Puppy Linux Discussion Forum

[timeecho]

howdy ...not sure where to put this so feel free to move...
Arch linux is maturing as of late and seems to be settling down
with its defaults....it is a very fast very configurable system
I wonder if youd consider offering an Arch based PuPPy???
it would be a great fit and something very very useful to many.
JWM is already supported but not as a default .iso
it could/should be very easy to do and a good match
so waddayathink huh well huh well huh huh please please
not only that it would be very invigerating for the PuPPy
project and Arch as well.

incidentally Puppy is great stuff and an old friend for me, thanX

[ally]

hey echo

welcome

there already a couple of arch forks, looks for alphaos and sensei, there was an earlier 'archpup' which was abandoned in favour of alpha

[simargl]

[ally]

my bad........!

[ally]

deleted double post

[oui]

Hi simargl

As you know, I did spend a lot of time with your first two version 12.04 as well as 12.12

[simargl]

Well, if Barry Kauler in his blog says 'Arch pup boots to desktop', meaning first Puppy based on Arch is able to start Xorg, ignoring fact that I made about 10 releases of something called Archpup before, what is that if not conflicting name. If you have 'Pup' in distribution name it implies that it's standard official release, like Slacko Puppy of Precise Puppy but that was not true in heavily ignored and overlooked Archpup so I got tired of that and Archpup had to be discontinued/removed. I'm very pleased with decision to start alphaOS although it has great potential to become distribution just for one user (me) judging by people interest (around 10 downloads per day)...
Cheers!

[R-S-H]

[oui]

Hi RSH

Hm, you also have discover why I did not be a faithful adept of Lazy (a really very good architecture and distribution, but to complex in all-day-use for me)...

I am an adept and fan from Arch Pup 12.12. and use it daily (as well as the KDE-Linux from Josep24x24: it is the only one puplet able to turn the screen 90’ for good graphical applications. It is old, obsolete, but it does that and the other not...!!!)

Why?

It does about the same as lazy pup (*.sfs oriented)
but is completely simple: no menu! you can select one of 20 options and finish!
Arch Pup was completely "fresh" according the absolutely last release of a very important good distro, Arch Linux (but not GNU-distro, this is/would be Parabola-Linux in the Arch linux world. I know now the guy's from Parabola: They are developers in front from pure GNU Linux base development and really very helpful for each!). Arch is one of the 2..3 most actual Linux'es available actually!

The most Puppy's are really obsolete in their libraries or some what.

This was the difference with Arch Pup: on top, absolutely not obsolete and branchable to a real high performance GNU-Linux depository branch.

I accept your argumentation that Lazy 3. can be the best because I know that you are more than an excellent coder (like sigmarl or iguleder!)

At this time nobody can test your Lazy 3 else you yourself...

I ALREADY (it is a big difference) did test extensively the Alpha from sigmarl and did wonder how good it is. but no way to install easily my GNU goodies (free kernel, icecat, gnu java etc.)...

I can only say: it is good and very pleasant to see that such good coders are in the environment of Puppy linux, else if it is not always possible to get an immediate use of it.

good working

kind regards

[elroy]

While, on the surface, using Arch as a base is appealing due to the fact that it makes use of a cutting-edge base system, and because it uses the most modern of packages currently available, it does have its' drawbacks. It's true that it can make use of Python 3.0, and Gtk-3.0, not to mention the latest and greatest kernel and glibc; but it also offers obstacles concerning Puppy. For one, it provides a symlink for /lib; and while this may be dealt with via woof2 or other means, it must be remembered that it uses some packages that are not Puppy-standard, such as systemd. And that said, even if everything were to be an equal “apples to oranges”, the use of pacman as a package manager (while arguably the best package manager in terms of Linux to date) does not bode well on a Puppy distro. Why? Well, let's explore.

1st off, Puppy is meant to run off of older hardware – and because of this, the “modern” kernel and/or packages offered by Arch don't really fit the bill. Secondly, even if you do possess the prerequisite hardware to run an Arch based distro, because of the fact that it isn't in the lines of a typical GNU/Linux distro, you may be better off using Puppy Precise or Puppy Slacko, certainly if you have a newer machine. And, if you have an older setup you may be better off with Puppy Wary or Puppy Quirky.

And here's where it get sticky..and my personal opinion becomes prevalent...if you're going to make use of a Puppy distro, regardless of what it's based upon, it is better served if said distro is based upon a central repository. In other words, a Puppy based on Precise should not be able to have “apt-get”...it should incorporate a traditional Puppy Package Manager (PPM). In this way it can trim any fat etc. Because of this, there is more control concerning the packages. Apt-Get and Pacman are nice in their respective desktop setups, but as far as using them in a Puppy environment, they don't work as well as they do in a traditional full-install.

So, in essence, there are many Arch based “live” versions out there that will do what you desire. But as far as Puppy is concerned, Arch, at present, defeats the purpose of providing a “live” distro that will work correctly on older hardware. That is Puppy's strength, and that is currently Puppy's calling card.

[simargl]

Wow elroy, there are so many false statements in your post that I must answer.

[disciple]