Posted: Thu 10 Jan 2013, 02:49
Hello,
Many interesting points here..
jpeps,
I agree that it is too easy for anyone to make and release a pet.
And while I do test to death anything I release, I am surely not a 'guru'.
I have gone back and found major flaws in things that, with my limited skill at the time, I thought were fine.. (Nothing that would wipe a partition, thank God, but still flawed.) But that is how I learn, from my mistakes..
As a musician, I learned that everyone makes mistakes, its how we recover from, and learn from them, that sets one apart..
RSH,
What you describe is a modular self inclusive system. Like Tinycore, which I also like a lot.. However, my attempts to build Puppy from TC taught me a few things.. I was successful at building a Pup from TC packages, however, it was rather basic, and still weighed in at around 370mb.. The point of symlinks, as I see it, is to avoid having the same libs in several different places at the same time. However, I agree that some housekeeping is definitely in order, as it has turned, in some Pups, into a 'spaghetti nightmare' of cross linked libs, and links to libs that simply are not there..
I never realized that till I tried to build an Archpup.. Since there was no blueprint, no example to go by, I started from scratch, and quickly found that Puppy symlinks damn near everything.. (IE busybox). Maybe a standardized set of base libs between Pups would help, IDK..
I stand here a relative novice amongst masters. My 'skill set' doesnt compare to most of you, and I have always been fully aware of that.
That is why I have 17 frugal installs to test on, hoping to cover all the bases.. But my lack of knowledge has led me to some unique answers, although maybe not the 'best' answers.. (IE my use of 'filemnt' in MultiPup which other, smarter coders have provided an improved fix for.)
bark_bark_bark,
We are all friends here, hence the jabs.. We all have a common goal, but maybe different ideas on the road there.. Hell, Ive gotten in a lot deeper than this on many occasions.. But I can admit I am just a hack..
So I normally dont let it get to me.. I am a midget amongst giants..
Even I am surprised that I got offended for a minute.. We speak freely here, and that can sometimes be abrasive. But you would have to really try hard to truly offend in this forum.. (IE Ecomoney is still here... )
I think Micko`s point was that beating that dead horse will open up doors we cannot close.. I personally cannot run as anything but root, and yes, it is Puppy`s fault.. But I find the task of elevating oneself to superuser, or SU/SUDO, to be so easy as to render the user/superuser debate invalid..
So, as my Aussie friends might say, its all good mate..
jpeps,
Perhaps a pet testing sandbox before release? A thread to post them to, for the 'guru`s' to test first, before they are allowed into the general forum?
I can think of a few I have tried that did some damage, IE a GUI for wbar that overwrote my xinitrc, addending every line.. And maybe a way for the pet spec file to specify which pups the pet has been tested on, as many things will work, for example on Lupu that wont work on Slacko, IE, my MultiPup...
Certainly Puppy has some inherent flaws, because it is unlike any other Linux distro out there, and being cutting edge sometimes means being 'non-compliant'. Also, there is a constant struggle between being Dev friendly, and being User friendly.. Not to mention that many here struggle between being Users and being Dev`s... Maybe it is good to be easy to make a pet, but should be a bit harder to release to the public..
I was at first thrown by the turn my thread had taken, but now I am glad to see it is sparking ideas that may serve the community in general..
Please continue...
Many interesting points here..
jpeps,
I agree that it is too easy for anyone to make and release a pet.
And while I do test to death anything I release, I am surely not a 'guru'.
I have gone back and found major flaws in things that, with my limited skill at the time, I thought were fine.. (Nothing that would wipe a partition, thank God, but still flawed.) But that is how I learn, from my mistakes..
As a musician, I learned that everyone makes mistakes, its how we recover from, and learn from them, that sets one apart..
RSH,
What you describe is a modular self inclusive system. Like Tinycore, which I also like a lot.. However, my attempts to build Puppy from TC taught me a few things.. I was successful at building a Pup from TC packages, however, it was rather basic, and still weighed in at around 370mb.. The point of symlinks, as I see it, is to avoid having the same libs in several different places at the same time. However, I agree that some housekeeping is definitely in order, as it has turned, in some Pups, into a 'spaghetti nightmare' of cross linked libs, and links to libs that simply are not there..
I never realized that till I tried to build an Archpup.. Since there was no blueprint, no example to go by, I started from scratch, and quickly found that Puppy symlinks damn near everything.. (IE busybox). Maybe a standardized set of base libs between Pups would help, IDK..
I stand here a relative novice amongst masters. My 'skill set' doesnt compare to most of you, and I have always been fully aware of that.
That is why I have 17 frugal installs to test on, hoping to cover all the bases.. But my lack of knowledge has led me to some unique answers, although maybe not the 'best' answers.. (IE my use of 'filemnt' in MultiPup which other, smarter coders have provided an improved fix for.)
bark_bark_bark,
We are all friends here, hence the jabs.. We all have a common goal, but maybe different ideas on the road there.. Hell, Ive gotten in a lot deeper than this on many occasions.. But I can admit I am just a hack..
So I normally dont let it get to me.. I am a midget amongst giants..
Even I am surprised that I got offended for a minute.. We speak freely here, and that can sometimes be abrasive. But you would have to really try hard to truly offend in this forum.. (IE Ecomoney is still here... )
I think Micko`s point was that beating that dead horse will open up doors we cannot close.. I personally cannot run as anything but root, and yes, it is Puppy`s fault.. But I find the task of elevating oneself to superuser, or SU/SUDO, to be so easy as to render the user/superuser debate invalid..
So, as my Aussie friends might say, its all good mate..
jpeps,
Perhaps a pet testing sandbox before release? A thread to post them to, for the 'guru`s' to test first, before they are allowed into the general forum?
I can think of a few I have tried that did some damage, IE a GUI for wbar that overwrote my xinitrc, addending every line.. And maybe a way for the pet spec file to specify which pups the pet has been tested on, as many things will work, for example on Lupu that wont work on Slacko, IE, my MultiPup...
Certainly Puppy has some inherent flaws, because it is unlike any other Linux distro out there, and being cutting edge sometimes means being 'non-compliant'. Also, there is a constant struggle between being Dev friendly, and being User friendly.. Not to mention that many here struggle between being Users and being Dev`s... Maybe it is good to be easy to make a pet, but should be a bit harder to release to the public..
I was at first thrown by the turn my thread had taken, but now I am glad to see it is sparking ideas that may serve the community in general..
Please continue...