(old)Puppy Linux Discussion Forum

What is the best way to modify DISTRO_PKGS_SPECS as far as dependencies are concerned.

DISTRO_PKGS_SPECS-ubuntu-xenial mentions vlc, and mplayer package.

Example:

yes|speex|libspeex1,libspeex-dev,libspeexdsp1,libspeexdsp-dev|exe,dev,doc,nls| #needed by mplayer, vlc. note, some apps only need libspeex1, others need both.

Do I say yes as kodi might need them, or do I say no to these and let the
thorough dependency check warn me about dependencies needed.

I want to minimize the size of the puppy.

Which is best?

On doing a thorough dependency check.

Will doing a thorough dependency check warn me about packages, that I do not need.

Will doing a thorough dependency check warn me about packages, that I need.

What is the best way of doing this?

Lassar wrote:Two changes needs to be made to the readme.txt file.

First:

"3. Build Puppy live-CD
This gets built in a directory named 'sandbox3' and as well as the live-CD iso file you will also find the individual built files and the 'devx' file.

# ./3builddistro"

"./3builddistro" needs to be changed to "./3builddistro-Z"

The "NOTE June. 18, 2014" at the bottom talks about the switch to 3builddistro-Z in more detail. I think that's an interesting approach that works, and punishes people who don't read the whole thing and rewards those who do.

Sailor Enceladus wrote:

Lassar wrote:Two changes needs to be made to the readme.txt file.

First:

"3. Build Puppy live-CD
This gets built in a directory named 'sandbox3' and as well as the live-CD iso file you will also find the individual built files and the 'devx' file.

# ./3builddistro"

"./3builddistro" needs to be changed to "./3builddistro-Z"

The "NOTE June. 18, 2014" at the bottom talks about the switch to 3builddistro-Z in more detail. I think that's an interesting approach that works, and punishes people who don't read the whole thing and rewards those who do.

./3builddistro is just plain wrong, inaccurate, and confuses people.

We want to keep the readme.txt truthful & accurate.

I tried another Slacko 5.7.1 build. Some things in it are pretty old by today's standards, like the mksquashfs versions don't understand what "-comp xz" is, but it might make a fun play thing. 2014 slacko with 2017 woof-ce and security updates. Haha.

Sailor,

Didn't you mention this bug somewhere? I just encountered it today:

http://murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic. ... 828#956828

Am I remembering correctly?? I know someone wrote about in the past few days, and I thought it was you. I'm looking for a solution, if there is one.

Thanks!

belham2 wrote:Am I remembering correctly?? I know someone wrote about in the past few days, and I thought it was you. I'm looking for a solution, if there is one.

Haha yeah, I think it's fixed now as of commit 5296 in woof-CE. Maybe it was this code that fixed it?
http://murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic. ... 708#956708

Sailor Enceladus wrote:

belham2 wrote:Am I remembering correctly?? I know someone wrote about in the past few days, and I thought it was you. I'm looking for a solution, if there is one.

Haha yeah, I think it's fixed now as of commit 5296 in woof-CE. Maybe it was this code that fixed it?
http://murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic. ... 708#956708

Thanks, Sailor E. I put a link in Peebee's thread so he sees this.

Found 4 more mini-icons to add when scouring about in 5.7.1 so that gave me an excuse to build a newer iso.
https://my.pcloud.com/publink/show?code ... =762680005

Latest slacko64 from woof-CE:

# report-video
VIDEO REPORT: Slacko64 Puppy, version 6.9.9.9

Chip description:
VGA compatible controller: Intel Corporation Haswell-ULT Integrated Graphics Controller (rev 0b)

Requested by /etc/X11/xorg.conf:
Resolution (widthxheight, in pixels): 1920x1080
Depth (bits, or planes): 24
Modules requested to be loaded: dbe
Drivers requested to be loaded: intel

Probing Xorg startup log file (/var/log/Xorg.0.log):
Driver loaded (and currently in use): intel
Loaded modules: dbe dri2 glx kbd mouse present

Actual rendering on monitor:
Resolution: 3840x1080 pixels (1013x285 millimeters)
Depth: 24 planes

...the above also recorded in /tmp/report-video
#
I've installed it to both my Acer laptop (touch works) and my hp mini desktop (here).

Works well so far,
Thanks.

Question to someone of the woof-ce developers:

Why Puppy needs its own compiled kernel? Except the smaller initrd.gz size.
It is possible to use puppy initrd.gz with official Debian kernel after small additions in the code (thanks to sfs) and adding part of the kernel drivers inside.
Do you see any possible problems with puppy scripts if the kernel is from Debian?
Do you see this as something positive for woof-ce future or not?
Anyone interested to work on this?

