Woof at Github

[Deacon]

Hi Devs,

As you are now perhaps the most important group taking Puppy into the future, your consideration of the opinions which may be expressed on this thread, http://murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic. ... 875#740875 would be appreciated, and your input welcomed.
I would also welcome any thoughts you may entertain regarding my post which suggested the need for that thread, http://murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic. ... 863#740863.

mikesLr

This is just my opinion and I'm no dev here, just a fan of Puppy, but -- time and place. There's already a few threads to discuss the future of Puppy including the ones you mnetioned. This is a thread for devs to put on the shoes and make the next Puppy work.

Barry just officially retired; but he's impressed with the fact that these folks managed to put together what appears to be a new release on their own. But the new Slacko's *still in alpha*. This community needs to become truly self-reliant first and finish Slacko 5.7, and presumably a new version of Precise.

Puppy has over 1,000 derivative versions because our community loves taking its simplicity and running with it. And that's really cool, but I don't think it should be a focus when some of our top people are trying to debug and update what we have at the core to keep Puppy mature and stable.

Do I like the current interface? I don't like ANY current interface on any distro. I was designing a GUI for the desktop using Cairo-dock on my own respin to one day bring to a deriv of Puppy. But I am not pushing it because right now we need to allow our best devs to take the reins and move us to next phase.

It seems you like the ideals of Puppy but disagree with the implementation of the main form it takes. I agree with you on some level-- a lot of people do-- but the beauty of what we have with Puppy (and all the derivs) is our ability to modify it. If we pull overworked volunteer devs into these debates on their development thread it's a recipe for nothing getting done; and if we don't have that, then we'll have a discussion board and no Puppy.

I'm sure that's not your intent, but my opinion again... time and place. If you want to discuss that, I'll be glad to discuss it on the other thread.

[mavrothal]

This is a thread for devs to put on the shoes and make the next Puppy work.

Actually this is a thread to let people know that the puppy building system, woof, is continuing after BK's retirement (from woof).
More important that is wellcoming contributions from anyone that has a good proposal coded and can provide patches against the current woof-tree.

The actual look and feel of the produced puppies depends on the developer that makes it and the applications (s)he chooses to put in.
Woof has actually very few apps that the user sees. Mostly the many wizards and other little gtk-dialog apps (the zigbets is currently revitalizing) and PPM. Neither ROX nor JWM is part of woof, beyond the option to install them in a puppy.
So, if something in woof does not allow desired packages to be included, then this is a woof issue relevant to this thread.
If we do not like the packages included in a puppy this is not related to woof and this thread, but to the specific pupplet.

[Deacon]

This is a thread for devs to put on the shoes and make the next Puppy work.

Actually this is a thread to let people know that the puppy building system, woof, is continuing after BK's retirement (from woof).
More important that is wellcoming contributions from anyone that has a good proposal coded and can provide patches against the current woof-tree.

The actual look and feel of the produced puppies depends on the developer that makes it and the applications (s)he chooses to put in.
Woof has actually very few apps that the user sees. Mostly the many wizards and other little gtk-dialog apps (the zigbets is currently revitalizing) and PPM. Neither ROX nor JWM is part of woof, beyond the option to install them in a puppy.
So, if something in woof does not allow desired packages to be included, then this is a woof issue relevant to this thread.
If we do not like the packages included in a puppy this is not related to woof and this thread, but to the specific pupplet.

Thank you! Most of what you said is above my pay-grade but it's good to know when this thread can be used for criticism.

Sorry mikeslr!

[gcmartin]

One of the missing components I have observed in Puppy (although other Linux too) is some "standard" way of maintaining a list of the products included and their version numbers. In the manufacturing industry, this is called a Manifest.

The PPM ONLY shows those products that a user has installed to the base system.

And, if one is available in the system, is there a way to have a reporting utility which anyone can used to see the present system's apps and versionings?

Lastly, if no such utility exist, could something like HardInfo be extended or could the PPM be extended or is a brand-new approach required in the system to enable a scan report of the system's apps?

I think this is being requested in the correct place for having any system generated to have its manifest included in the outcome of the final system.

Here to help

[mavrothal]

One of the missing components I have observed in Puppy (although other Linux too) is some "standard" way of maintaining a list of the products included and their version numbers. In the manufacturing industry, this is called a Manifest.

It actually does in /root/.packages/woof-installed-packages, while all the files of each package is in /root/.packages/builtin.
Some utilities use it, like remove-builtins, while the code to show them in a UI form is already present is the woof building UI.
I guess it could be made to a stand alone app and make a pet.
Any takers?

[bigpup]

From Barry's blog:
http://bkhome.org/news/?viewDetailed=00012

I want to greatly reduce the clutter at my Quirky hosting site at ibiblio.org. this place:
http://distro.ibiblio.org/quirky/

For the guys building pups with woof-CE, it grabs PETs from 'pet_packages-common', 'pet_packages-noarch' and 'pet_packages-wary5' especially.

In "noarch" and "common" directories, there are many PETs that are created by various developers, such as Sigmund's Pmusic and rcrsn51's peasyGlue, but I am not keeping the repo up-to-date with the latest PETs.

