A SAVE-session to directory option added for PUPs [REOPENED]

A home for all kinds of Puppy related projects
Message
Author
User avatar
Ted Dog
Posts: 3965
Joined: Wed 14 Sep 2005, 02:35
Location: Heart of Texas

#406 Post by Ted Dog »

@all but JB
JB is more creative and concerned about his work affecting others data, I can see why on a large picture, and I trust his 'safety' limits maybe more than he does.
I know people will hurt there computers regardless of what OS or software they use. BK set the trend of rapidly creative releases with a set of dialog boxes to let us choose 'how' unsafe we want to be. I think with obvious instability of not having the full source of the NTFS to KNOW it will always be unwise, but does it work, YES! does it appear more than in the past to be useful, YES. Does windows itself know what to do with linux links (NO, picture of /?\ ) does linux (YES) even after reboot.
People for the most part we STILL run as ROOT, HOW FREACK'N, unwise is that!!! :wink:
Can we work together to get the remaining distro-level developers to STOP baby proofing by hiding and not giving us a choice to be unwise. With the right 'txt' let people choose to help 'test' stuff
</END OF RANT>

User avatar
Ted Dog
Posts: 3965
Joined: Wed 14 Sep 2005, 02:35
Location: Heart of Texas

#407 Post by Ted Dog »

Also about less wise or more wise savefolder on NTFS or saveFILE on NTFS. I vote for savefolder ( agree with gcmartin on this ) and here is why!
There is no difference at the file level if it gets hurt by a power shutdown, generally only the last active file buffers are lost. No big deal most of the time since it would be the logfile trying to report the error. Or the file <program> itself that caused the crash.
But if either was INSIDE a larger savefile then savefile suffers. Add that seems to occur TOO much even on linux 'safe/known' EXT3/4 etc.
Having it on a savefolder <regardless of base filesystem> would spread the risk from one supercritical file (savefile itself) to thousands and most non-critical files.
Not sure if that was gcmartins take on the matter, that is mine!
Last edited by Ted Dog on Sun 11 Oct 2015, 17:48, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Ted Dog
Posts: 3965
Joined: Wed 14 Sep 2005, 02:35
Location: Heart of Texas

#408 Post by Ted Dog »

Unexpected side benefit, savefolders work GREAT on hybrid harddrives ( those having a tiny SSD and regular HD ) it only took a few days of fatdog64 reboots for all the 'normals' to be moved into the SSD part and make running from HD as fast as running from expanded to RAM. :D

gcmartin

#409 Post by gcmartin »

When this discussion was opened, it was done from a point of view of a user who comes from Windows and wants to become a user saving his work as he goes without having to learn what a 2fs/3fs/4fs extension is or means. Typically one begins as a user testing the waters and relying on his knowledge and use of Windows tools.

Here is an reaction by a new member that happened on the FATDOG thread. It is not an apple to apples comparison, but it does bring to light another advantage for Puppy Linux, should use that filesystem for normal work or for save-session to directory consideration be re-examined.

I think the language used is a little over the top, but, the point raised allows us to examine or for us to consider if there might be merit. This is not an issue of whether we like MS or not, rather it is an issue of whether we can take advantage for our benefit.

Is there benefit? Does the community benefit in making it easier for new users to see filesystems and directory structures they are accustomed to?

User avatar
bigpup
Posts: 13886
Joined: Sun 11 Oct 2009, 18:15
Location: S.C. USA

#410 Post by bigpup »

If people are unwilling to learn a different operating system and how it works.
THEY SHOULD NOT USE IT!!!!!

Long time Linux users even have problems learning Puppy.

I wonder what a fragmented NTFS file system would do to a save directory/folder?
I know it will make a save file unusable if it was made when the NTFS file system was fragmented.

If a NTFS file system gets too fragmented. It will make Windows have all kinds of problems.
The things they do not tell you, are usually the clue to solving the problem.
When I was a kid I wanted to be older.... This is not what I expected :shock:
YaPI(any iso installer)

gcmartin

#411 Post by gcmartin »

Yes, I know. This is what has been shared in the thread. Those things happen to Windows users using Windows. And that doesn't mean Windows users shouldnt. One way of looking at this is that no matter what OS is used, the concerns you raise exist and is a valid point.

But, if the consensus is that the risks is increased because something other than Windows is adding information to the filesystem, that is one thing. But, the reason that NTFS support was added to Linux was NOT one whose intent was to increase risk.

