(old)Puppy Linux Discussion Forum

Firefox 23 Greek: http://sourceforge.net/projects/puppyst ... t/download
Firefox 23 English: http://sourceforge.net/projects/puppyst ... t/download

Firefox 23 Greek Portable: http://sourceforge.net/projects/puppyst ... z/download
Firefox 23 English Portable: http://sourceforge.net/projects/puppyst ... z/download

Thanks very much, koulaxizis!

Carlos Albert
Disco Makberto

P.S.: Pet working perfectly on Puppy Lucid!

Disco Makberto wrote:Thanks very much, koulaxizis!

Carlos Albert
Disco Makberto

P.S.: Pet working perfectly on Puppy Lucid!

Firefox 24 SFS is coming soon!

That's nice to know, koulaxizis! Unfortunately, I don't use SFS. However, I know there are ways to change an SFS to a PET, so I might go that route.

Cheers!

Carlos Albert
D-Mak

Disco Makberto wrote:That's nice to know, koulaxizis! Unfortunately, I don't use SFS. However, I know there are ways to change an SFS to a PET, so I might go that route.

Cheers!

Carlos Albert
D-Mak

I always create SFS and PET format for each package. The only reason i have stop packaging is because i'm waiting to see what will be the next main stream of Puppy so i can consider the dependencies. It's not really importand for Firefox but it's important for almost every other package. I don't want to compile on Slacko and can't be used by Precise or the next "official" Puppy.

Thumbs up, koulaxizis!

Carlos Albert
D-Mak

added link to wiki
http://puppylinux.org/wikka/firefox

Hi koulaxizis; It`s great you make multiple packages, but it`s an unnecessary pain isn`t it.?

I don't want to compile on Slacko and can't be used by Precise or the next "official" Puppy.

# Exactly why I keep suggesting more community action and decisions. Like what libraries to include...
Also better organization of a few add-on packages like the devx file. This would give Puppy a good base.

I noticed you haven`t made an SFS package yet. I can help, but I`m sure you know how to.

I`ll make a bare AppPkg for your Firefox package for you to try.
.

Hello again; I`ve made an AppPkg for you to try.
It`s "bare" so it`s small enough that I can post it here.

# Instructions:

1) Open rxvt "inside" your firefox-23 dir., so it has the correct path.

2) Make a Squash file of it like this:
mksquashfs * firefox-23.sq
Notice the extension ".sq", this is not a SFS file.!

3) Copy the Squash file to this dir.:
/(path-to-AppPkg)/Firefox-23.AppPkg/.AppPkg/firefox-23


You should now be able to run Firefox by clicking in Rox on the dir.: Firefox-23.AppPkg
If you have any problems, Qs, or suggestions, please let me know...

My normal AppPkg setup is more complicated as it runs non-relocatable apps.
But I made the firefox-23 script so you could easily see what`s going on.
The Squash file`s mounted at: /tmp/.AppPkg/firefox-23
This is because /tmp is in ram, and resolving mounts or links in ram is faster.

I`m making a AppPkg build tool kit, if this sounds interesting let me know.!
I also have used the bare AppPkg idea that downloads and builds "virtual" AppPkgs.

Keep making apps. koulaxizis, Puppy badly needs them ( the whole point of any O.S.).
# Your friend Terry B.
.

Sunburnt says:

"Hi koulaxizis; It`s great you make multiple packages, but it`s an unnecessary pain isn`t it.?".

Disco Makberto replies:

I respectfully disagree, Sunburnt. You see, when I want to install Firefox, I use the install package, but I also use different versions of Puppy on liveCD's, and in these last cases, the portable version is useful. Of course, I don't use any Greek version since I don't know Greek. On a related note, some people are really fond of the SFS format, so I am sure that, for them, the SFS version is useful.

Best,

Carlos Albert
Disco Makberto

P.S.: It is nice to know about your efforts with an SFS version (:

Hi Disco Makberto; My remark was mainly in response to koulaxizis wanting to know Puppy`s direction.

But having many Puppy variants is unproductive, the O.S. is only a platform, the apps. matter.
That`s part of why M$ Weiners is so successful, only they design and compile the O.S.
So the chance that folks apps. will run properly is much greater than if there were 100 O.S.s.

I see lots of "reinventing the wheel" going on, and I`m sure koulaxizis wants to avoid it.
.

Hello, Sunburnt!

You are talking about the official puppies, right? If so, I agree with you in general terms. However, in the case of pups, I welcome as many variants as possible.

In regards to MS Windows, let me tell you that I don't really like it at all. The only reason why I keep it is because some applications only work in Windows (yes, we can use Wine, but it is not always reliable). Hence, I try to use Windows as little as possible. Also, now that we are talking about it, the latest Firefox "is" compatible with both Windows XP and newer; notwithstanding, the latest Internet Explorer is not compatible with Windows XP and only is so with newer Windows. I think this is an attempt by MS to discourage Windows XP users (such as myself). Thank God we have something like Puppy Linux, particularly the "retro" versions, since the Windows part of this computer will be very tricky to use not so long from now.

