The journey to Archpup..

For talk and support relating specifically to Puppy derivatives
Message
Author
ajbibb
Posts: 12
Joined: Thu 15 Apr 2010, 22:51

#16 Post by ajbibb »

No static release.

Following is my understanding - I've not done an initial Arch install in over a year and things have changed quite a bit since I last did. Every month they publish an ISO, but this is really just enough to boot and get on the Internet. At that point you use Pacman to upgrade the packages on the ISO and download what you want. The installer scripts have been removed (no one to support them) so print out the beginners guide and the official install guide and use them to walk you through the install process. A bunch of people seem to find this easier than using the old install scripts - but again, I've no personal experience with it.

Back to your project of ArchPup. Arch is going over to systemd booting, probably doesn't make any difference with user packages, but it might make a difference if you are trying to build in their system packages to your Puppy.

elroy

#17 Post by elroy »

puppyluvr wrote:...and cost me a wife...
Damn, can I relate to you :D
Keep at it. If you can create an Arch-Pup, you'll probably end up with the best package-manager puppy has to offer.

User avatar
puppyluvr
Posts: 3470
Joined: Sun 06 Jan 2008, 23:14
Location: Chickasha Oklahoma
Contact:

#18 Post by puppyluvr »

:D Hello,
Taking a break to clear the head, before I rewoof it again..
I was hoping to fix the previous woof from the cli, but its missing too much..
However, the ppm worked, as did bash. So....close..
Am D/L Arch today to have a look..
Will get back.... :D
Close the Windows, and open your eyes, to a whole new world
I am Lead Dog of the
Puppy Linux Users Group on Facebook
Join us!

Puppy since 2.15CE...

dogbert0360
Posts: 27
Joined: Sun 30 Sep 2012, 03:18

#19 Post by dogbert0360 »

We text-ed earlier and I just want to add my encouragement again and know that you will bring "Archie" pup alive and barking. Indeed the work and wait will be well rewarded.

Keep fighting!!!

User avatar
Q5sys
Posts: 1105
Joined: Thu 11 Dec 2008, 19:49
Contact:

#20 Post by Q5sys »

Im rooting for you Puppyluvr!
Keep trying. If you make it work you'll go down in history. :)

User avatar
puppyluvr
Posts: 3470
Joined: Sun 06 Jan 2008, 23:14
Location: Chickasha Oklahoma
Contact:

#21 Post by puppyluvr »

:D Hello,
I`m still here...
Still trying..
Still pulling my hair out.. LOL
Close the Windows, and open your eyes, to a whole new world
I am Lead Dog of the
Puppy Linux Users Group on Facebook
Join us!

Puppy since 2.15CE...

User avatar
puppyluvr
Posts: 3470
Joined: Sun 06 Jan 2008, 23:14
Location: Chickasha Oklahoma
Contact:

#22 Post by puppyluvr »

Close the Windows, and open your eyes, to a whole new world
I am Lead Dog of the
Puppy Linux Users Group on Facebook
Join us!

Puppy since 2.15CE...

User avatar
BarryK
Puppy Master
Posts: 9392
Joined: Mon 09 May 2005, 09:23
Location: Perth, Western Australia
Contact:

#23 Post by BarryK »

Woof is being fixed for Arch Linux, see my blog post:

http://bkhome.org/blog2/?viewDetailed=00166

Give me a bit more time, hopefully I can actually get it to boot to the X desktop.
[url]https://bkhome.org/news/[/url]

stifiling
Posts: 388
Joined: Sun 30 Dec 2007, 03:56

simargl (ArchPup)

#24 Post by stifiling »

BarryK wrote:Woof is being fixed for Arch Linux, see my blog post:

http://bkhome.org/blog2/?viewDetailed=00166

Give me a bit more time, hopefully I can actually get it to boot to the X desktop.

any specific reason why simargl and ArchPup is being treated like a shadow or an optical illusion?

you kind of have to put forth effort, to skip over the 10 ArchPup threads, and dig up this one. As if the mind set was, "Let me see which other thread I can find, besides these ArchPup ones, to leave this Arch Linux Woof post in."

Seeing Arch Linux working in woof would be a very welcoming addition. I see you guys (a few names I was surprised not to see in the ArchPup thread months ago) kind of struggling over here. Simargl's already got it all figured out. Asking for his help seems ideal...no??

User avatar
Announcer
Posts: 151
Joined: Tue 03 Jan 2012, 12:26

Re: simargl (ArchPup)

#25 Post by Announcer »

stifiling wrote:any specific reason why simargl and ArchPup is being treated like a shadow or an optical illusion?
Like Barry said in his blog post, Arch packages in Woof was a thing well before simargl came along. (Not to minimize simargl's accomplishment.)

Perhaps simargl could contact Barry and offer assistance; it doesn't have to be the other way around.

Not that it's any of our concern. Barry can do whatever he likes; after all, Barry is Puppy Linux.

stifiling
Posts: 388
Joined: Sun 30 Dec 2007, 03:56

Re: simargl (ArchPup)

#26 Post by stifiling »

Announcer wrote:Like Barry said in his blog post, Arch packages in Woof was a thing well before simargl came along.
He also said it was 'broken' and then 'broke' some more. Yea, I seen that Arch Linux was swallowed by Woof years ago....just never seen it spit back out. Have you? Can you post the link..to the 'working' Arch Linux Puppy Derivative...before 'ArchPup'? Saying Arch Linux existed in Woof....is the same as calling the OP of this thread....an idiot.
Announcer wrote:Perhaps simargl could contact Barry and offer assistance; it doesn't have to be the other way around.
I'm thinking maybe he would have...if his 10 threads weren't, dodged/skipped/deliberately ignored, 'and not by mistake, on purpose'......and this old thread 'dug up' and 'necrobumped' to leave an Arch/Puppy Linux related post in.
Announcer wrote:Not that it's any of our concern. Barry can do whatever he likes; after all, Barry is Puppy Linux.
That's true. Barry is Puppy Linux. But simargl is the first person to make 'Puppy Linux & Arch Linux' work correctly together. So Simargl is Arch Puppy Linux. You've got to put the credit where the credit goes.