The positive side is any kernel security fix will be easy upgradable from the base distribution instead recompiling the kernel.
The negative side is initrd.gz must include some kernel drivers (duplicated in the kernel.sfs module). initrd.gz size will be from 6 to 10Mb depending on the kernel.

Toni

I was working all day long With Windows Xp at my office. When i have my first old laptop, my goal was to run something different at home. I tried five Linux OS, multiboot on a CD bought with Linux magazine (10 euros) . I found these big distros more boring than Windows XP, until i discovered Puppy 4.3.1 (Toutou Fr version). Puppy is Linux was what i was looking for, for home. Light, speedy, easy to install.
I understand that Debian lovers would like to mix it with the speediness of our little Puppy.
But why should i change my Puppy for something different ? PPM the package manager give us access to quite all applications available in 'Dogs' ?
The interest of these projects is for training Linux programmers. What we miss a lot is developers for applications, not for the OS.
. It looks like we were farmers with lots of brand new tractors with the machines for horses to link with
We have still more than 600 Puppies available; What a choice !
Yes i Know, devs want to do what they like, which often is not what we need..

Pelo wrote:But why should i change my Puppy for something different ?

You don't have to change Puppy. My post was about changing kernel. Allmost all packages are already taken from the base distro. Why not use the same kernel? The developer will have more time for other things instead recompiling the kernel again and again. And much faster woof-ce building I guess.
It is not important anyway. But the possibility is there.

PPM the package manager give us access to quite all applications available in 'Dogs' ?

Really?

About changing the kernel saintless, it was suggested to keep the same kernel for a puppy family for instance Puppies 5. Nothing against the idea, if they are compatibles for using wireless with an antenna
Because drivers provided with the are not efficient
And in many countries wireless is still weak.
People whose hobby is programming don't care, but Puppy is not an OS for programming at home, its more a tiny OS you can go with it. An usb or a little CD in you pocket, the laptop in your car,
Last puppy stretch is ok with kernel 4.1.38 (rcrsn compiled a pet for driver 8192cu).

Thanks for the information Pelo. We are not woof-ce developers and none of them seems interested with my ideas. Lets stop here.

Edit: But If someday someone is interested also how to add systemd-boot in puppy explore a bit more the commits in the code link I gave above.

Toni

saintless wrote:We are not woof-ce developers and none of them seems interested with my ideas.

CE means "community edition", it's probably closer to this than your definition above: https://communitywiki.org/wiki/DoOcracy

Sailor Enceladus wrote:

saintless wrote:We are not woof-ce developers and none of them seems interested with my ideas.

CE means "community edition", it's probably closer to this than your definition above: https://communitywiki.org/wiki/DoOcracy

But of course, how did I miss this?
Then I have to answer my own questions because I'm part of this DoOcracy and also seems I'm a woof-ce developer, right?
What is the point to ask questions about woof-ce then? And what is the point to have this thread open for discussion?

Toni

Hi saintless.

I think you are one of the few people on this forum with the credentials,
expertise and ability to implement your idea.

Don't wait for a woof-CE "policy". Just do it! Dive in!

Besides, the "Community" in this "CE" acronym can probably be counted on
"one's fingers and toes", to borrow an expression from Linus Torvalds.

It's certainly a community compared to Barry Kauler developing Puppy by
himself, but It's a community of developers rather than "the Puppy
community" at large.

My 2¢. Best of luck. BFN.

musher0 wrote:Don't wait for a woof-CE "policy". Just do it! Dive in!.

Thanks musher0.

I usually do that. Just liked to ask first if including kernel from different distro could cause some problems with special puppy scripts. There should be some important reason for compiling own puppy kernel each time. I guess I will have to find out for myself.
All the best!

Toni

saintless wrote:Just liked to ask first if including kernel from different distro could cause some problems with special puppy scripts.

Hi Toni....

Puppy relies on aufs - Puppy built kernels include aufs...if the other kernels you are considering don't include aufs then they won't work in Puppy.

@gyro has recently started some work looking at whether overlayfs could be used instead of aufs but has already identified that overlayfs is not as capable as aufs and therefore a Puppy using overlayfs would "behave differently"....

Cheers
peebee

Thank you peebee.

Overlayfs is the aufs replacement used in live-boot and I'm not sure it was a good default choice to replace aufs. But if aufs kernel module is the only thing to be aware of - then Puppy should work fine with standard Debian kernel (aufs-dkms package for building module is still available in latest Debian).
I will do some experiments. Thanks again!

Toni