... why??). That, and automatically finding & deleting that pesky .XLOADED file. Maybe delete the thumbnails cache and clipboard while at it.

Bingo - done! A single-click remaster. Of course, leaving the "pause" option to allow manually modifying those dir's contents (although, aside from that pesky .XLOADED file, I find any further modifying is completely unnecessary - as long as the currently running system is exactly as I want it...).

Doesn't seem like those changes to the existing remaster utility would be too hard to accomplish... but then again, I'm no coder - so what do I know!!

And as much as I like (!) MX Linux, I find the remaster & USB creation utilities - although extremely powerful and flexible - quite confusing/unclear (frankly too many un-intuitive, irrelevant and somewhat poorly described/documented options); if it wasn't for belham himself walking us through some of it in the "Other Distros" thread (thx, belham!), I'm not sure I'd have gotten it all working (and I did spend quite a bit of time perusing the official documentation/videos). Sorry... just my take.

Bob

[belham2]

Awwee, for crissakes, people, are yee all addled? Has the world gone blind? Mad? I dunno, I guess, given recent elections around the world. But here, regarding remastering: WHAT in blue blazes are you all talking about, and trying to defend? AntiX and/or ddog remastering confusing????? Crikey.......get the wax out of ur brains

How can this one screenshot (below, from all DDogs) be any clearer about how much more this remaster script is beautiful, simple, clear, concise, with all choices from one screen (and AntiX/MX-Linux is no different, which I will post pictures of once I get home). The choice to do a "Personal" vs "Non-Personal" remaster is one click. How is that confusing and/or not clear? How is that not light years ahead of the current puppy remaster scripts requiring opening several file managers, dragging & dropping all sorts of crap from the existing /root & /etc to the puppylivecdbuild folder?? That method (the current remaster scripts in Puppies) is old, passe', and idiotic given recent developments. And it is definitely NOT friendly to any new user of Puppies who want to do remasters. Come on, guys, we gave up bows & arrows long ago when defending the walls. For example, Wiak took the confusing and obtuse woof-CE build process and made it simple enough my kids can do it. This is no different. The Puppy Remaster situation needs brought into the 21st century.

I can only assume from reading comments here (save for Nic007's) that you guys cannot be on the same planet talking about this same stuff. And Nic007's wouldn't even exist if these short-comings weren't so glaring . Damn, you old codgers (of which I am one but one who welcomes new, better * improved things), quit defending the old and possibly consider a better mousetrap has been built with regards to 'remastering' and we should implement it in puppies. Last time I checked, we weren't still driving around in Model Ts and going out back to use the Outhouse for a bathroom

[Moat]

Oh, I fully agree about the DDog's remaster utility - it's great!! Easy as pie... and fast...

But no - MX's "Personal" vs. "Non-Personal" is not clear... e.g.; including '/home/' or '/root/', or both. If I change an OS in any way, I've "personalized" it - and want to remaster... why would I not want to include either '/home/' or '/root/'? Especially if installed applications could very well have (unknowingly) installed files in both locations? And IIRC, MX's description of '/root/' in that context was consistently unclear as to what '/root/' meant exactly... e.g.; what about files in other locations outside of '/root/' (i.e. - '/usr/bin/' or '/etc/' or '/usr/share/', etc.)? Redundant meanings/actions, and inexact in description - let alone considering their dev's own definition of just what "personal" might mean.

That's the vibe I walked away with, anyway.

For example (this is all from foggy memory from a few months ago...); I spent quite a bit of time doing all of my preferred Firefox 'about:config' tweaks and installation and setup of my favorite FF addons. Did a full, personal remaster selecting both '/home/' and '/root/'... and all of my Firefox tweaks and addons did not carry over into the new remaster - FF had completely reverted to it's default, freshly-installed self. I had to waste time digging around (maybe Googling the MX/AntiX forum, IIRC) to find info relating to a config file for the remaster program, where changes to Firefox are ignored during remaster by default (makes no sense) - and modify the config's entries to suit.

