Puppy Package Manager (modified) v3.0

Message

mistfire · #31 Post by **mistfire** » Wed 27 Jul 2016, 07:00

I guess I miss another exit statement if 0setup script. Okay will I fix that again.

mistfire · #32 Post by **mistfire** » Wed 27 Jul 2016, 12:29

New PPM-MOD version released

Changes:

* More update package database fix, more GUI revisions

bigpup · #33 Post by **bigpup** » Wed 27 Jul 2016, 14:28

Small problem.
See image:

mistfire · #34 Post by **mistfire** » Wed 27 Jul 2016, 15:22

@bigpup I repacked the PPM mod and changed the version number. Its reuploaded and you can try it again.

bigpup · #35 Post by **bigpup** » Wed 27 Jul 2016, 21:07

Xenialpup 7.0.1
Fresh clean Frugal install
NO save

PPM updated database OK.

AFTER Installing PPM-mod 1.0

Seems to now be working OK.

This is what I got after the update database completed.
I assume this indicates it did work OK.
See image:

Note:
This image was after I did the update the second time.
First time I did not see the info at top about no such file found.

mistfire · #36 Post by **mistfire** » Wed 27 Jul 2016, 23:27

New PPM mod version released

Changes

* Automatic package directory rebuilding in case of pinstall is not executed upon installation

bigpup · #37 Post by **bigpup** » Thu 28 Jul 2016, 04:54

Xenialpup 7.0.1
Fresh clean Frugal install
NO save

PPM updated database OK.

AFTER Installing PPM-mod 1.0.1

Seems to now be working OK.

That was fun

bigpup · #38 Post by **bigpup** » Thu 28 Jul 2016, 15:14

Just wondering about this.

AFTER Installing PPM-mod 1.0.1

The database update process seems to complete very fast.
Are you sure it is actually updating each repository database?

Before installing PPM-mod 1.0.1 some of those Ubuntu repositories would take several minutes to update and you would see results for each repository.
Also, you would get a choice to update that specific repository or not.

mistfire · #39 Post by **mistfire** » Fri 29 Jul 2016, 00:24

@bigpup is there any wget error appears on update database?

bigpup · #40 Post by **bigpup** » Fri 29 Jul 2016, 04:37

Are you asking if any errors here, after doing the database update?
See image.

mistfire · #41 Post by **mistfire** » Fri 29 Jul 2016, 05:14

@Bigpup I tried PPM Mod 1.0.1 in pristine xenial. The update database package works fine. I wonder what cause PPM mod to behave like that in updating database package in your xenial. I think you should check the availability of repo or check your internet connection.

bigpup · #42 Post by **bigpup** » Fri 29 Jul 2016, 05:42

OK.
Tried again with a new fresh clean install of Xenialpup 7.0.1

This time It seems to be working OK.

Who knows what was wrong with the other install of Xenialpup

IT job security feature

Sorry!!

I may have a computer that has some ram going bad, but it seems to be working OK.
It is 15 years old!!

musher0 · #43 Post by **musher0** » Fri 29 Jul 2016, 15:53

Is there only one (1) tester for this package?

bigpup · #44 Post by **bigpup** » Fri 29 Jul 2016, 16:21

Sure seems so

To be honest. I am not really sure why PPM needs this?

musher0 · #45 Post by **musher0** » Fri 29 Jul 2016, 16:41

Hi bigpup.

Want company?

Is this meant only for the ubuntu breed of Pups?

I mean, the original PPM on josejp2424's pupjibaro jessie (based on debian jessie
repos) hangs a lot. I suppose I could test this PPM MOD on it? What do I need to
change to make it work on the pupjibaro?

Thanks in advance.

Sailor Enceladus · #46 Post by **Sailor Enceladus** » Fri 29 Jul 2016, 17:06

bigpup wrote:To be honest. I am not really sure why PPM needs this?

My only complaint with the original PPM structure is that if you install a lot of packages, then /root/.packages can get quite messy and hard to find with everything mixed in together, which I think is what happened to mistfire also. I'm not sure if there was good reason for putting user installed packages in /root/.packages instead of /root/.packages/user-packages originally, maybe it was just more convenient for devs at the time. I would have just made that one change for now and see how it works, ironing out the bugs for that, rather than doing all these adjustments at once, but if mistfire is up to challenge of debugging it all then I guess all the power to them.

I think wdlkmpx might be considering a PPM fork in the rationalise branch also.

Recently I haven't been "installing" many pets though, I prefer just using SFS files or ibiblio/forum pets on demand in pfix=ram.

mistfire · #47 Post by **mistfire** » Sat 30 Jul 2016, 10:43

musher0 wrote:Hi bigpup.

Want company?

Is this meant only for the ubuntu breed of Pups?

I mean, the original PPM on josejp2424's pupjibaro jessie (based on debian jessie
repos) hangs a lot. I suppose I could test this PPM MOD on it? What do I need to
change to make it work on the pupjibaro?

Thanks in advance.

@musher0 PPM Mod works fine in different Puppy Linux 5.x onwards. It is already implemented in x-slacko slim which is slackware based. It also works fine in pristine tahr pup and xenial pup.

Just install it and it works properly.

musher0 · #48 Post by **musher0** » Sat 30 Jul 2016, 10:54

mistfire wrote:
musher0 wrote:Hi bigpup.

Want company?

Is this meant only for the ubuntu breed of Pups?

I mean, the original PPM on josejp2424's pupjibaro jessie (based on debian jessie
repos) hangs a lot. I suppose I could test this PPM MOD on it? What do I need to
change to make it work on the pupjibaro?

Thanks in advance.
@musher0 PPM Mod works fine in different Puppy Linux 5.x onwards. It is already implemented in x-slacko slim which is slackware based. It also works fine in pristine tahr pup and xenial pup.

Just install it and it works properly.

Many thanks for the kind reply, Mistfire.

musher0 · #49 Post by **musher0** » Sat 30 Jul 2016, 14:53

Hello Mistfire.

I just tried your PPM mod on the pupjibaro jessie and to be frank, I don't know if it's
working ok or not.

The "events" seem to be happening one after the other as they should, but I get a
segmentation fault for the debian-jessie database (11 Mg). I tried to correct it by
asking for a 2nd update, but all the debian repos "told me" they had failed, while the
puppy ones said "success".

If I try to install pekwm, for example, I get told it is already installed -- when it's not.

Later I'll do an fscheck on the pupsave and on the partition. If that fails, I'll use the
"defrag" script, but that's all I can think of at the moment.

I've asked this before, and got no answer: would the debian repos be guarded
somehow against the PPM?

Because this is not the first time I've had problems with the debian repos through
PPM, while I can get most of what I need directly from the same repos with my
browser, using the site
https://packages.debian.org/search?suit ... esize.so.0
for example, by simply changing the query.

And more generally, has any PPM developer ever asked the people on the "taking"
end of the PPM (the webmasters at debian, slackware, ubuntu, etc.) if they were
allergic to the PPM or accepting it? It would be the polite thing to do, wouldn't ?

Thanks in advance for any lead.

mistfire · #50 Post by **mistfire** » Sun 31 Jul 2016, 00:34

@musher0 PPM mod works successfully if the performance is the same as the original PPM. It can install apps, uninstall apps, and update database package successfully. Pupjibaro jessie uses synaptic package manager. I'm afraid that PPM may not work properly.

(old)Puppy Linux Discussion Forum

(old)Puppy Linux Discussion Forum

Puppy Package Manager (modified) v3.0