(old)Puppy Linux Discussion Forum

http://www.thehumorarchives.com/humor/0001202.html

Here's an idea for the next bootup screen for Puppy. Can't use this particular picture of course but if you could find a little white chiua....chua....Taco Bell Dog and a laptop running Puppy you could set up something cute. A puppy running Puppy.

I think if you look at the expression on his face and the position he is standing in, he must think that laptop has Mr. Bill's operating system installed on it!

Enlarge the picture. He's making a puddle on the keyboard.

Wouldn't this puppy make a nice boot screen?

SANTA BARBARA, Calif. (AP) - The owners of the other contestants in
this year's World's Ugliest Dog Contest may have thought their pooches had
a chance - until they saw Sam.
>
The 14-year-old pedigreed Chinese crested recently won the
Sonoma-Marin Fair contest for the third consecutive time, and it's no surprise.
>
The tiny dog has no hair, if you don't count the yellowish-white tuft
erupting from his head. His wrinkled brown skin is covered with
splotches, a line of warts marches down his snout, his blind eyes are an alien, milky white and a fleshy flap of skin hangs from his withered neck. And then there's the Austin Powers teeth that jut at odd angles from his mouth.
>
He's so ugly even the judges recoiled when he was placed on the
judging table, said proud owner, Susie Lockheed, of Santa Barbara.
>
>"People are always horrified when I kiss him. <snip>

You people are making some people's mouths water. LOL.

Not sure if this is suitable or we have covered it but maybe this is more apt . . .

http://www.bootsplash.org/index.html

I think that something like that would be wonderfull... only instead of a penguin, we could have cute little puppy...

Wonder how hard it would be to implement this in a future release ------ or, how much larger it would make Puppy?

The idea of a kernel patch to make the boot process "look pretty".......the mind boggles


This is "serious shit" guys......and all for 30 seconds of "prettiness" ?

I think time and resources could be better spent of getting other areas working sweetly.


But then again I maybe wrong..........Cos looking pretty will cover everything.

If anything I think a more modular boots process would be an advantage....and having a way to hook into various parts of the boot to make customizations would be an idea.....

eg some psuedo code for /etc/rc.d/rc.xyz

As always, you have a good point bladehunter-san.

I did not realize that it was serious shit. You're right, energy would probably be better spent on other areas.

Pretty things suck.

yes, for example, i've thought that a hook in /etc/profile might be useful

for example, change:

if [ ! -f /usr/X11R6/bin/X ];then

to:

[ -r /etc/profile.local ] && . /etc/profile.local
if [ ! -f /usr/X11R6/bin/X ];then

and you could put lines like these in profile.local:

export LANG=ja
export JAVA_HOME=/mnt/hda15/jre1.5.0_04
export PATH=$JAVA_HOME/bin:$PATH
export SHELL=/bin/bash

and they would stay there when you upgrade to a new Puppy version

or, for example, i could put a line to patch /usr/local/bin/rox in profile.local, so that Puppy will use rox 2.2.0 ... if i put a line like that in profile, it will be gone the next time you upgrade Puppy

One of the Puppy mission statement is "just works"

Now a big part of "just works" is the perception that it is just working. If it looks as if it is not working or doing stuff associated with not working (putting text on the screen or displaying a primitive boot) then this sets up an expectation in the mind. I agree with BladeH that there are more important issues from a developers viewpoint but from an end users . . . first impressions are also very important.

She looks nice = she is nice

Paws up all those who feel it is time people based things on merit? (in your dreams . . .)

- Oh a Puppy - how cute - It must be a cute Linux

She looks nice = she is nice

Momma Cass and Janis Joplin weren't the prettiest.....but boy they could do the job extremely well....

Looks mean nought if the job aint done well

Bladehunter, Lobster and Barryk aren't the prettiest..... but boy they do the job extremely well....

Looks mean nought if Linux aint done well

Edit

I've been told my extra thumbs AND webbing is quite fetching thank you very much....

GuestToo,
Yes, okay, I'll put that into the upcoming 1.0.5alpha2 release.

Lobster wrote:One of the Puppy mission statement is "just works"

Now a big part of "just works" is the perception that it is just working. If it looks as if it is not working or doing stuff associated with not working (putting text on the screen or displaying a primitive boot) then this sets up an expectation in the mind. I agree with BladeH that there are more important issues from a developers viewpoint but from an end users . . . first impressions are also very important.

She looks nice = she is nice

Paws up all those who feel it is time people based things on merit? (in your dreams . . .)

- Oh a Puppy - how cute - It must be a cute Linux

How about a "poor mans" bootsplash? Simply change the background colour from black to say white (as per the "puppy head" image screen) and have the text set the same colour.

Hey presto! No 'disturbing' lines of code, microscopic bloat, no reduction in speed, everybody happy? Probably best to add a verbose option like the options already presented when booting from cd, it'd just need to change the colour of the text.

It may be an idea to put the odd bit of ASCII in a different colour just to show that something is still happening (The one good thing a noob will get from the lines of code is that something is happening) These lines could just be the occasional "..." or prehaps something a little decriptive like "Recognising Hardware", "Starting Puppy Linux" for each stage of the boot? These lines would just be part of the script that slides up the screen but the rest of it would be invisible as it is the same colour.

Personally I think this would look quite "solid" and confidence inspiring.

What do you people think?

Chris

As far as I know the only way to remove the kernel messages would be to remove all the printk statements from the source code...hahahahahaha

As for the rest it's simply the way the bootscripts are designed.....

Anyway it's only 30 seconds or so of text....does it hurt you ? does it make you feel inadequate ? Does it make you less of something ? Does Puppy work ?

I propose a splash screen that stays on the screen for 10 minutes then at the end of that period decides whether to continue booting, just hang or reboot with no warning. Then if we do boot we could have the option, well not really an option, of either running with or without the BSOD. Then everytime a simple change is made we could be forced to go through the same procedure over again.
And how about 1.2gig null file in ram (swap) to make sure you can't run(?) more than one application at a time.
And how about a kernel level virii interface\API to make life easier for script kiddies ?
And then everytime you finally manage to connect to the internet 4.234 gig of patches are required to be downloaded, but after every patch is downloaded and installed you are required to reboot and by the time you finally get back online that particular patch has been superseded.

Huh. I must really be tired. I read that post and thought you were serious until I got to the patches part. Maybe I should go to bed.....

Nah. I'll just turn up the radio...

Personally, I like the text. I'm weird like that. I grew up on Windows 95 and 98, so I'm used to seeing pointless babble. I actually associate splash-screens with the five minutes following the text, waiting for the piece of junk to load, with no indication of whether it's still going or froze up. The text looks cool and techo-ish. Like it's a computer instead of a tv. Especially since linux can have colored text instead of just grey. I like seeing messages like
doing this..........................Success!
doing that..........................Success!
doing the other..........................FAILURE!
Okay, so maybe I don't like that last part, but I do get a kick out of the messages sometimes. Like kernal panics, and when it gets "confused" and stuff. Windows never admits that it did something wrong or is unsure until it commits an illegal opperation and shuts down to hide from the authorities.

So, stick with the text is my opinion. (Seriously, I like the text. I was mocking it in good humor. Text is good. Just ask your teachers.)

May the text be with you!