Somebody's (wrong!) interpretation of what "personal" means, IOW. I tweaked... and the remaster failed to reflect those tweaks. An undocumented config modification, too, as far as I recall.

So no - all is not rosy in MX remastering (among other things), IMHO. Great potential, but could use some further polish (just like anything, in Linux Land).

Bob

[nic007]

belham2, this thread is long and starting to hurt my head. Can you please as a matter of summary report what you can not achieve with the builtin remaster script of puppy (as far as remastering puppy is concerned). Ddog is not a puppy as far as I know so puppys remastering script won't work for Ddog and ddogs script wont work for puppy. Am I correct? What can you achieve with Ddog's script that you can't with puppys builtin script? Can you choose to personalise or not to personalise your settings with the Ddog script/does the script for instance allow you to go on and make an ISO and burn it to CD? Puppys script is rather comprehensive to cater for many scenarios. And lastly - have you tried my remaster suite which I released in July last year which makes things a bit easier for you because you can choose exactly what you want to do. One of the scripts is even automatic ie, there is no user input required, it remasters the base sfs with your personal settings by default (how easy is that). Waiting for your reply, thanks.

[musher0]

Fine. Have it your way. I will report you both to the International SPCA
for cruelty to Puppies.

Plus belham2 will be charged for witholding evidence from us in his OP
and for sending me personally on a Canadian Goose Chase for
remastering pics in AntiX and MXLinux docs and elsewhere, when said
Goose was not Canadian at all, and needed pics nowhere in sight. Rest
assured I will file a complaint against you at the Wild Goose Council,
Canadian chapter.

Yeah, moat, remastering is simple as pie. As Dougal tried to tell us as
he left, remastering Puppyists do not need a script, they need well-oiled
neurones (5-40 is All-Season; Synthetic Oil is ok too) and a basic
knowledge of the command line. He forgot to mention the role of the
Superior Power in all of this, though...

You want to remove SeaMonkey?
Step 1) back-up the poor Puppy Victim. Say one Our Father and one Hail
Mary first, out of respect; this is a sacred operation;

Code: Select all

cp -f puppy_xxx.sfs puppy_xxx.sfs.bckp

Step 2)unsquash poor Puppy Victim; a Hail Be the Father, etc., is in
order at this point;

Code: Select all

unsquashfs -d Puppy_Victim puppy_xxx.sfs

Step 3) remove SeaMonkey; no prayer necessary, this is a lay program.
Enter the Puppy_Victim directory and type:

Code: Select all

rm -rf usr/lib/seamonkey

Add Firefox: you never, ever, ever add anything so big to a Puppy.
You download Firefox from the Mozilla site, you unpack it at /mnt/home
and you leave it there. However, in console, you type:

Code: Select all

ln -s /mnt/home/firefox/firefox /usr/bin/firefox

Voilà how you integrate it.

Step 4) you resquash the Puppy_Victim; you need to say another prayer
here, but the choice is yours

Code: Select all

mksquashfs Puppy_Victim/ puppy_xxx.sfs -comp xz -noappend -all-root

plus any squash compression parameter trick you may know.

Please do not remaster on any holiday of any religion. You may end up
in Hell at the end of your days if you do. Ok on strictly Civic Holidays.

First advantage of the above procedure: it keeps things separate.
You will notice that the above procedure keeps your pupsave file intact,
it does not touch it. And that's exactly the idea. If you keep the two
separate, you do not have the anxiety and the resulting mess of "OMG,
I included my personal parms in the remaster!" And then you cannot
share your new Pup with anyone.

Second advantage: if you do not erase the Puppy_Victim directory, you
can trim it again and again and again, thus saving you a lot of time.

Important:
Mutatis mutandis, and use at your own risk -- GPL3 style, but
above you have the basics of a clean and simple Puppy remaster. If you
need to shrink your pupsave, that's a different story altogether: please
read my tutorial a couple of posts up.

Finally, come to think of it, RemasterX is NOT the best remastering tool
shinobar produced. But I can't find it at the moment, I have to dig
deeper in my personal bazaar.

BFN.