Carlos Albert
Disco Makberto

# XP, the best and greatest... R.I.P.
As a point, Linux does everything WinBlows does except DirectX gaming.
And in many cases Linux does it better than Weeners ( arguable ).

Yes, variants are freedom, but they are also chaos when it comes to average users.
Most folks don`t understand that the O.S. is unimportant, just so it works well.
Apps. are the whole point, and many variants don`t have a good "working" selection.
Hell... The main Puppy releases don`t have that many apps, or a good diversity either.

As I`ve said, a few folks maintain a small O.S., so no wasted bandwidth and app bloat.
And many folks like koulaxizis to maintain many many apps so the O.S. has a purpose.
Lots of variants maintained by one or two guys is never going to last ( none have...).
Debian, Ubuntu, Mint, etc. survive. All maintain one O.S. ( more or less ) and many apps.
.

Hey, Sunburnt!

"As I`ve said, a few folks maintain a small O.S., so no wasted bandwidth and app bloat.
And many folks like koulaxizis to maintain many many apps so the O.S. has a purpose.
Lots of variants maintained by one or two guys is never going to last ( none have...).
Debian, Ubuntu, Mint, etc. survive. All maintain one O.S. ( more or less ) and many apps."

Again, I don't quite understand what you are saying here. When you are talking about Debian, Ubuntu, etc. releases, you are talking about the "official releases" only, right? As I am sure you know, these OS'es have many derivatives which are, in a way, the equivalents of our own "pups". For instance, in the case of Ubuntu, I remember Ubuntu Remix, Super Ubuntu, Ubuntu Lite, etc. I support these derivatives.

In the case of app bloat, one way to try to deal with this situation is to get a barebones release (which it would mean a "pup" in our case), and then use portable applications. I do this regularly with Puppy Lucid 5.01 "Barebones". The caveat here is that there are not many portable applications for Linux. Anyway, I am really appreciatve of the fact that koulaxizis is releasing different portable versions of Firefox.

Carlos Albert
Disco Makberto

Hey Disco Makberto; I know what you`re saying.
But the Ubuntu offshoots ( Mint, etc.) are all Ubuntu, so the many apps available do work.
This is just very good sense of course. I don`t think I`ve seen a Slackware based Ubuntu.
But there are at least 4 different Puppies. See what I mean about having so many "types"?

With no common base O.S. it`s a case of endlessly reinventing the wheel over and over.
Any coder/builder cringes at duplication of effort. And here at Puppy it`s most of what goes on.
Except for a few efforts, Puppy pretty much stands still, except for Barry`s updates.
And then in addition to wasted effort is the loss of good code when devs quit ( many of them ).

I state again... Who cares what the O.S. is based on? It doesn`t matter, apps matter, that`s all.
Unless effort is centered around a good base, then it goes in many directions. All of it wasted.
.

Sunburnt, I think I am getting one important point of yours. Stated differently, you would like, for instance, sort of universal pets for particular applications that work on all puppies (or as many as possible) and not having, for example, the same application in the form of diiferent pets, one for lucid, one for 431, one for slacko, etc. If so, that is something that I also welcome, but I don't know if it is possible unless there is a common base OS, as you are saying. One application that drives me nuts is ALSA; it has been deployed in diiferent ways in different puppies, so in some puppies it works in some specific ways, in some others it works differently, and still in some others it works in different manners.

Best,

Carlos Albert
D-Mak

Probably very few app pkgs will work for many variants/distros. Only the simple ones.

Mainly as was said in the Community Edition thread: One main release, not many.!
They seem to have settled on Debian stable for the base. A good choice I think.
Debian and Ubuntu both have tons of apps. This makes them a very good choice.

Others don`t agree, mostly the Slacko folks. It`s a good variant also. Don`t know if it`s better.
They say Debian & Ubuntu are bloated. But size isn`t so important. Does it have lots of apps.?
.

Not because I'm Slacko, but I remember being here as a lurker 4 and 5 years ago reading up on Puppy. What was true then is true now, "Diversity is key to Linux, and Puppy by extension". The Buntu's can go to business, like Fedora for all I care. Android can stay on phones, Chrome... well, no thanks, it wants to # me and my device. Windows gives my 'puter several noxious addictions.
So me and my little eee are here. And quite happy with a distro of a particular diversion that nearly duplicates the needs.

Most of the time I rely on "pups" and not on official puppies. And, at least in my case, I welcome as many pups as possible. Also, and this is very important to note, a "pup" does not necessarily have to include extra applications when compared to the official releases, for there are pups with fewer or almost no applications such as the barebones releases which are also "pups".

Carlos Albert
D-Mak

Thanks for this works on Slacko 5.3.1

Was using Seamonkey but the Ghostery plugin doesn't work on the latest versions.