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 Tue 21 Oct 2014, 11:50
All times are UTC - 4
 Forum index » Advanced Topics » Cutting edge
New Life For Older Puppys
Moderators: Flash, Ian, JohnMurga
Post_new_topic   Reply_to_topic View_previous_topic :: View_next_topic
Page 2 of 4 Posts_count   Goto page: Previous 1, 2, 3, 4 Next
Author Message
sszindian


Joined: 24 Apr 2010
Posts: 607
Location: Pennsylvania U.S.

PostPosted: Sat 08 Mar 2014, 11:46    Post_subject: Kernel .pet  

Because of the interest and possibly the reluctance to install these new Kernel's of BK in a present working puppy, I opted to do some research on the Internet to try to see just what we have here and why there appears to be a significant increase in performance by installing them.

First I found that there are in fact '4' (four) different types of Kernels and 'many variants' of these that can be classified into four broad categories: monolithic kernels, microkernels, hybrid kernels and exokernels. Each has its own advocates and detractors.

The kernel can be easily replaced or upgraded by changing or upgrading the operating system or, in the case of Linux, by adding a newer kernel or modifying an existing kernel.

It is not necessary for a computer to have a kernel in order for it to be usable, the reason being that it is not necessary for it to have an operating system. That is, it is possible to load and run programs directly on bare metal machines (i.e., computers without any operating system installed), although this is usually not very practical.

Then there is the 'patched' Kernel (which BK's 3.12.06 an 3.12.11 are). From what I found, a 'patched' source Kernel 'HAS' the ability to update/upgrade the existing Kernel (even replace the existing Kernel with itself) AND update your operating system to make better use of your existing programs.

All this is but a brief explanation you can research it yourself on the Internet.

I know BK's Kernels are doing 'something' just by the way the .pet installed differently with a pristine puppy in RAM and that same puppy with an already rather large savefile on the HDD.

>>>---Indian------>

_________________
Cloud Computing For Every Puppy (a .pet)
http://murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?t=69192
Back to top
View user's profile Send_private_message 
rerwin


Joined: 24 Aug 2005
Posts: 1529
Location: Maine, USA

PostPosted: Sun 09 Mar 2014, 15:39    Post_subject:  

sszindian,
I think you are confusing the "source" pets with the ones you must be using, one of which is "linux_kernel-3.12.11-nopae-aufs-squashfsbuiltin-i486-tahr.pet". The "i486" pets are what can be merged into puppies, not the source packages.
Richard
Back to top
View user's profile Send_private_message 
sszindian


Joined: 24 Apr 2010
Posts: 607
Location: Pennsylvania U.S.

PostPosted: Sun 09 Mar 2014, 21:34    Post_subject: Kernel.pet  

No rerwin... I'm using the-

Source PET (115.2MB):
http://distro.ibiblio.org/quirky/quirky6/x86/packages/pet_packages-quirky6/kernel_src-3.12.6-patched.pet

Source PET (112.9MB):
http://distro.ibiblio.org/quirky/quirky6/noarch/packages/pet_packages-noarch/kernel_src-3.12.11-patched.pet

Exactly as I stated in the first post of this thread!

I have just started today playing with the-

linux_kernel-3.12.11-nopae-aufs-squashfsbuiltin-i486-tahr.pet

I'd like to see what that does to various puppy's. However, from my research on the Internet, it appears that the only Kernel that will/can upgrade another Kernel or itself or even replace itself has to be a 'patched' Kernel. There are a whole bunch of things going on with various Kernels, the research sure was a new eye-opener for me although very interesting.

Have you by chance installed the- linux_kernel-3.12.11-nopae-aufs-squashfsbuiltin-i486-tahr.pet in any existing puppy builds? If so, what was the outcome?

Thanks for posting here!

>>>---Indian------>

_________________
Cloud Computing For Every Puppy (a .pet)
http://murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?t=69192
Back to top
View user's profile Send_private_message 
01micko


Joined: 11 Oct 2008
Posts: 7831
Location: qld

PostPosted: Mon 10 Mar 2014, 19:43    Post_subject:  

Indian,

With due respect, however I'll be blunt. Kernel source pets do nothing. They are the source used to build the kernel. The patch is just for AUFS and various Puppy tweaks. You can't even install a kernel pet (re rerwin's post) in a frugal install. You need to hack the initrd. All you are going to end up with installing kernel src (or source or whatever) is a bunch of useless source code in /usr/src/linux.

Any performance "improvements" are in your mind.

If you don't believe me, find vmlinuz in the root dir (usually where your save file is; it is the kernel image). Do an md5sum on it. Install one of those pets you have been spruiking. Now do an md5sum on vmlinuz again. It's the same. The rest of the "kernel" comprises of kernel modules (/lib/modules/$kernel_version) and firmware (/lib/firmware).

