Back to Ubuntu? Arrrgh.....!!

Promote Puppy !
Post Reply
Message
Author
User avatar
Mike Walsh
Posts: 6351
Joined: Sat 28 Jun 2014, 12:42
Location: King's Lynn, UK.

Back to Ubuntu? Arrrgh.....!!

#1 Post by Mike Walsh »

Afternoon, all.

I've just had one of the most frustrating experiences I've had for years.

I started out in Linux with Ubuntu 14.04 LTS, 'Trusty Tahr', a little over 5 years back. At the time, it was quite an adventure, one which I lapped up, and relished the challenge of doing something different after decades over on the 'dark side'. I soon gave up on it after a few months, and moved to Puppy, which was far kinder to the elderly hardware.

I don't what put the idea into my head, but I d/l'ed the 2nd 'point release' of 'Bionic Beaver', 18.04.2 LTS, last night, burnt it to DVD, and took it for a test run. It looked all very slick & polished - I definitely prefer the GNOME desktop to Unity, with its horrendous 3D hardware acceleration demands; everything seemed to work fine (even Cheese, which I've been trying to get to work in Puppy on & off this last couple of years).....so I decided to install it properly, and have a play with it.

I will confess, I think Puppy's spoiled me this last few years. (And to think I complain about having to run the odd app as 'spot'..!)

I'd forgotten how frickin' awkward mainstream Linux distros can be to work with. In Puppy, you can do exactly what you want.....the responsibility for anything going wrong is squarely on your own shoulders. So you learn to be careful as you have fun with her.

I couldn't even import bookmarks to Firefox. Despite copying them across from Pup's 'my-documents' folder, and chowning permissions to 'mike:mike', Firefox wasn't having it. They'd import OK.....but steadfastly refused to show up. Anywhere.

Even Fred's 'portable-Firefox' won't run. I confess, I was fairly certain it would, but....no. Ubuntu won't execute Bash text-files, even if marked to do so, and encouraged to start via 'sudo'. It just opens them in a text editor....

Huh????

Canonical are so determined to insulate the user from any possible consequence of their own actions, it's ridiculous. 'Sudo this...' 'Sudo that...' 'Not allowed to do this.....' 'Can't do that...' 'You don't have permissions....'

Ah, to hell with all that!

I don't care if I make a hash of my Pups. It takes 5 minutes to back-up even my sizeable save-files (regularly performed once a month on average), so what does it matter? Personal data is, of course, all on external media.....the internal drives are all OS stuff.

It also took over half-an-hour to register for an Ubuntu Single Sign On a/c to get permission for a new feature Canonical are calling 'live-patch'.....certain kernel-mod 'upgrades' that don't require a re-boot. Every attempt I made to register (and I must have tried over 30 variations on a user-name) was met with a point-blank refusal, and a repetition of the same old refrain; something about the number of letters and numbers, upper- and lower-case not being 'recognisable'. Whaaat???

It amazes me that Ubuntu is still so popular, when they put obstacles like that in the user's way.....

-----------------------------------------

Oh, no doubt I could sort the problems out given time (and the inclination!), but this old dog's getting to the stage where I'm happy with what I know, and don't need all that hassle. I'm content with the Puppy community, good friends and all.

My 'Ubuntu experiment' lasted all of about 90 minutes. Including the 25 minutes install time (used to be 20, but it's almost double the size it used to be. Was once around a gig, now almost 2...)

If I ever make any tentative noises about trying this sort of thing again, I'd appreciate it if y'all would give me a good smack round the head....

Nightmare!!! Never again.

PUPPY ROOLZ, YEAH!!!!!


Mike. :wink:

User avatar
fredx181
Posts: 4448
Joined: Wed 11 Dec 2013, 12:37
Location: holland

#2 Post by fredx181 »

Hi Mike, yeah, I feel with you, all these permission issues, we "run-as-root" users are not used to that, we are spoiled :wink:
But on the other hand, most main distro's work that way being logged-in as normal user, so apparently lots of people have found their way to use it, using sudo etc, or some may have configured the system to login as root (which is possible, but can be a big struggle to find out how, btw).
Also, a "true multi-user system" may be what many people want.

Fred

User avatar
Mike Walsh
Posts: 6351
Joined: Sat 28 Jun 2014, 12:42
Location: King's Lynn, UK.

