(old)Puppy Linux Discussion Forum

If the user's Puppy has SFS-Load on-the-fly, then all s/he has to do is to load a program's sfs to use that program. Will additional scripts be needed at all?

Or, is there a more important result achieved through the scripts?

Loaded at boot sfs files placed with the main sfs...no configs to setup.
A folder of optional ones to get loaded with a right click.

Inspired by the simplicity of slax all this works with a few lines over the basics needed to use just a pup_xxx.sfs and a save system.

That's it...nothing more...the rest is just standard linux.

Modular 'should' be simple... that's the main reason for doing it that way in my book.

Module creation is compressing a file tree....manually or the odd 2 line script. .... my slobby engineering nature brought me to this point

mike

simultaneous posts....

Or, is there a more important result achieved through the scripts?

for standard pups there is the problem of upside down layering so scripting is needed to bring out the hidden files.... otherwise there would be nothing to do apart for perhaps refreshing the menu.

sunburnt wrote:Main interface is the ScriptBox right-click menu that`s a modded Rox menu.
There are tons of scripts, so lots of installed infrastructure and complexity.

# Thoughts: I agree with amigo that simple is the only way to go...
Modularity as a concept is great. But any added complexity is a heavy toll.

An AppDir package is self-contained and no-install = little infrastructure.
SFS files are no install ( sort of...), but need a union = added infrastructure.

An app menu for both SFS and AppDir would handle both transparently.
There`s no need that the user ever know that there`s a difference.
.

Yes, any added complexity is a heavy toll, but as I've stated before, RSHs-ScriptBox has only find its place in the Modularity Package, to give any testers an easy way of start and testing.

RSHs-ScriptBox is NOT a part of the Modularity Concept!

The Modularity Concept is SFS Module based!

The RoxApps -like the RSHs-ScriptBox- are just an addition to show, how such can be put together and how easy it will work.

Meanwhile i have reached some PMs, but I don't have the time to reply to any at the Moment. Will do it later - sorry, but I'm really busy.

---

However, to make you all more able to understand, what I am doing, do test the attached.tar.gz. It contains a StandAlone-RoxApp-directory, named: LP2_JWildFire-1.01.sfs.Scripts, which you can store where ever you want, as long as the location can handle linux-type symbolic links.

Nothing, absolutely nothing of the Modularity Package is needed to run this and to include this into a Operating System - so, please get it all out of the way for testings.

Please do some testings in a fresh and clean puppy. Do not forget to create directory Module on boot partition, when trying this on installed puppies. it will still download to this directory.

Please, do test this also by booting from CD. If you will have already downloaded LP2_JWildFire-1.01.sfs, move it , so that it can't be found.
It will (should) download the LP2_jre-1.7u13-i586.sfs as well, which is the dependent SFS Module of LP2_JWildFire-1.01.sfs.

When testing this from CD booting, first open the directory LP2_JWildFire-1.01.sfs.Scripts and go to its hidden .data directory. There is a empty file: download_dir_temp, open this in a text editor and insert a drive, where to store the downloaded SFS Module.

Note: insert just the drives name (e.g. sdd1), no /mnt and no further directory name. It will create automatically its download directory by using the DISTRO_FILE_PREFIX in its name.

If you don't insert any drive to this file, the SFS Module will download to /tmp into a sub directory by using the DISTRO_FILE_PREFIX in its name.

After first use, this file download_dir_temp is copied to /tmp and after this each time executing such a StandAlone-RunScript-RoxApp-Dir will read this file out. So, after a first go, you need to edit the /tmp/download_dir_temp because it will not be overwritten if existing in /tmp.

Please do test both variants when using this from CD. Currently I can not make tests on this download feature, so I need your test results.

Please do test also with mounted and unmounted drives - it should mount the drive/s automatically.

When I'm publishing the Modularity Concept (SFS P.L.U.S.), such StandAlone-RunScript-RoxApp-Dir would be the only thing that any OS developer would have to provide for the OS.

Ok, that's all for now. hopefully I did not forget anything to mention and some successful test results will return.

I'm back on duty...

RSH

P.S.

A PM wrote (can't resist to quote this PM):

Hi RSH
OK HOLLY S#@T ! I just did a fresh frugal install of precise 5.7.1 and added your Modularity Package
I am at a loss for words right now ! I don't know alot about how everything works yet but I am rubbing my eyes trying to take it all in Very very nice work ! I will be sure to post on it soon after i am done collecting myself !
I dont know yet how much I like it but you definitely have my attention !
Well done !

