Puppy Linux Discussion Forum Forum Index Puppy Linux Discussion Forum
Puppy HOME page : puppylinux.com
"THE" alternative forum : puppylinux.info
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

The time now is Fri 31 Oct 2014, 06:59
All times are UTC - 4
 Forum index » Taking the Puppy out for a walk » Suggestions
Lucid and Slackware repositories... A mistake?
Moderators: Flash, Ian, JohnMurga
Post_new_topic   Reply_to_topic View_previous_topic :: View_next_topic
Page 1 of 1 Posts_count  
Author Message
Atle

Joined: 19 Nov 2008
Posts: 286
Location: Oslo, Norway

PostPosted: Fri 09 Mar 2012, 11:53    Post_subject:  Lucid and Slackware repositories... A mistake?
Sub_title: Would base Puppy on another MiniDistro make less mess?
 

Sometimes I ask my self why Puppy's two big ones are based on Slackware and Ubuntu Lucid repositories as such a big number of packages fails to install and there are dependencies from here to eternity.

It sounds nice with having such big and well know repositories, but the truth is that its not really ever going to work properly. The only thing that does work a 100% is the .PET and .SFS packages...

So I wonder if anyone will ever take a closer look at Slitaz and Tiny Core, as they are the little brothers of Puppy so to say, in comparison with hanging out there with the "big guys" that has so complex packages?

Slitaz has more than 3000 packages today. Not all of them the latest version, but they do a very good job over there. Its looks to me as a package is a package, and I believe that they do not have a lot of dependencies.

As for Tiny Core, they have quite a number of packages as well... I do not know the number.

So without claiming I am right here, I believe that at least the Slitaz Packages are based on Slitaz not having KDE, not having Gnome or what what. And that Slitaz is very basic and the dependencies are IN the so one package can actually use them...

I know this is not a popular post, but for me it seems like more natural for Puppy to use such a repository and giving users a reasonable number of WORKING packages, as at least for me, I do no longer bother to try the packages from Ubuntu Lucid or Slackware as it not really working in to many cases.

I know people will jump on me for this, but I hope that someone finds a way to make Puppy something that REALLY works all the time, in stead of "dependency hell" and dreams that can not come true...

So now I wait for some serious verbal beating here...

Atle
Back to top
View user's profile Send_private_message Visit_website MSNM 
otropogo


Joined: 24 Oct 2009
Posts: 702
Location: Southern Rocky Mt. Trench

PostPosted: Tue 13 Mar 2012, 15:49    Post_subject: Re: Lucid and Slackware repositories... A mistake?
Sub_title: Would base Puppy on another MiniDistro make less mess?
 

Atle wrote:
Sometimes I ask my self why Puppy's two big ones are based on Slackware and Ubuntu Lucid repositories as such a big number of packages fails to install and there are dependencies from here to eternity.

It sounds nice with having such big and well know repositories, but the truth is that its not really ever going to work properly. The only thing that does work a 100% is the .PET and .SFS packages...


Correction: .PET packages DO NOT 'work a 100%' as you state. I haven't played with .sfs



Atle wrote:
Slitaz has more than 3000 packages today. Not all of them the latest version, but they do a very good job over there. Its looks to me as a package is a package, and I believe that they do not have a lot of dependencies.

As for Tiny Core, they have quite a number of packages as well... I do not know the number.



And have you reviewed and considered how up to date these packages are?

http://www.murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?t=70855&start=1245

...

Quote:
I know this is not a popular post, but for me it seems like more natural for Puppy to use such a repository and giving users a reasonable number of WORKING packages, as at least for me, I do no longer bother to try the packages from Ubuntu Lucid or Slackware as it not really working in to many cases.


After many years of working with Linux distros from the biggest to the smallest, I can assure you that the ONLY way you would ever find a distro in which all the applications just work would be to

a) be very lucky in your hardware and software configuration and

b) be rather conservative and frugal in your selection and use of applications

Quote:
I know people will jump on me for this, but I hope that someone finds a way to make Puppy something that REALLY works all the time, in stead of "dependency hell" and dreams that can not come true...


So now I wait for some serious verbal beating here...
Atle




I don't mean to "jump" on you, much less to deliver a "serious verbal beating". But your expectations from an operating system are simply utopian. You can't reasonably expect this from any OS. There are always bugs that need to be discovered after the initial "final' release, in Linux as in Windows.

Your complaints are entirely sound, but not the proposed solution.

My suggestion, previously aired in the thread linked above, is to have an official Puppy designed to be able to use the RPM repositories. Unlike the slackware/slatiz repositories, the rpm packages are kept quite current and are well supported. While they may not be as replete with entertainment-oriented apps, those that are offered will generally be more carefully constructed.

This is not just a Puppy issue, but a Linux issue. You need a large, stable user base in order to be able to provide the support to maintain a reliable and current OS.

If the Puppy development community has the will and the resources to produce and maintain a Puppy that can use the same packages available to CentOS, I feel it is certain to increase its userbase and greatly improve its reputation. I'm sorry to say that I don't know that it has either.

It appears to me that this community (to which you and I are, at best, whispers in the wind, and, at worst, mere guinea pigs) does not have the resources to maintain the present variety of Puppies, and certainly cannot hope to add yet another one, compatible with rpm packages, to the mix. So the "will" required would include at very least the decision to drop Slacko from official development.

OTOH, I believe that without both consolidating its development efforts AND achieving compatibility with a large, stable, and current repository of applications, the entire Puppy project is doomed to a downward spiral to irrelevance and perhaps oblivion.

I regret this not only because I have used Puppy daily for many years now, despite all of the frustrations, and am very reluctant to lose it, but also because this forum is, because of its large user base, its relatively free format, the breadth and depth of the discussions here (from geeky-plus to philosophical) a precious asset to the entire Linux community. And I don't see how it could be maintained without a current Puppy and a growing base of users.

_________________
otropogo@gmail.com facebook.com/otropogo
Back to top
View user's profile Send_private_message Visit_website 
Display_posts:   Sort by:   
Page 1 of 1 Posts_count  
Post_new_topic   Reply_to_topic View_previous_topic :: View_next_topic
 Forum index » Taking the Puppy out for a walk » Suggestions
Jump to:  

Rules_post_cannot
Rules_reply_cannot
Rules_edit_cannot
Rules_delete_cannot
Rules_vote_cannot
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
[ Time: 0.0678s ][ Queries: 11 (0.0042s) ][ GZIP on ]