#3 Post by Mike Walsh »

Hi, Fred.

Nah, when I started with Linux a few years back, I naturally went with Ubuntu as the 'first-time' thing; everybody and his dog ( :lol: ) was recommending it as the distro for newbies.

And at that time, I was happy to spend hours 'sorting' problems out.....and considered it time well-spent.

Nowadays, well; I'm a few years older, and having been with Pup for a while I like to think I'm starting to know what I'm doing with her at long last. Conventional Linux is like learning a whole new language all over again.....and I no longer have the patience, or the inclination.

I was surprised your 'portable-Firefox' wouldn't fire up, though; when I tried it in AntiX a year or so back (also now consigned to the history books), it behaved itself, and started up straight away, as good as gold. I think Canonical must have toughened up some of their security protocols, but I can no longer be arsed to figure it all out!

I now know for definite that with Puppy I've truly found 'the one for me'. Long may she continue.


Mike. :wink:

Terry H
Posts: 708
Joined: Sun 29 Mar 2009, 16:48
Location: The Heart of Muskoka, ON Canada

#4 Post by Terry H »

Mike, your little adventure reminds me of a very old cartoon Tooter Turtle... Drizzle, drazzle,drizzle drone..time for this on to come home..
Last edited by Terry H on Fri 31 May 2019, 18:13, edited 1 time in total.

s243a
Posts: 2580
Joined: Tue 02 Sep 2014, 04:48
Contact:

#5 Post by s243a »

IN Ubuntu are you running the portable firefox as a non-root user?
Find me on [url=https://www.minds.com/ns_tidder]minds[/url] and on [url=https://www.pearltrees.com/s243a/puppy-linux/id12399810]pearltrees[/url].

darry19662018
Posts: 721
Joined: Sat 31 Mar 2018, 08:01
Location: Rakaia
Contact:

#6 Post by darry19662018 »

Usually the way I fix this is to install roxfiler and change the permissions and make executable - I do this in Refracta.

Strangly in Refracta had trouble running a portable seamonkey but you're portable sse Palemoon portable did once downloaded.
But yeah we take running as root for granted.
Puppy Linux Wiki: [url]http://wikka.puppylinux.com/HomePage[/url]

[url]https://freemedia.neocities.org/[/url]

s243a
Posts: 2580
Joined: Tue 02 Sep 2014, 04:48
Contact:

#7 Post by s243a »

delete
Last edited by s243a on Fri 31 May 2019, 18:47, edited 1 time in total.
Find me on [url=https://www.minds.com/ns_tidder]minds[/url] and on [url=https://www.pearltrees.com/s243a/puppy-linux/id12399810]pearltrees[/url].

s243a
Posts: 2580
Joined: Tue 02 Sep 2014, 04:48
Contact:

#8 Post by s243a »

darry19662018 wrote:Usually the way I fix this is to install roxfiler and change the permissions and make executable - I do this in Refracta.

Strangly in Refracta had trouble running a portable seamonkey but you're portable sse Palemoon portable did once downloaded.
But yeah we take running as root for granted.
One could just go chmod +x.

which makes me wonder if the portable version of firefox is giving executable permission to world. I had a simmilar kind of issue on my work developing TazPup64. See thread:
A script to fix Directory Permissions

Puppy might by default only gives executable permission to root (i.e. the user) and spot (i.e. the group), since by default files in puppylinux age given group=spot
Find me on [url=https://www.minds.com/ns_tidder]minds[/url] and on [url=https://www.pearltrees.com/s243a/puppy-linux/id12399810]pearltrees[/url].

User avatar
Mike Walsh
Posts: 6351
Joined: Sat 28 Jun 2014, 12:42
Location: King's Lynn, UK.

#9 Post by Mike Walsh »

s243a wrote:IN Ubuntu are you running the portable firefox as a non-root user?
Yep.

I doubt it's got anything to do with permissions, even though the whole thing was chowned to my user directory (using the recursive -R) to avoid this kind of problem.

It worked fine in AntiX after doing just that. AntiX is Debian-based, with exactly the same kind of owner/permissions structure and set-up. One wonders what changes Canonical have made to Ubuntu in recent versions; it may be Debian-based, but a lot of Ubuntu stuff is uniquely Canonical in nature. This is my first try-out of Ubuntu 'proper' for nearly 5 years; a lot can change over that kind of time-frame.

