Puppy Linux Discussion Forum Forum Index Puppy Linux Discussion Forum
Puppy HOME page : puppylinux.com
"THE" alternative forum : puppylinux.info
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

The time now is Fri 01 Aug 2014, 12:17
All times are UTC - 4
 Forum index » Advanced Topics » Cutting edge
GtkDialog - Make Image / Save / SFS files utility.
Moderators: Flash, Ian, JohnMurga
Post new topic   Reply to topic View previous topic :: View next topic
Page 1 of 4 [57 Posts]   Goto page: 1, 2, 3, 4 Next
Author Message
sunburnt


Joined: 08 Jun 2005
Posts: 5010
Location: Arizona, U.S.A.

PostPosted: Sat 07 Dec 2013, 22:15    Post subject:  GtkDialog - Make Image / Save / SFS files utility.  

Saintless made a new small Debian from the Debian-Live distro.
It doesn`t have any utilities yet, so I made this to help out.

I`m going to expand on it so it can replace Puppy`s "First Run Shutdown Save File Wizard".
It`s been a problem for far too long now. And I dislike wizards anyway ( Mages are okay. Wink ).

mk-save.gtkdlg makes: ext2, ext3, ext4, and sfs files.

##### NEWER Version: ### CheckBox to auto. add Puppy Linux extensions.


### And now I apologize for the bad "mkfs" command. AGAIN...
mk-save.gtkdlg.zip
Description  Unzip into $PATH
zip

 Download 
Filename  mk-save.gtkdlg.zip 
Filesize  1.1 KB 
Downloaded  171 Time(s) 
mk-save.gtkdlg.png
 Description   
 Filesize   159.56 KB
 Viewed   218 Time(s)

mk-save.gtkdlg.png


Last edited by sunburnt on Tue 17 Dec 2013, 23:27; edited 17 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
sunburnt


Joined: 08 Jun 2005
Posts: 5010
Location: Arizona, U.S.A.

PostPosted: Sat 07 Dec 2013, 22:23    Post subject:  

How many people actually use an encrypted Save file.?
I`ve never used one, and I doubt it`s all that popular.

Bringing back the use of a Save partition / folder instead of a Save file is a good idea.
.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
saintless


Joined: 11 Jun 2011
Posts: 2224
Location: Bulgaria

PostPosted: Sat 07 Dec 2013, 23:06    Post subject:  

sunburnt wrote:
How many people actually use an encrypted Save file.?
I`ve never used one, and I doubt it`s all that popular.

Bringing back the use of a Save partition / folder instead of a Save file is a good idea.
.

Thank you, Sunburnt,

I've never used encrypted also. I have KDPup, TXZ-Pup and Turbopup remastered for my needs and if I ever use save file it is not bigger than 32 Mb (not encrypted).

Cheers, Toni

_________________
Farewell, Nooby, you will be missed...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message MSN Messenger 
sunburnt


Joined: 08 Jun 2005
Posts: 5010
Location: Arizona, U.S.A.

PostPosted: Sat 07 Dec 2013, 23:41    Post subject:  

My thoughts exactly Toni, if no PET pkgs. are used then the Save can be fairly tiny.

I solved my Save file growing because of Firefox by moving the Mozilla cache.
I moved: /root/.cache/mozilla to /tmp/mozilla_cache
And then made a link: /root/.cache/mozilla => /tmp/mozilla_cache
Now at shutdown the Firefox cache is self deleting. At boot an empty cache.
Added the link & mkdir commands to /etc/rc.d/rc.local so it`s always ready at boot.

# Perhaps I should write this in the How To section... Rolling Eyes
.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
saintless


Joined: 11 Jun 2011
Posts: 2224
Location: Bulgaria

PostPosted: Sun 08 Dec 2013, 05:04    Post subject:  

sunburnt wrote:
# Perhaps I should write this in the How To section... Rolling Eyes
.

This is good idea. I usual turn off submit crash reports. They can become big in time.

Cheers, Toni

_________________
Farewell, Nooby, you will be missed...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message MSN Messenger 
musher0


Joined: 04 Jan 2009
Posts: 4229
Location: Gatineau (Qc), Canada

PostPosted: Sun 08 Dec 2013, 10:00    Post subject:  

Hi, sunburnt.

Thanks but no thanks. Laughing

I normally don't like to toot my own horn, but...

While my script is CLI, it's much more elaborate. (ahem) Smile
http://murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?p=742075&sort=lastpost#742075
(Browse a few messages up to see illustrations of how it works.

In yours, the user has to know what to name the ?fs file according ot the Puppy.

At it his, he/she can come up with any name (see pic.) and the created file will be useless.

Also, a squash file needs some folder to squash, doesn't? (A bug will do! Wink )
So why offer the squash choice? Jo no comprendo.

BFN,

musher0
mk-save-too-simple-dialog!.jpg
 Description   
 Filesize   26.95 KB
 Viewed   444 Time(s)

mk-save-too-simple-dialog!.jpg


_________________
"Logical entities must not be multiplied needlessly." / "Il ne faut pas multiplier les êtres logiques inutilement." (Ockham)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website 
sunburnt


Joined: 08 Jun 2005
Posts: 5010
Location: Arizona, U.S.A.

PostPosted: Sun 08 Dec 2013, 14:11    Post subject:  

musher0; Yes the ext2-4 image files don`t auto. add the extension.
I guess I could fully Puppize it and have it add the extensions.

The latest version does do Squash files, and it adds the .sfs extension if needed.
It`s not as capable as a SFS maker I made years ago, but it good for simple tasks.

Looked at your image file script. Too complex for such a simple thing.!