EDIT: Now, installing a normal kernel pet in a FULL install will work (or potentially work, depending on compatibility) after a reboot.

That's it.

_________________
Woof Mailing List | keep the faith Cool |
Back to top
View user's profile Send_private_message Visit_website 
sszindian


Joined: 24 Apr 2010
Posts: 607
Location: Pennsylvania U.S.

PostPosted: Tue 11 Mar 2014, 19:53    Post_subject: Kernels  

Hey Mic... thanks for popping in here and for all your smart expertise!

I run all my puppy's from the CD drive with the .iso on a closed-disk. I create my savefile on the HDD. That's how I do it if it matters any? I don't do frugal or full installs.

>>>---Indian------>

_________________
Cloud Computing For Every Puppy (a .pet)
http://murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?t=69192
Back to top
View user's profile Send_private_message 
mikeb


Joined: 23 Nov 2006
Posts: 8342

PostPosted: Wed 12 Mar 2014, 09:02    Post_subject:  

I was being polite before... I was trying to avoid this...
Quote:

I gave this a try on a fresh USB flash frugal install of Precise 5.7.1 Retro - took about 8 minutes for the kernel_src-3.12.11-patched.pet install to finish, added about 400mb to the savefile - but both uname -a and the system info utility show the old kernel (3.2.48 IIRC) still in place - even through multiple reboots. Everything looks/functions fine, otherwise.


I don't doubt your good intentions . may I suggest altering your first post with directions to those kernel pets that will provide the update you are suggesting to avoid any further confusion

regards

Mike
Back to top
View user's profile Send_private_message 
sszindian


Joined: 24 Apr 2010
Posts: 607
Location: Pennsylvania U.S.

PostPosted: Wed 12 Mar 2014, 15:54    Post_subject: Kernel .pet  

mikeb:

Thanks for your not-so-polite response! 'I was really hoping you would return with some bench-marks as you wanted to know about in a previous post so all would know if anything changed in the performance of your puppy or other programs used by your puppy or not?'

As you can see in the other posts here, some believe nothing happens and an increase in performance is just in my own mind but again, there was 'one programmer who thought we might be on to something?'

Over the last few years, I have tested lots of new puppy's that come to life, hundreds of various programs that are used in those puppy's... Why... to help developers make their builds something to be desired and wanted by users and further the use of puppy in the Linux world. I never pulled an punches... if their program was good, I told them so... if it wasn't, I told them that also (which I'm sure never won me any popularity contest) but... I am a full-time puppy user and have been for a long long time, not like many here who dabble in puppy and are still afraid to let go of their Windows... that's sad!

Because of my extensive testing on puppy's, (I feel) I am able to notice little things like split-second performance differences in areas that probably even the dev's themselves don't notice sometimes.

I listed my experience with what I thought I found in the first post here and will stand by it until proven 100% wrong.

My word... this is 'testing' man, not 'rocket-science.' If something good eventually comes from all this fine! If not... so be it.

One thing it has accomplished thus far... 'certainly ruffled some feathers which I didn't expect or want to happen!'

As far as 'Instructions' there aren't anymore than what I have already mentioned in the other posts in this thread.

If one doesn't like the results after installing these .pet's the nice part is you can always 'UN-INSTALL IT' !

>>>---Indian------>

_________________
Cloud Computing For Every Puppy (a .pet)
http://murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?t=69192
Back to top
View user's profile Send_private_message 
mikeb


Joined: 23 Nov 2006
Posts: 8342

PostPosted: Wed 12 Mar 2014, 17:05    Post_subject:  

really my only answer to that would not be polite so I will withdraw from this and leave my 8 year experience of using and modify puppy including changing kernels out of the picture and leave you to consider if what you have posted is a little misleading

mike
Back to top
View user's profile Send_private_message 
dejan555


Joined: 30 Nov 2008
Posts: 2681
Location: Montenegro

PostPosted: Thu 13 Mar 2014, 07:46    Post_subject:  

Kernel placebo. Linux is that good Cool

Sorry sszindian but Mick and Mike are right here, just the fact that those are SOURCE pets / sfs's means that they don't do anything, they are used like any other source - only after compiling you get the working kernel binary/modules which would need to be replaced in puppy filesystem the proper way like Mick said.

_________________


Back to top
View user's profile Send_private_message Visit_website MSNM 
saintless


Joined: 11 Jun 2011
Posts: 2563
Location: Bulgaria

PostPosted: Thu 13 Mar 2014, 09:29    Post_subject:  

Hi, all.

No matter if the approach with source-kernel.pet is wrong or not - the idea to change puppy linux kernel easy from the user is still here and is very good idea. Nothing wrong to make changing kernel easy for the user and without need of special linux skills.
It will really give new live for older puppies.