For example, I have several PCs where I have not had issues at all in NTFS use. I should be a greater liability as I use NTFS Compressed for my needs. In fact, my TV (Linux OS derivative) is able to read NTFS compressed filesystem when the USB with a "compressed" drive is connected. And, the TV also is capable of storing to the drive. If a dumb TV can do this, and not corrupt or create havoc, then maybe there is chance that Puppy can do likewise for benefit, safely, as well.

Linux filesystems have their set of problems too.

On the subject of who should start using Linux, that is a different issue outside of this thread. And that what the poster to FATDOG, that I mentioned 2 post down, was sharing.

sheldonisaac
Posts: 902
Joined: Mon 22 Jun 2009, 01:36
Location: Philadelphia, PA

Re: updated version of ydrv_slacko_5.7.sfs

#412 Post by sheldonisaac »

gyro (in part) wrote: I've uploaded a new version of the slacko ydrv to http://www.fishprogs.info/puppy/slacko/ ... ko_5.7.sfs.
I started with shinobar's latest ydrv
...
Note: It might work in PAE slacko, if you just rename it.
gyro (and shinobar, or other experts):
I downloaded 8Geee's updated Slacko 5.7
http://www.murga-linux.com/puppy/viewto ... 633#878633
and can't make it use a savefolder.

I put these files in a directory:

1925680 2016-02-25 16:25 initrd.gz
170635296 2016-02-25 16:25 puppy_slacko_5.7.sfs
3109344 2016-02-25 16:25 vmlinuz
45056 2016-02-28 10:14 ydrv_slacko_5.7.sfs

and booted it.
Rebooted, making a 32MB savefile ext4
Set the bootmanager to include the ydrv.
Rebooted.
Used your savefile2dir to make a save directory.
Rebooted.
It doesn't offer to use the savefolder.

Will you please help me?
Is there something to do with "rename it."?
(I am NOT an expert)

Thank you,
Sheldon
Dell E6410: BusterPup, BionicPup64, Xenial, etc
Intel DQ35JOE, Dell Vostro 430
Dell Inspiron, Acer Aspire One, EeePC 1018P

gyro
Posts: 1798
Joined: Tue 28 Oct 2008, 21:35
Location: Brisbane, Australia

#413 Post by gyro »

@sheldonisaac,

The most probable causes are either:
Your slacko 5.7 does not support savefolder,
or
Your savefolder is not on a linux partition.

Note: Don't configure boot manager to load ydrv. If your puppy supports ydrv, it is loaded automatically.

gyro

sheldonisaac
Posts: 902
Joined: Mon 22 Jun 2009, 01:36
Location: Philadelphia, PA

#414 Post by sheldonisaac »

gyro wrote:@sheldonisaac,

The most probable causes are either:
Your slacko 5.7 does not support savefolder,
or
Your savefolder is not on a linux partition.

Note: Don't configure boot manager to load ydrv. If your puppy supports ydrv, it is loaded automatically.
Thanks, gyro.
The savefolder is/was in the directory with the slacko files, on an ext4 partition.

I figured that it was the referred-to slacko that does not support savefolder, but hoped your ydrv or shinobar's pet would fix that.
Some people have retro-fitted puppys with that ability, but apparently not that one.

Thanks again,
Sheldon
Dell E6410: BusterPup, BionicPup64, Xenial, etc
Intel DQ35JOE, Dell Vostro 430
Dell Inspiron, Acer Aspire One, EeePC 1018P

gyro
Posts: 1798
Joined: Tue 28 Oct 2008, 21:35
Location: Brisbane, Australia

#415 Post by gyro »

sheldonisaac wrote:I figured that it was the referred-to slacko that does not support savefolder, but hoped your ydrv or shinobar's pet would fix that.
All is not lost yet.
The savefolder facility requires both a patched "init" script, and some patched puppy utilities.
The patched utilities in the ydrv, could work with this version of slacko 5.7 if these utilities have not been otherwise modified.
The patched "init" is in an "initrd.gz" file, this could be what is missing.
Again if it has not been otherwise changed there should be a patched "intrd.gz" file for slacko 5.7 mentioned way back there somewhere, that could work. (Maybe even in my message that you quoted.)

If the combination of these 2 files does not work, then may be the "patching" would need to be applied again to this new version of slacko 5.7.

gyro

User avatar
Ted Dog
Posts: 3965
Joined: Wed 14 Sep 2005, 02:35
Location: Heart of Texas

#416 Post by Ted Dog »

idea, to backup save directory to sfs somewhat like newer Quirkies did, for roll back forward etc.

sheldonisaac
Posts: 902
Joined: Mon 22 Jun 2009, 01:36
Location: Philadelphia, PA

#417 Post by sheldonisaac »

gyro wrote:All is not lost yet.
The savefolder facility requires both a patched "init" script, and some patched puppy utilities.
The patched utilities in the ydrv, could work with this version of slacko 5.7 if these utilities have not been otherwise modified.
The patched "init" is in an "initrd.gz" file, this could be what is missing.
Again if it has not been otherwise changed there should be a patched "intrd.gz" file for slacko 5.7 mentioned way back there somewhere, that could work. (Maybe even in my message that you quoted.)

