I am currently using 1.0.9CE successfully, from a HD install.
If I install Puppy2 to HD, will it preserve my applications and data from 1.0.9?
Puppy 2 replacing 1.0.9CE - is it safe?
I think noone tried yet.
It is kind of risky, as Puppy2 uses different scripts, a different kernel, different applications (Seamonkey, not firefox).
Also 109 uses a different system for the menu, that is not supported yet by Puppy2.
I also don't know, if Puppy2 overwrites your personal settings, like mailaccounts, passwords and so on.
So you should backup them first.
So I think you would have to do some manual tuning, to get a result you like.
But it might be worth the effort, Puppy2 is closer to a "real harddisk" by default, as unionfs now covers the whole filesystem, and not just /root and /usr as Puppy1.
So in theory, Puppy2 should be the better choice for harddisk-installation.
However, I still recommend to use a frugal install, using a huge pup001 to store your personal files.
This approach has several advantages.
Mark
It is kind of risky, as Puppy2 uses different scripts, a different kernel, different applications (Seamonkey, not firefox).
Also 109 uses a different system for the menu, that is not supported yet by Puppy2.
I also don't know, if Puppy2 overwrites your personal settings, like mailaccounts, passwords and so on.
So you should backup them first.
So I think you would have to do some manual tuning, to get a result you like.
But it might be worth the effort, Puppy2 is closer to a "real harddisk" by default, as unionfs now covers the whole filesystem, and not just /root and /usr as Puppy1.
So in theory, Puppy2 should be the better choice for harddisk-installation.
However, I still recommend to use a frugal install, using a huge pup001 to store your personal files.
This approach has several advantages.
Mark