User avatar
Announcer
Posts: 151
Joined: Tue 03 Jan 2012, 12:26

#27 Post by Announcer »

I don't see simargl on here bitching. Just you.

Maybe they're talking behind the scenes, who knows?

stifiling
Posts: 388
Joined: Sun 30 Dec 2007, 03:56

#28 Post by stifiling »

Announcer wrote:I don't see simargl on here bitching. Just you.
that's beside the point....and also goes both ways.
Announcer wrote:Maybe they're talking behind the scenes, who knows?
Well maybe Barry did acknowledge Archpup...and isn't deliberately ignoring it. Time will reveal...and then 'we'll know'.

simargl

#29 Post by simargl »

.
Last edited by simargl on Sun 01 Sep 2013, 14:41, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
BarryK
Puppy Master
Posts: 9392
Joined: Mon 09 May 2005, 09:23
Location: Perth, Western Australia
Contact:

#30 Post by BarryK »

01micko wrote:Be aware that some of the templates (most) are a bit ubuntu-centric. I have had to hack a few for slacko so that critical stuff doesn't get thrown out. You can avoid using the templates by renaming the "package" in the second field of the PKGS_SPECS_TABLE variable. Some likely culprits can be binutils, coreutils and util-linux.
Hopefully this situation has improved with the latest Woof, see recent blog post:

http://bkhome.org/blog2/?viewDetailed=00178
[url]https://bkhome.org/news/[/url]

User avatar
BarryK
Puppy Master
Posts: 9392
Joined: Mon 09 May 2005, 09:23
Location: Perth, Western Australia
Contact:

#31 Post by BarryK »

I now have Arch pup booting to the desktop:

http://bkhome.org/blog2/?viewDetailed=00179
[url]https://bkhome.org/news/[/url]

User avatar
BarryK
Puppy Master
Posts: 9392
Joined: Mon 09 May 2005, 09:23
Location: Perth, Western Australia
Contact:

#32 Post by BarryK »

The question was raised above about another project named "Archpup", and why have I ignored it.

Well, a few reasons...

1. Not Woof
I am only dealing with Woof and puppies built with Woof. As I understand it, the other Archpup does not use Woof. Or rather, just the 'roofs-skeleton' is taken out of Woof and other scripts are used to build the distro.

2. No PPM
Woof has the Puppy Package Manager. Actually, this is in rootfs-skeleton, but the other Archpup does not use it, instead uses pacman, the Arch Linux package manager.

3. Diffferent UI
The packages and UI are very different from normal puppies. No JWM, no ROX-Filer.

No. 3 is a minor point, as puplets can be built with different packages for the UI. But, it contributes toward something that is somewhat different from a "puppy".

At what point do you say, hey, this is a different distro? Simargl describes it as a variant of Puppy, well that it is.

Anyway, it is not a Woof-built Puppy, so is off the radar for me.

Good luck to simargl though. His distro has it's own site and is really a fork, that is based on some of the Puppy initrd and skeleton infrastructure. So, it stands alone as it's own distro.
[url]https://bkhome.org/news/[/url]

stifiling
Posts: 388
Joined: Sun 30 Dec 2007, 03:56

#33 Post by stifiling »

BarryK wrote:Anyway, it is not a Woof-built Puppy, so is off the radar for me.
64-bit is another Puppy I was also hoping to see in Woof. Is this build of FatDog64, another 'Woof fork', for one reason or another, an exception to the rule?

FatDog64 falls under the exact same category as ArchPup, as far as not being Woof-built...yet, it made it to Barry's Blog??....

anikin
Posts: 994
Joined: Thu 10 May 2012, 06:16

#34 Post by anikin »

BarryK wrote:I now have Arch pup booting to the desktop:

http://bkhome.org/blog2/?viewDetailed=00179
A true JWM/Rox based Archpup - this is really, welcome news. Built by someone, who knows what Puppy Linux is all about and what the community needs. But will it last? Can I hope, Barry will not screw his followers on a whim and not migrate his project to a newly created forum? Then abandon it there in favor of debasing other devs' work and dragging their name through the mud? Only time will tell.

stifiling
Posts: 388
Joined: Sun 30 Dec 2007, 03:56

#35 Post by stifiling »

anikin wrote:
BarryK wrote:I now have Arch pup booting to the desktop:

http://bkhome.org/blog2/?viewDetailed=00179
A true JWM/Rox based Archpup - this is really, welcome news. Built by someone, who knows what Puppy Linux is all about and what the community needs. But will it last? Can I hope, Barry will not screw his followers on a whim and not migrate his project to a newly created forum? Then abandon it there in favor of debasing other devs' work and dragging their name through the mud? Only time will tell.
ok...so you're defending the fact that ArchPup was ignored for months and months and months....by the father of Puppy Linux?

It's kind of like dad built a paper plane 5 years ago, but it didn't quite fly right. So you fix it and say..."Hey pops, look at how high this fly's!!" And he totally ignores you, and rebuilds his paper plane that he's left broken for 5 years.

I don't see how you can defend that. FatDog64 got a big THUMBS UP!! and ArchPup got completely ignored. When they both have the same amount of differences, and both are woof forks.

It's kind of like you ignored one of your kids, and praised another one for both doing the exact same thing. Like simargl said...it appears as though Barry doesn't like him.

You can only feel attacked and unwanted for so long before you finally decide to.......leave the house.

Post Reply