If the combination of these 2 files does not work, then may be the "patching" would need to be applied again to this new version of slacko 5.7.
Thanks, gyro.
I spent time this morning looking through the thread from May through June of 2014.
Somehow I got an initrd.gz and a ydrv, and put them in a directory with the puppy_slacko_5.7.sfs and the vmlinuz from 8Geee's s57-2016a.iso
Booted, and saved to folder.
1922772 Mar 1 13:44 initrd.gz
170635296 Feb 25 16:25 puppy_slacko_5.7.sfs
4096 Mar 1 14:42 slackosave-mar1
3109344 Feb 25 16:25 vmlinuz
45056 Feb 28 10:14 ydrv_slacko_5.7.sfs
Dell E6410: BusterPup, BionicPup64, Xenial, etc
Intel DQ35JOE, Dell Vostro 430
Dell Inspiron, Acer Aspire One, EeePC 1018P

User avatar
8Geee
Posts: 2181
Joined: Mon 12 May 2008, 11:29
Location: N.E. USA

#418 Post by 8Geee »

There is something here I do not understand... mnt/home has all the bootup files and the 'slackosave- 123abc _fs has all the personal files. In a frugal install to USB-stick all is well, both files co-exist. What was it sheldonisaac wanted? All I know is he didn't have a savefile which I thought was no "_fs" personal save file. Can someone clue me in here?
Linux user #498913 "Some people need to reimagine their thinking."
"Zuckerberg: a large city inhabited by mentally challenged people."

sheldonisaac
Posts: 902
Joined: Mon 22 Jun 2009, 01:36
Location: Philadelphia, PA

#419 Post by sheldonisaac »

8Geee wrote:There is something here I do not understand... mnt/home has all the bootup files and the 'slackosave- 123abc _fs has all the personal files. In a frugal install to USB-stick all is well, both files co-exist. What was it sheldonisaac wanted?
A save folder. I wasn't able to make one when I booted with the original initrd.gz from s57-2016a.iso. Did I make a mistake there?

All I know is he didn't have a savefile which I thought was no "_fs" personal save file. Can someone clue me in here?
No, that's not the case; sorry, maybe I didn't say it correctly.
I was able to make a save file.

Thanks much.
Dell E6410: BusterPup, BionicPup64, Xenial, etc
Intel DQ35JOE, Dell Vostro 430
Dell Inspiron, Acer Aspire One, EeePC 1018P

User avatar
8Geee
Posts: 2181
Joined: Mon 12 May 2008, 11:29
Location: N.E. USA

#420 Post by 8Geee »

oK, I think... If I got this right, you wanted to make a copy of the _fs personal file as a folder (directory) to update every so often as reference point in case things go bump in the night.
Linux user #498913 "Some people need to reimagine their thinking."
"Zuckerberg: a large city inhabited by mentally challenged people."

sheldonisaac
Posts: 902
Joined: Mon 22 Jun 2009, 01:36
Location: Philadelphia, PA

#421 Post by sheldonisaac »

8Geee wrote:oK, I think... If I got this right, you wanted to make a copy of the _fs personal file as a folder (directory) to update every so often as reference point in case things go bump in the night.
I'm sorry, 8Geee; I'm being a bother to you.

In the last year or so, people have made Puppys which can save settings etc in a directory(folder), rather than the usual file, such as lupusave-may19.2fs

Somehow I like that way, so I wanted to do it with your new s75-2016a slacko

There seem to be a couple of ways to do make a Puppy able to save to a folder. I think gyro et al did it by, among other things ?, modifying the init , which I understand is in the initrd.gz
Dell E6410: BusterPup, BionicPup64, Xenial, etc
Intel DQ35JOE, Dell Vostro 430
Dell Inspiron, Acer Aspire One, EeePC 1018P

gyro
Posts: 1798
Joined: Tue 28 Oct 2008, 21:35
Location: Brisbane, Australia

#422 Post by gyro »

@8Geee,
If you are not familiar with the svefolder concept, please read the first few pages of this topic.

However the code created in this topic has been superceed by the implementation of savefolder in this topic http://www.murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?t=95922.
The files for slacko 5.7 are mentioned here, http://www.murga-linux.com/puppy/viewto ... &start=110

gyro

Post Reply