Therefore, I want to mark these repos as deprecated, and it would be good if the woof-CE guys could copy them somewhere else and maintain them.

I might set a deadline, maybe halfway through 2014, when I will erase most of the non-Quirky stuff.
The thing is, Quirky is heading off in a different direction, and is a separate distro. It has a Puppy-like UI and apps and many of the tools, but I envisage so many changes that it will be quite a different beast.

Anyway, if you woof-CE guys can think about it, that would be great.

[01micko]

From Barry's blog:
http://bkhome.org/news/?viewDetailed=00012

.......

Taken care of 2 days ago.. you need to read the comments at BK's blog too.

[bigpup]

Good point

I was commenting more about this fact.

but I am not keeping the repo up-to-date with the latest PETs.

Maybe not everyone that looks at this topic, reads Barry's blog.

In present versions of Puppy being used. How is this going to affect PPM?

[James C]

Good point

I was commenting more about this fact.

but I am not keeping the repo up-to-date with the latest PETs.

Maybe not everyone that looks at this topic, reads Barry's blog.

In present versions of Puppy being used. How is this going to affect PPM?

http://bkhome.org/news/?viewDetailed=00012

And as you say, for those with current pups, a PET can be provided to patch the download path.

[bigpup]

I saw that, but it did not say anything about the PPM patch pet having been made.

If so where is it?

Does each Puppy version developer need to make PPM pet patch for their version?

Will one PPM patch pet work for all?

How do we the users, find out about it and know we need it?

[mavrothal]

I saw that, but it did not say anything about the PPM patch pet having been made.

If so where is it?

Does each Puppy version developer need to make PPM pet patch for their version?

Will one PPM patch pet work for all?

How do we the users, find out about it and know we need it?

BK said the quirky repos will remain for another 6 months or so. So no need for rush.
I'm sure a "universal" solution will be provided by Barry before the repos are taken down

[oldyeller]

removed

[01micko]

Whoooaaa.... ease up!

Let BK worry about patches. It is his responsibility. There is a bit more to it than just DISTRO_PET_REPOS. The adventurous can take a look at the ppm files at github/woof-CE, though mid 2014 is the cut off point, I'd be patient.

[oldyeller]

Whoooaaa.... ease up!

Let BK worry about patches. It is his responsibility. There is a bit more to it than just DISTRO_PET_REPOS. The adventurous can take a look at the ppm files at github/woof-CE, though mid 2014 is the cut off point, I'd be patient.

Would you like me to remove it? I can with no problem

[mavrothal]

I have a new file for DISTRO_PET_REPOS here http://www.murga-linux.com/puppy/viewto ... 8&start=60 That I did for OVPrecise that should work on all builds of precise.

This will not work by itself and will still download packages from the quirky site.
Despite of better advise if you want to use the new repos and do not run (or want to use packages from) quirky or raring, the next should do the trick.

Code: Select all

sed -i 's/quirky/puppylinux/g' /root/.packages/DISTRO_PET_REPOS
sed -i 's/quirky/puppylinux/g' /usr/local/petget/downloadpkgs.sh

Let me repeat at this point that the above has been briefly tested only in a couple of puppies...
BK's resolution should be awaited.

[bigpup]

To me, this is more of an issue, if you are building a version of Puppy with Woof-CE.

but I am not keeping the repo up-to-date with the latest PETs.

If you are getting programs, from this repository, to build a Puppy, wouldn't you want them to be the latest versions?

01micko's test Slacko5.7 is missing some newer versions of Puppy key programs.
These newer versions do have bug fixes.

I know, someone is going to have to be the one to keep the repository updated or is there an automated way to do it?

[01micko]

If you are getting programs, from this repository, to build a Puppy, wouldn't you want them to be the latest versions?

The thing is, woof-CE doesn't use BK's quirky repository at all. I changed the code as soon as I copied what was needed from BK's repo. Not a problem for woof-CE pups.

If this is a problem for you bigpup, take it up with BK. We are looking to the future, not the past. All slackos are mostly unaffected. In fact, the sooner BK removes them the better it will be for legacy slackos as dependencies which are dragged in from quirky/wary won't be a problem any more. Same goes for Lucid.

EDIT: BTW. I'm the only one with repo access. I can't be everywhere.

Why not make a separate thread and keep things up to date for us if you want to help out. That way I can take a glance there instead of trawling through the noise that is Murga-linux!

[bigpup]

Thanks for the update.

So, you will be keeping the program pets updated in the new repository?

Sorry,
I posted before your edit.

[bigpup]

Why not make a separate thread and keep things up to date for us if you want to help out. That way I can take a glance there instead of trawling through the noise that is Murga-linux!

I could try and do that, but I too am limited on time.
I can try!

Would there be some way to automate this?

I know the pets are all over the forum.

Maybe a list of specific forum links that would get checked and identified as new version available?

That is how I would try to do it, but I would have to check each one manually.

Not sure how Barry kept up with them?

[01micko]

Not sure how Barry kept up with them?

He didn't!