I mean, who else but Canonical would spend 5 years trying to develop a brand-new, unique display server (Mir), only to promptly bin it as soon as they realized it wasn't going to be adopted by the community at large.....? Shuttleworth must have money to burn, given that Canonical has consistently made a loss ever since going public as a limited company; after all, it's no secret that only his personal fortune has kept the company afloat.

I'm sticking with Pup from now on. She'll do for me; her binaries may mostly be from Ubuntu, but the way she works is a hell of a lot simpler & more comprehensible.

(*At my time of life, 'simple & comprehensible' is good! I get easily confused... :lol:*)


Mike. :wink:
Last edited by Mike Walsh on Fri 31 May 2019, 21:11, edited 1 time in total.

s243a
Posts: 2580
Joined: Tue 02 Sep 2014, 04:48
Contact:

#10 Post by s243a »

Mike Walsh wrote:
s243a wrote:IN Ubuntu are you running the portable firefox as a non-root user?
Yep.

I doubt it's got anything to do with permissions, even though the whole thing was chowned to my user directory (using the recursive -R) to avoid this kind of problem.

It worked fine in AntiX after doing just that. AntiX is Debian-based, with exactly the same kind of owner/permissions structure and set-up. One wonders what changes Canonical have made to Ubuntu in recent versions; it may be Debian-based, but a lot of Ubuntu stuff is uniquely Canonical in nature. This is my first try-out of Ubuntu 'proper' for nearly 5 years; a lot can change over that kind of time-frame.

I mean, who else but Canonical would spend 5 years trying to develop a brand-new, unique display server (Mir), only to promptly bin it as soon as they realized it wasn't going to be adopted by the community at large.....? Shuttleworth must have money to burn, given that Canonical has consistently made a loss ever since going public as a limited company; after all, it's no secret that only his personal fortune has kept the company afloat.

I'm sticking with Pup from now on. She'll do for me; her b inaries may mostly be from Ubuntu, but the way she works is a hell of a lot simpler & more comprehensible.

(*At my time of life, 'simple & comprehensible' is good! I get easily confused... :lol:*)


Mike. :wink:
I wonder if LD_LIBRARY_PATH is getting ignored for some reason. The portable firefox prepends some directories to LD_LIBRARY_PATH. Maybe do an strace to see where is is looking for thing like apulse.
Find me on [url=https://www.minds.com/ns_tidder]minds[/url] and on [url=https://www.pearltrees.com/s243a/puppy-linux/id12399810]pearltrees[/url].

User avatar
bigpup
Posts: 13886
Joined: Sun 11 Oct 2009, 18:15
Location: S.C. USA

#11 Post by bigpup »

The dark force is strong, but resist you must!

There is a more powerful force in the universe.

We are Puppy.
Resistance is futile.
The things they do not tell you, are usually the clue to solving the problem.
When I was a kid I wanted to be older.... This is not what I expected :shock:
YaPI(any iso installer)

User avatar
Lobster
Official Crustacean
Posts: 15522
Joined: Wed 04 May 2005, 06:06
Location: Paradox Realm
Contact:

#12 Post by Lobster »

:D

these bigdog pseudo/sudo have little to offer us ..

Icreate 199 (for MacOs, IOS and Iphone, Ipad etc) has an article on running Linux on your MacOS. Which Linux do they use? Puppy Linux 8 BionicPup.

That's right to get your Apple device working properly .... run Puppy on it ...

Simpler, Better, Faster
Iz Puppy Masterplan ...
Puppy Raspup 8.2Final 8)
Puppy Links Page http://www.smokey01.com/bruceb/puppy.html :D

User avatar
01101001b
Posts: 123
Joined: Thu 09 Mar 2017, 01:20
Location: Buenos Aires, Argentina

Re: Back to Ubuntu? Arrrgh.....!!

#13 Post by 01101001b »

Mike Walsh wrote:I'd forgotten how frickin' awkward mainstream Linux distros can be to work with. In Puppy, you can do exactly what you want
Your conclusion, sir, is quite spot on 8-)

p310don
Posts: 1492
Joined: Tue 19 May 2009, 23:11
Location: Brisbane, Australia

#14 Post by p310don »

quite spot on
I'd say root on, rather than spot on :D

User avatar
8Geee
Posts: 2181
Joined: Mon 12 May 2008, 11:29
Location: N.E. USA

#15 Post by 8Geee »

So its Puppy 4-the-Win.
A job well done.
Thanks to all.