If the kernel is a separate module and the base module does not contain /lib/modules and puppy can load second module on boot it will make puppy better and more flexible.
What will get wrong if puppy can load 5, 6, 7 modules on boot like Debian live does it for example? It will be an advantage for puppy.

Changing only vmlinuz + initrd.gz and adding second squashfs with /lib/modules (and new firmware if it is needed) will make the same puppy work on different hardware without (or almost without) adding extra size to the system. Yes, it will not work for very old and much newer kernel on the same puppy base module, bit it will work most of the cases. It also will save some hosting space for puppy versions.

Maybe something will come up from this thread and maybe not. I see it as an idea how to create more flexible puppy.

Toni

_________________
Farewell, Nooby, you will be missed...
Back to top
View user's profile Send_private_message MSNM 
mikeb


Joined: 23 Nov 2006
Posts: 8342

PostPosted: Thu 13 Mar 2014, 10:12    Post_subject:  

Quote:
Maybe something will come up from this thread and maybe not. I see it as an idea how to create more flexible puppy.

include 10MB of kernel dev files and build modules on the fly rather than kernel swapping every five minutes and have the bonus of a much smaller number of drivers to be included in the basic release.

Remember a new device driver can normally be built on a large range of kernels.

mike
Back to top
View user's profile Send_private_message 
saintless


Joined: 11 Jun 2011
Posts: 2563
Location: Bulgaria

PostPosted: Thu 13 Mar 2014, 10:55    Post_subject:  

Hi, Mike.

Good point, but building modules on the fly is not easy for new linux user. Puppy loose nothing and gain something more as option if it can load more modules on boot from /puppy folder.
Separate kernel modules will make puppy easy to use for new comers if the kernel does not work well on their hardware. Creating few kernel modules is not a problem, but puppy can't use them on boot. Maybe not needed to have base module without /lib/modules but the option to test easy new kernel on the same puppy will be welcome for new puppy users.

it is just an idea to add one more option in puppy. I know it is too late for all existing puppy version to include it but it is never too late for new ideas to be considered for the future development.

Toni

_________________
Farewell, Nooby, you will be missed...
Back to top
View user's profile Send_private_message MSNM 
jamesbond

Joined: 26 Feb 2007
Posts: 2227
Location: The Blue Marble

PostPosted: Thu 13 Mar 2014, 12:27    Post_subject:  

saintless - in Fatdog64, all kernel modules are kept in kernel-modules.sfs inside initrd. If you want to replace the kernel, just replace vmlinuz, open initrd, replace kernel-modules.sfs, and re-pack it (a program is even included to repack it). It has been like that for a few years now.

In FatdogArm, it's even easier because it doesn't use humoungous initrd like Fatdog64: I distribute FatdogArm as an SFS + a bunch of "kernel packages" (for different platforms). The kernel packages contains vmlinuz+initrd. Want to build your own "kernel package"? Same as above - replace vmlinuz, open existing initrd (*any* one of them), replace kernel-modules.sfs; and re-pack.

_________________
Fatdog64, Slacko and Puppeee user. Puppy user since 2.13.
Contributed Fatdog64 packages thread
Back to top
View user's profile Send_private_message 
saintless


Joined: 11 Jun 2011
Posts: 2563
Location: Bulgaria

PostPosted: Thu 13 Mar 2014, 13:00    Post_subject:  

Thank you, Jamesbond!

I see you have even better approach but it works only for FatDog.
I will check out your FatDogArm solution. Sounds like something I try to do for small debian based system.
I might be able to do something similar borrowing your method if you do not mind?

Toni

_________________
Farewell, Nooby, you will be missed...
Back to top
View user's profile Send_private_message MSNM 
mikeb


Joined: 23 Nov 2006
Posts: 8342

PostPosted: Thu 13 Mar 2014, 13:04    Post_subject:  

Quote:
Good point, but building modules on the fly is not easy for new linux user.


actually I believe there is a script or pet to do exactly that for Nvidia since that requires the building of a custom kernel module.

Build a kernel module is one of the simpler compiling jobs.... unpack, cd and make ...in other words something that could be done with a script that's a whole lot simpler than the puppy package manager.

Seems easier to make a module than to play pick and mix with a bunch of kernels in an attempt to juggle hardware support.

It is more akin to the windows model where drivers are only installed for the hardware present.

Anyway was just musing around possibilities as others have on this thread.

mike
Back to top
View user's profile Send_private_message 
Display_posts:   Sort by:   
Page 2 of 4 Posts_count   Goto page: Previous 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:  

Rules_post_cannot
Rules_reply_cannot
Rules_edit_cannot
Rules_delete_cannot
Rules_vote_cannot
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
[ Time: 0.0953s ][ Queries: 12 (0.0043s) ][ GZIP on ]