Puppy Linux Discussion Forum

[amigo]

When you open a terminal it will be running whatever shell your default is set to. If you then start another shell, it will remain running until you type 'exit' whiuch returns you to the original shell.

There can be a great difference between /bin/sh and /bin/bash -even if /bin/sh is a link to /bin/bash. Running bash called as /bin/sh yupports *some* bash extennsions which are not supported by 'real' sh. if /bin/sh is really ash, or dash, or busybox ash/lash/hash/mash, then expect even more differences. None of the above are really 'sh' as it was in the old days -ash and dash support more features and any of the busybox versions will most likely support less. busybox ash is not the same as ash.

The point is, for consistency, you need to use the shebang for the exact shell which supports the code you are writing. If you use '#!/bin/sh' as the shebang, don't assume that /bin/sh will be bash and act like bash-as-sh. if you really want to use /bin/sh, then you'll have to check all of your syntay to make sure it works with whatever /bin/sh really is. Once again, if you call bash as 'bash' it will (obviously) support all the bash features which were compiled into it. But, if you run bash as 'sh', it will only support a small sub-set of the bash extensions.

[shinobar]

[01micko]

Hi shino (good to see you are ok )

What about an adjustment to the run action for an sfs.. depending upon sfs_load's existence?

/root/Choices/MIME-types/application_x-squashfs-image

[lithpr]

This is fantastic. works flawless under 2.5.4, as far as i can tell. Thank you!

Lithpr

[mhanifpriatama]

Shinobar :

[shinobar]

15 Mar 2011: sfs_load-1.0: again PUPMODE=5/6/77

[stu90]

Hi shinobar,
Terrible events over in your part of the world hope you, your family and friends are ok?

Thanks for update - will test 1.0 after dinner.

Also had this message? when testing an .sfs on 0.9

[shinobar]

Fortunately my area and my family is safe. Thank you stu90.

[mavrothal]

v1.0 works fine in pupmode=6 on my end again. v1.0 indeed
One thing though that all sfs_load pets have (from v0.3 onwards that I used) is that have wrong folder permissions (777) for most folders and files. specifically

[shinobar]

small bugfixes:
# 17 Mar 2011 v1.1: load/unload under PUPMODE=5, launcher
Thanks mavrothal. The permissions are fixed.

[gcmartin]

[quote="Q5sys"]

[gcmartin]

Shinobar, I have not tried it, but should I expect "sfs_load-1.1 on-the-fly" to work in FATDOG?
Edited: Can think of any reason why this would NOT work on 64bit FATDOG?

Thanks in advance

[`f00]

Might only be me and my trifling, but sfs_load-1.1 has some issues in macpup520 (and perhaps mp511 as well, but that one is a ram issue with too much junk in the savefiles, add a measly ~60mb of sfses and RAMFULL for that liveCDmulti :shrug: ). Now, it did work in w511,NOP (both Xvesa and Xorg in different usb savefiles), but unfortunately the savefiles corrupted .. possibly due to my trying to bypass NOP's somewhat odd shutdown ui (seriously don't care for that ui at all but I thought I was okay with Exit to Prompt->reboot .. apparently not but that's for savefile-config thread detailing).

Anyhow, a camera-pic (image-link @647k) of mp520 on reboot/fail for what it's worth - maybe a conflict between etc/init.d/sfs_load and bootmanager? As noted on pic, the sfses did not load on-the-fly and I thought it a bit unusual to have to specify to bootmanager to load what I'd imagined already loaded by sfs_load. Perhaps an unload of the sfses in sfs_load and then a load of them via bootmanager? Have to bonk the last savedir but just odd that bootmanager and sfs_load in mp520 have that 'failure to communicate' as it were. Oh well, it is lupu-based so (sure is tiresome having them fail or mess up on no apparent schedule with liveCDmulti or CDboot+usbsave, though) but that's ok since sfs_load works like a charm on my old w020 (liveCDmulti with a 'lucky 13' savedirs and still going strong )

[sc0ttman]

Firstly, sorry I have not read the whole thread..

But, did you incorporate a function similar to the 'pinstall.sh' function that we have with PET files? Because when loading certain SFS files, they require extra work, as the pinstall is not normally executed...

As I see it, seaside, you and goingnuts have all made good SFS work...

It would be great to see all 3 of you incorporate the execution of any "pinstall.sh" scripts found in the root of the SFS when it is loaded on the fly.. Then the pinstall could be optionally removed - unless that causes some problems.

I think this may be a good idea, as more OTF SFS loading will catch on, I am sure of it... Also many SFS files were convereted for PET files originally... The vbox SFS around, for example...

I have posted this to seaside, on the SFS-Exec thread as well, hope people dont mind

[HiDeHo]

Hi does this work in the latest puplets lupu series, wary, and quirky. also does it allow more sfs files to be added to the os as the default bootmanager can only load 6 sometiems i want more.

lighthouse pup can losd 40 and it also has sfs combiner installed both in teh base