Regards
8Geee
Linux user #498913 "Some people need to reimagine their thinking."
"Zuckerberg: a large city inhabited by mentally challenged people."

User avatar
mouldy
Posts: 663
Joined: Wed 04 May 2005, 21:47

#16 Post by mouldy »

I have been playing with non-puppy distributions this spring/summer. Not particularly fond of Ubuntu. Lubuntu LXQt better, especially after I gave user root abilities. Some hoop jumping, but once done, not nearly as annoying. It still makes me use sudo sometimes, but then doesnt ask for a password. I can live with that. Typing in a password to give myself permission to use my own computer is about as stupid as it gets. I get the need for the hierarchy on shared computer where you dont want everybody to be able to make fundamental changes, but for your own personal computer its just PITA.

Right now I am using 32bit version LXDE spin of Debian 10 "Buster". I really like Buster, its got its quirks but it does at least let me log in and run as root. Also very stable. If Puppy didnt exist, this is what I would be using day to day.

User avatar
Ananda98
Posts: 56
Joined: Mon 03 Jul 2017, 10:04
Location: Bali, Indonesia

#17 Post by Ananda98 »

Ubuntu? Hm... My first linux distro that I use, when I still in junior high school.

Yes, at the first time, I think using Ubuntu was easy, as easy as Windows. But, after tried to install one derivative of it (Linux Mint), I think Puppy is more more better.

On Pentium 4 machine, I only need less than 5 minutes to use Puppy Linux in live mode, and not more than 15 minutes to install it (full install). On the other hand, I need a half hour just to get Linux Mint running on live cd, on my old netbook, Acer Aspire One.

Installing software? In Puppy, installing software isn't hard. Just find a package, and install it. No sudo -su or changing files because missing repositories server (I experienced it). More easier compared with Windows, when I need to read a long (very long) EULA. Ubuntu? Installing apps into old Ubuntu, seems like a little distaster I think :D

User avatar
takenp
Posts: 101
Joined: Wed 05 Aug 2015, 23:27
Location: Moskva
Contact:

#18 Post by takenp »

Hi Mike! It was a real pleasure to read your success story. The mine is simple: somewhere in 2014 after had been checking alot of distros for few years trying to find the only one I came to the conclusion that puppy is 'my distro'. So at least 5 last years I'm on puppy half of my computer time (another half is on MaxOS X 10.8 -- the latest great OS from Steve). MacOS is very robust and convenient but puppy is much better. Its like a small wooden country house placed deep inside beautiful scenery far away from the concrete jungles with fireplace and flowers on the window and cat lying on your legs while you're writing a novel :)

and yes.. this root access - I love it, I love JWM, rox and many many other bricks which puppy is built from.. But the most I love the community.. the best possibly one.


p.s.
Ubuntu.. is just for everyone. The only two distros that I'd put right after our puppy are Void Linux and Porteus OS. I was impressed by runit (init) of Void as well as the maturityof Porteus alike puppy OS!

oui

#19 Post by oui »

no mike, excuse me, I don't agree with you: It is too much not properly justified euphoria and newcomers ready that would probably find, that you mislead them.

yes, you are right concerning the direct access to the build in abilities.

yes, you are right concerning the use of binaries available in some Puppy depositories (note: sometime extremely difficult to find!)

yes, you are right concerning some limited old version out the time or other solutions

but here and at other places are the real problem beginning! I demonstrate it for you now with a very special edition out the Puppy world but, I know, an extreme case:

Code: Select all

http://google.com site:http://murga-linux.com/puppy/ wary64-6.9.9
I use it each day for now a long time. I am in it now and write through the build in browser, not Firefox, it is in my opinion no Puppy browser (Puppy did very early decide to use the full Mozilla Suite after different hesitations with the Opera suite, and I see that BK continues to build the first one in his new productions in! I am certain that a lot of the old and constant followers of the Puppy community as I consider SeaMonkey as her browser).

