hi oui
puppy is small
but very functional
and can revive most old computers
however because of its design
it can never be made as efficient
as corepup/tinycore
however it can be cut down to have just the stuff you need
to make it as small as possible
first you have to decide what you want
and then you could just remaster the iso
to add the stuff you do want
and remove what you don't want
i don't think it would be worth messing with woof-ce
thats just a big unnecessary build and tweak process
since you want a distro that already works well to start with
as for woof-ce
the problem is that it is too complex and unwieldy
for the average person to use
but the gurus are using it to make puppies
so it seems to work for them
woof-ce is not responsible for the bloat
its the size of the components you choose
i personally do not see any further use
in trying to make puppy a minimal system
since as i said its design limits its efficiency
so i will return to working on corepup
wanderer
Puppy's big problem with woof and woof CE
@ wanderer:
I read somewhere that the development of Core had been put on hold indefinitely.
Is that true?
@oui:
There are other factors than a larger size that may make a user decide against
Puppy. How about a boot loader that cannot boot all other Puppies? Would that
qualify as a deterrent? Please see here. I discovered this yesterday. The devs
at woof-CE should pay attention to these things.
BFN.
I read somewhere that the development of Core had been put on hold indefinitely.
Is that true?
@oui:
There are other factors than a larger size that may make a user decide against
Puppy. How about a boot loader that cannot boot all other Puppies? Would that
qualify as a deterrent? Please see here. I discovered this yesterday. The devs
at woof-CE should pay attention to these things.
BFN.
musher0
~~~~~~~~~~
"You want it darker? We kill the flame." (L. Cohen)
~~~~~~~~~~
"You want it darker? We kill the flame." (L. Cohen)
it is wonderful (I did, for myself, eliminate it, because I use the full Spectrum of Seamonkey: Browser, Mail, IRC, and, most important for me, HTML WYSYG editor. But I can understand that some one will simply surf in the web, and probably is that built in Firefox better than the built-in Seamonkey. The size difference between both causes an important economy of size!Smithy wrote:@Oui,
how about trying something in this ball park?
DELL SX280 750 MB Pentium4, =Thin Slacko
Acer emachines 2 GB AMD64. =Thin Slacko
DELL XPS15 =Thin Slacko
https://archive.org/download/Puppy_Linux_ThinSlacko
99mb, you're not really going to do any better than that.
If it was possible to interchange that built in Firefox with a browser release able to show HTML5, ThinSlacko would be an exceptional and actual enough Puppy yet until today!
(I did test remastering again (reason: after localization, not only poor test! Change in localization, change in /etc/clock/ , change in /etc/X11/xorg.conf to introduce KbVariant) and the size did stay preserved! Perfect!!!
For those starting out the CDROM, it is a great difference to read only 99 MB instead of more than 200 MB or more !!
As playing time, I did test (again) old CD's from me! Enjoy:
(It seems both would work willing on my i7 laptop (but I was not able to start the network: I did never use 0.20. My first release was 0,24, I have also yes the CD, but I did never use network! At that time, I did connect directly through the phone modem and can remember it was easy...). We also have Puppy's for RAM size up 48 MB! My modern Vertical Mouse works but is slow. The screen resolution is better as at that time on old PC's from that time! You can see yourself the evolution of the scope of app's between 2 releases in a few months...)
.
- Attachments
-
- Pyppy-0.4-ISOsize20MB.jpg
- (69.22 KiB) Downloaded 299 times
-
- Puppy-0.7.4.jpg
- (81.38 KiB) Downloaded 304 times
pls read precedent msg (it was the reason why I did try to start the old CD's)!musher0 wrote:Puppy. How about a boot loader that cannot boot all other Puppies? Would that qualify as a deterrent? Please see here.
the very very old iso's from BK continue to start willing.
error from woof or error from the developer?
I also find wrong don't to use the "UNIFIED" loader (that word stay in the acronym GRUB) that really all great Linux distributions use and I also would prefer to encourage unity of middle if those middle are reasonable... But I am Puppyist since 2003 and as the Puppy community did decide grub4dos I use it until a new full installation from an other great distributor will erase it without I can do somewhat opposite without to have the risk to loose the new installation .
those manipulations are NOT GOOD for the MBR of our harddisks. The decision of the Puppy community here is an error...
I don't know some download point any more, only my old damaged CD (never used but always unprotected since 2003! In 2003 I did use directly 0.24, only a bit bigger, but its condition is more worse).
I also have yet the extrem tiny release from MU coming very later at the time of releases 1.x or 2.x (10 MB with a good browser; MU did also make a 7 MB version, it did work but was not as well...).
I also have yet the extrem tiny release from MU coming very later at the time of releases 1.x or 2.x (10 MB with a good browser; MU did also make a 7 MB version, it did work but was not as well...).