The journey to Archpup..

For talk and support relating specifically to Puppy derivatives
Message
Author
User avatar
Iguleder
Posts: 2026
Joined: Tue 11 Aug 2009, 09:36
Location: Israel, somewhere in the beautiful desert
Contact:

#76 Post by Iguleder »

stifiling - I guess it's frustrating when your creation doesn't get the status you want it to have. But, there's a well-known proverb in the social circles I belong to, which says "life's a b**ch" :lol:

I know how this feels, because my creations aren't recognized by Barry as Puppy-related, too. And guess what - there's nothing wrong about being different and re-inventing the wheel, especially in the FOSS world. Just keep doing what you do best and don't look back in anger. :wink:

What Barry says makes sense. Barry, as the mind behind Puppy, gave you three reasons why ArchPup does not fit in his the definition of a Puppy derivative - it doesn't which came first. ArchPup isn't built using Woof, doesn't use PPM and doesn't have the JWM/ROX-Filer combo. So ... this is a distribution based on Puppy (e.g uses parts of Puppy and Arch) and not a Puppy flavor (e.g a genuine Puppy that uses parts of Arch).

You're right - it's unfair that FatDog64 gets attention and recognition from Barry, while ArchPup doesn't, like some forgotten lovechild - but I understand why - the former is much closer to Puppy, since it has everything except the use of Woof.

2c
[url=http://dimakrasner.com/]My homepage[/url]
[url=https://github.com/dimkr]My GitHub profile[/url]

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

#77 Post by stifiling »

Iguleder wrote:stifiling - I guess it's frustrating when your creation doesn't get the status you want it to have. But, there's a well-known proverb in the social circles I belong to, which says "life's a b**ch" :lol:

I know how this feels, because my creations aren't recognized by Barry as Puppy-related, too. And guess what - there's nothing wrong about being different and re-inventing the wheel, especially in the FOSS world. Just keep doing what you do best and don't look back in anger. :wink:

What Barry says makes sense. Barry, as the mind behind Puppy, gave you three reasons why ArchPup does not fit in his the definition of a Puppy derivative - it doesn't which came first. ArchPup isn't built using Woof, doesn't use PPM and doesn't have the JWM/ROX-Filer combo. So ... this is a distribution based on Puppy (e.g uses parts of Puppy and Arch) and not a Puppy flavor (e.g a genuine Puppy that uses parts of Arch).

You're right - it's unfair that FatDog64 gets attention and recognition from Barry, while ArchPup doesn't, like some forgotten lovechild - but I understand why - the former is much closer to Puppy, since it has everything except the use of Woof.

2c
you a lil late to the party dude. show's over.

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

#78 Post by puppyluvr »

:D Hello,
and really...it's the OP that's looking more and more like the idiot.
Really?
First, I WAS able to build an Archpup back in `09 using Unleashed, but the ppm was broken. I posted screenshots back then, and asked for assistance, and got no reply.. So I let it go.. I tried again recently using woof, but could only get a cli, so I started this thread..
Second, I have the current "Archpup" and it is interesting, but not a "Puppy"..
I agree that the PPM must work for it to be a Puppy.
I disagree about the Rox/Jwm part, as several new Puplets use Xfce/Thunor..

FWIW I dont really care about Arch.. I tried because it had not been done.
(Well, apparently it had, but not to my knowledge).
I have done a Tinycore (worked, but was huge), and a Fedora (failed) as well. Also trying to build a Puppy using LFS scripts.

I like to try new things. If I am an idiot, so be it...
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...

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

#79 Post by stifiling »

I'm not trying to insult ANYONE.

puppyluvr,

I do not think that you are anything other than a smart dude. You got further than i had gotten in trying to accomplish this goal and i was rooting for you also. my exact thoughts when i saw this thread pop up was, "YES! this goal is being tackled by someone who actually knows what they're doing. And he's also having some success."

I was the person that was most wrong in this thread, by not thinking more first, about what i said, before i said it. So if anyone deserves to wear the 'dumbbell cone hat' it's me.

Post Reply