But I did forget
a. to copy the thread(s) about it at the right time (because at this time, my main computer was on with Pentium and not AMD64, at this time was this ISO not interesting for me!)
and
b. to copy some devx file if there were one!
c. to copy the blog pages from BK and all seems to be away now.
d. to note under which name(s) this project did start or be named in the discussions or publications.

only one details is real: the name of the ISO (probably, I never change those names in my private depot where it was since parution because I have an old not really used laptop (bad screen) wiht AMD64.

(today, I use the computers that I have differently as our house have different floor levels and our children don't live any more with us, so I have to live with a mixture of computers and operating systems, all Linux excepted a test with ReactOS and a test to return to Windows 95)

it is very difficult
1. to locate the Puppy depositories excepted for an hand full of named official versions (*1
2. in some cases to find out the adequate threads, and, with them, the important companion files especially the exquisite devx (not included in the Iso else it would be the most rational way to avoid an incomplete system...)
3. to use parallel on different computers depending of the CPU exactly the same environment

and, oh terror,

4. to reinstall some oldies being important for you, that you did use for a long time, as the (now old) release of puppy was new, with success for your specific jobs and you file formats, and did have really to abandon to follow the progress of new puppy versions (ok! it is often the same in Ubuntu, and also sometimes in Debian but it is no MUST in the Debian world.

Example:
- try to use some KDE :roll:
- try to install some Children environment software like Scratch2

I did use both years along IN PUPPY and loose them in the new versions, exactly as lot of other goodies being more and more difficult and cryptic to install now in new Puppy's (if you have luck and can find them), like the map building system merkaartor, the genealogy software gramps (or all the other shit depending of the from the Linux world prefered software Python), computer languages, independant (from the terrible «firefox clan» or «google clan») browsers.

Your problem with porting file from Ubuntu personal environment under user name to is probably a trick from Firefox. I would say, with Seamonkey, you would not have that problem and maximal loose some figures like content of the bookmarks bar. But you would probably have to erase your ~/.adobe, your ~/.macromedia and your cache and re enter into your browser IN THE ORIGIN SYSTEM, Ubuntu, before you copy (with the -a option, it is very important, and you have to quit completely your browser before you copy with cp (no hidden little download manager or other window open!!!) if not you disturb it because it can't be correctly opened as you restart and begin to use your old files!) the subdir ~/.mozilla into your Puppy (for those reading this message: if you will do it into the reverse direction, from Puppy into some for ex. Debian, you have, before you try to open the (other) browser preferently to install the same version of the browser, the mozilla depositories for Seamonkey continue to offer all old releases :!: , and, very important, use chown on the copied subdir :idea: :
sudo chown :R myself:myself /home/myself/.mozilla
(adapt the 3 "myself" to your effective username in the target system as it is probably different! Porting from Ubuntu to a Puppy system where the browser works under username, for ex. my actual version of Quiky 64 requires probably the same precautions)!

AND,

to use Ubuntu, a distro without CD / DVD series and erasing old releases about completely (not really: I did read there is some kind of rest of each release, perhaps only for the long time ones, in the web. But difficult to find) is pretty stupid as you have with Debian the security to dispose at home on all the stuff on DVD for cheap price or with Deepin the security of great compatibility of software through all versions. I would in all cases prefer the one with the always accessible software collection :roll: .

(I have in my Deepin actually chrome, chromium, SRware Iron, I never install Firefox but it is proposed, but I did install Seamonkey of course 49.4 the actual version, palemoon, luakit (a really fascinating very small browser requiring some experience in VIm, but with good build in big help screen), xombrero initially with webkit3 but reinstalled with webkit first generation (only to avoid the double installation of webkit; it would allow to install more on it as TazWeb from Slitaz or the vimprobably if I would find a 64 bit binary als well as the early midori, not the most actual release based on the most recent webkit), merkaartor, scratch2, gramps, and more and more and more including the Chinese WPS office, the Microsoft office compatible office, is better if you want to exchange with other you files!)

I can not understand the choice of the most Puppy developers to use Ubuntu and if possible :lol: not the long time versions!

(*1 it would be easy possible to always create also in Puppy deriv. from Ubuntu/Debian an /etc/apt subdir and write in it the url of adapted depositories, for ex. in a README.depositories.html with active links - never one would have to search! As well as it would be possible to always include le devx file in each ISO to avoid the propagation of ugly systems without development ability!

Post Reply