# Made the change you suggested...
.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
musher0


Joined: 04 Jan 2009
Posts: 4229
Location: Gatineau (Qc), Canada

PostPosted: Mon 09 Dec 2013, 01:05    Post subject:  

Have you updated the attachment in post 1?
_________________
"Logical entities must not be multiplied needlessly." / "Il ne faut pas multiplier les êtres logiques inutilement." (Ockham)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website 
sunburnt


Joined: 08 Jun 2005
Posts: 5010
Location: Arizona, U.S.A.

PostPosted: Mon 09 Dec 2013, 01:37    Post subject:  

Yep, just delayed is all. Sorry about that... Terry
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
musher0


Joined: 04 Jan 2009
Posts: 4229
Location: Gatineau (Qc), Canada

PostPosted: Tue 10 Dec 2013, 02:17    Post subject:  

@ sunburnt:

Would you consider a collaboration? I know message panels such as yours are more popular than my windowed CLI panels. I'm tempted, but xml scripts give the itch! Also, I haven't finished evolving this script yet.

Let me know by PM or here? BFN.

musher0

_________________
"Logical entities must not be multiplied needlessly." / "Il ne faut pas multiplier les êtres logiques inutilement." (Ockham)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website 
Ted Dog


Joined: 13 Sep 2005
Posts: 2300
Location: Heart of Texas

PostPosted: Tue 10 Dec 2013, 11:23    Post subject:  

also working on same line of save files ideas a few suggestions. a pet wrapper around sfs files. There is a false divide of camps with the sfs verses pet people. I suggest a pet style wrapper to load / unload a embedded sfs file. And combined name for such a combo. The real issue with sfs is lack of install for the uniqueness of squashfs. Where pets can be installed and some what untinstalled.
Im mostly perplexed about how to handle sfs files with multisession methods. loading large files that may not be needed at boot. this is where a smart pet style loader for off load sfs files would be ideal.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
mikeb


Joined: 23 Nov 2006
Posts: 8041

PostPosted: Tue 10 Dec 2013, 12:35    Post subject:  

Quote:
Im mostly perplexed about how to handle sfs files with multisession methods. loading large files that may not be needed at boot. this is where a smart pet style loader for off load sfs files would be ideal.


sfs on the fly loader should do the job for you so no need to load anything at boot you do not need.

sfs installer.... well sfs is an archive format just like pet so my head says 'why not' ...

mike
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
Ted Dog


Joined: 13 Sep 2005
Posts: 2300
Location: Heart of Texas

PostPosted: Tue 10 Dec 2013, 13:10    Post subject:  

need to step away from sfs as a file system storage idea a few feet. Some how over the years sfs moved from way BK method of built in division to REMOVE files as a logical group, with pre-existing hooks to reattach if user decides for added bulk. To how its is used now as a large package ready to attach filesystem, WITHOUT buit in hooks.
This is the problem, many stand alone packages would work fine without hookin existing. But most of the problems are related to overlaying existing or duplicate files. LOAD SFS WAS a great leap forward. But not a cure. I think a cure would be a pet like loader around sfs. SFS files would no longer exist as a stand alone.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
sunburnt


Joined: 08 Jun 2005
Posts: 5010
Location: Arizona, U.S.A.

PostPosted: Tue 10 Dec 2013, 14:19    Post subject:  

Ted Dog; A RoxApp or AppDir is a Squash file ( I`ve used SFS file directly ) in a dir. with wrapper scripts.
Using a common SFS file is a novel idea, wrapping in a pet pkg double compresses it...

# How about a AppDir with a popup menu: Install as: [Loose Files] [SFS union File] [AppDir].
The AppDir wouldn`t actually install anything of course, just sets how the pkg. is used & run..

All pkg types: PET, SFS, & AppDir leave dirs, files, and links unless the pkg. builder was tidy.
Especially a problem in /root or $HOME because the files/etc. have to be made on-the-fly.

Yes, one of my gripes about unions is it`s layer over-shadowing problem.
2 good pages about unions and their problems: http://lwn.net/Articles/324291/
And there`s no possible "union" fix, it`s just a reality of the union concept of layering.

seaside has a mime based setup ( I think ), click SFS to mount and union, and maybe run.
And RSH has done lots with this whole simplifying SFS / union usage thing.


musher0; I hate xml with a passion also. But I`ll help you out any way I can. Let me know...
Instead of developing you end up spending your time wrestling with GtkDialog. Rrrrrrrr
.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
mikeb


Joined: 23 Nov 2006
Posts: 8041

PostPosted: Tue 10 Dec 2013, 15:29    Post subject:  

Quote:
But most of the problems are related to overlaying existing or duplicate files. LOAD SFS WAS a great leap forward. But not a cure.

Historically using unionfs limited the number of layers. Coding was a bit easier putting additional sfs underneath the main pup_xxx.sfs (it gets special treatment in puppy) plus there would be one or 2 at max addon files. This has persisted even though up to 252 sfs is possible..(can't say I would be happy with that many but 20-30 is a figure i commonly use.) A pet adds files on top of the existing ones if it needs to... thats accepted as normal... a sfs should do the same for the same reasons as required. The init and sfs on the fly loaders could do this... its not rocket science... and would make life much simpler for package makers. Problems are there to be solved and this one has had a cure for years...lets do it.

mike
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
Display posts from previous:   Sort by:   
Page 1 of 4 [57 Posts]   Goto page: 1, 2, 3, 4 Next
Post new topic   Reply to topic View previous topic :: View next topic
 Forum index » Advanced Topics » Cutting edge
Jump to:  

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
[ Time: 0.0841s ][ Queries: 12 (0.0070s) ][ GZIP on ]