Edit, 2013-11-25, 21:25 GMT+1:

Attachment removed, upload of a improved version will follow and be posted on page 8.

Ok downloaded it, tried it but no sfs obtained perhaps the lack of DISTRO_FILE_PREFIX would be the reason.... something easily hacked or is there more to it?

my-roxapps was about the first thing I removed from puppy many years ago so the sight of a huge pile of them made me a little wary (no pun intended)
If its just for demonstrating sfs usage then a misunderstanding has occured.

mike

ok gave DISTRO_FILE_PREFIX a value in the script but still no joy. any other puppy version dependant variables ?

Hello all
Ok i have precise 5.7.1 frugal installed on an ext4 partition on my hard drive with modular package installed ! So far so good Been using a couple of days no no problems ! I must say i am amazed with this and the fact that i dont have the worry of a save file is awesome ! Very nice work RSH So just to clarify the use of sfs files and RSH script box are not the modular idea here "just a little extra bonus" am i right ?
This is very impressive ! As i read back through this thread RSH is right ! Alot of problems with apps not working etc. pertain to the save file ! I know just from my own experience that i have on more than 1 occasion accidentally deleted my save file
@RSH : Its hard to embrace change ! Its a human thing ! But the more you use it the more comfortable you become
Remember the first time you used puppy ? It was all new then ! But you learned to use it ! RSH's modularity concept is no different

Been doing the modular boogie since 2009 using nimblex and then applied the principles to puppy, and also no save files so no convincing needed here.

Wondering about a gathering of scripts for sfs making... deb2sfs, rpm2sfs and so on ...many exist but perhaps there are a few gaps.

mike

Took a look at Nimblex, too bad they`re not up to date. But nice web site and it seems they`re competent.

What a shame that Puppy has so little of this. It`s even hard to tell how cohesive Puppy is.

Well Nimblex was quite a nice attempt at a more desktop friendly version of SLAX. I even used their kde modules on puppy which worked quite well but going the other way and puppyfying it made more sense in the end.... even if the word does not...anyway I digress and there's a longer story not for here

mike

Hi everybody!
Sorry, just a little question... Trying Lazy as live from usb.

Clicking on the top bar for internet it says that there isn't sfs for firefox.
Then it asks for download it, after accept this the download starts (from smokey01) and then it seems ok.
But after good download a message appears, saying that it isn't ok.

Then, with Puppy package manager I select firefox and in this way everything runs fine.

inoxidabile wrote:Hi everybody!
Sorry, just a little question... Trying Lazy as live from usb.

Clicking on the top bar for internet it says that there isn't sfs for firefox.
Then it asks for download it, after accept this the download starts (from smokey01) and then it seems ok.
But after good download a message appears, saying that it isn't ok.

Then, with Puppy package manager I select firefox and in this way everything runs fine.

This kinda makes it sound like you have installed lazy puppy !
please read this and follow the instructions here
http://murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic. ... 139#736139
Or maybe i miss understand you ?

@RSH
I tried the StandAlone-RunScript-RoxApp-Dir.tar.gz
Very impressive

partsman wrote:

inoxidabile wrote:Hi everybody!
Sorry, just a little question... Trying Lazy as live from usb.

Clicking on the top bar for internet it says that there isn't sfs for firefox.
Then it asks for download it, after accept this the download starts (from smokey01) and then it seems ok.
But after good download a message appears, saying that it isn't ok.

Then, with Puppy package manager I select firefox and in this way everything runs fine.

This kinda makes it sound like you have installed lazy puppy !
please read this and follow the instructions here
http://murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic. ... 139#736139
Or maybe i miss understand you ?

I apologize, maybe I explained it in a bad way
I had Lazy on usb mem stick (2 gig), using unetbootin.
Then I run it as live only and nothing more.
One more point: after the install of firefox (using puppy package manager ) at shutdown it says "session not saved" but this is obvious, I didn't anything more than a quick try as live.

Hi all
Something that came to mind :
What happens if the file system on the partition becomes corrupt ?
like say xorg fails to start etc. booting in ram is not an option not sure about pfix=purge etc.

If a partition becomes corrupted there will be more to deal with than the odd stubborn xorg.
No system is going to deal with hardware failure apart from keeping backups.

Pupsave failures on the other hand are software/system related which is why they tend to affect the same areas...eg xorg, desktop items. You are dealing with a writable file system encompassed in a writable filesystem which is not cleanly unmounted plus its doubly prone to power outage/bad shutdown problems too especially if a non journalled filesystem is utilised. Having no save or a sfs save system avoids those kinds of corruption leaving only the host partition health to deal with. The sfs save also gives a nice tidy file to keep as a backup.

mike

A normal linux system boots with / read-only so that even the rootdisk can be fscked before mounting read-write and continuing with init. If you have /boot on a separate partition, then it can also be fscked without problems and by only mounting read-write when needed it remains sane.

inoxidabile wrote:Hi everybody!
Sorry, just a little question... Trying Lazy as live from usb.

Clicking on the top bar for internet it says that there isn't sfs for firefox.
Then it asks for download it, after accept this the download starts (from smokey01) and then it seems ok.
But after good download a message appears, saying that it isn't ok.

Then, with Puppy package manager I select firefox and in this way everything runs fine.

You do mean the message about different md5sum found.

This means not necessary the SFS wasn't ok. This is mostly a result of different dates of creating the RunScript and uploading the SFS Module (after editing it again without to create a new RunScript). The md5sum-file is stored inside the RunScript's directory and created only when creating a RunScript. Just try run the application again - should work, though!

However: please do post anything about issues in LazY Puppy in its thread. I'm trying to keep this here divided from LazY Puppy as far as possible - thanks.

mikeb wrote:Ok downloaded it, tried it but no sfs obtained perhaps the lack of DISTRO_FILE_PREFIX would be the reason.... something easily hacked or is there more to it?

partsman wrote:@RSH
I tried the StandAlone-RunScript-RoxApp-Dir.tar.gz
Very impressive

Ok, so it doesn't work for mikeb, but it does for partsman.

@mikeb

Can you give more informationon what you did and what you mean by: perhaps the lack of DISTRO_FILE_PREFIX would be the reason.

So just to clarify the use of sfs files and RSH script box are not the modular idea here "just a little extra bonus" am i right ?

RSHs-ScriptBox was just an addition to give anyone an easy start for testings. Actually it is a rough cut-down of the version that I'm using here - and turned it into EN for this (mine is DE only).

The Modular Concept is basically the use of SFS Modules, but refined/improved as they download, load and run the application by a RunScript - using sfs_load in cli mode only.

The SFS P.L.U.S. development toolkit is to be found inside the RSHs-ScriptBox in its directory Module.

1. LP3_SFS_PLUS_3.sfs
2. LP3_SFS_PLUS-3.9.3-install.pet

These two are needed to build/edit SFS Modules, create RunScripts, adding dependencies to SFS Modules and many more. just do a right-click onto a SFS Module or a directory and look at the options (most of them do start with SFS P.L.U.S. - I think).

Note: this version 3.9.3 can not create those StandAlone-RunScript-RoxApp-Dirs - this is new in my current version 3.9.4.

When it is version 4.0.x I will publish this as a release. This will include then (hopefully) a short guide to the use of it.

No bootconfig or distrospecs or my-roxapps.... so cannot really join in with the testing here....guess my puppies are not so puppy after all ....

Worry not

mike

Of course a partition fsck at boot could be done for Puppy ( Why hasn`t it? ).

Rather that a Save file, a Save partition would be a much better idea.
Puppy had an option for this, but I`m not sure if it`s still there.

A dir on a partition could be used also, and is a much simpler way of doing it.
But being as the whole partition would need to be fsck, a large partition would take awhile.

For folks that insist on WinBlows with NTFS partitions, a Save file is the only thing that`ll work.
.

sunburnt wrote:A dir on a partition could be used also, and is a much simpler way of doing it.

For those with frugal installs on a linux partition, using a "save directory" in place of a "save file" would be a very neat way to go.

gyro

For those with frugal installs on a linux partition, using a "save directory" in place of a "save file" would be a very neat way to go.

Added this option several years ago and yes its works nicely. Was pretty simple and mainly involved the use of a bind mount.

I added it after using nimblex/slax's save folder option and having a full partition for temp storage is so much easier. Stilll have the same save folder created 5 years ago

I believe puppies pfix=fsck option does do partitions....since I have pups loading to ram along with the save I just manually fsck occasionally since nothing is mounted at boot though it could be automated in the rc.sysinit like for a full install rather than hacking the initrd.

archive/sfs save is no problem on ntfs....whether ntfs is a problem is another matter The improvements in hard drives seem to offset the weaknesses of FAT.

mike