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 02 Sep 2014, 03:47
All times are UTC - 4
 Forum index » Taking the Puppy out for a walk » Announcements
Woof-based Puppy builders wanted
Moderators: Flash, Ian, JohnMurga
Post new topic   Reply to topic View previous topic :: View next topic
Page 4 of 8 [113 Posts]   Goto page: Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 Next
Author Message
Iguleder


Joined: 11 Aug 2009
Posts: 1890
Location: Israel, somewhere in the beautiful desert

PostPosted: Sat 31 May 2014, 05:21    Post subject:  

jamesbond wrote:
a) it is compilable on a bog standard OS (doesn't require asm libs that only runs in 64-bit with AVX, for example), and


Clean C99. Check.

jamesbond wrote:
b) that it can install packages in a specified chroot directory, including its administration files, and correctly recorded installation path relative to chroot dir,


packdude -p. Check.

jamesbond wrote:
c) and it can install from a local repo.
The last one is not necessarily needed, but it makes stuff easier for multiple builds (I don't have to re-download packages every time I attempt to build puppy).


packdude -u file://path/to/repo. Check.

EDIT: this really troubles me. With this design, what makes Puppy different from a minimal Debian installation with JWM and ROX-Filer? And what about package upgrades - if we use our own kernel instead of the Debian one, what happens when there's a kernel package in Debian?

_________________
My homepage
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website MSN Messenger 
ICQ Number 
saintless


Joined: 11 Jun 2011
Posts: 2377
Location: Bulgaria

PostPosted: Sat 31 May 2014, 06:29    Post subject:  

Iguleder wrote:
With this design, what makes Puppy different from a minimal Debian installation with JWM and ROX-Filer?

Different mount points created inside /media for Debian and inside /mnt for Puppy/
/etc/rc.local in Debian and /etc/rc.d/rc.local in Puppy (there is no /etc/rc.d in Debian).
/root/.xinitrc in Puppy is /root/.xsession in Debian
I'm sure other small changes like the above will be found.
For example mount programs downloaded from Debian will look for /media which is not included in Puppy. AptOnCD from Debian will fail if there is no /media/cdrom0 link to /media/cdrom directory...
Debian uses its own menu system that does not provide desktop file for all packages.
Nothing much at first look but it makes impossible to run many deb packages on Puppy without problems.

Quote:
And what about package upgrades - if we use our own kernel instead of the Debian one, what happens when there's a kernel package in Debian?

Upgrading the kernel can be refused easy with configuration file.
Some packages has to be provided for Puppy kernel instead downloaded from Debian. Like linux-headers, VirtualBox...
Nothing will happen since the kernel is only available for download and install option. It will not work if it is installed with Puppy inird.gz (but it will work after download and install with auto-created after installing initrd.img giving Debian boot and save file options. Then we can switch from Puppy to Debian changing vmlinuz and initrd in the boot code and the save file name from pup_save.2fs to persistence (or live-rw).

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

Joined: 26 Feb 2007
Posts: 2134
Location: The Blue Marble

PostPosted: Sat 31 May 2014, 06:54    Post subject:  

Iguleder wrote:
EDIT: this really troubles me. With this design, what makes Puppy different from a minimal Debian installation with JWM and ROX-Filer?


Indeed. What makes puppy, a puppy? Make makes Mint different from Ubuntu? What makes Ubuntu different from Debian? Surely not only the wallpaper and gtk themes?

But for practical purposes:
1. Today's upup: built from ubuntu + pet, full ubuntu repos, but not all working, people complain.
2. Today's t2pup (racy, wary): built from pet, small repos, people complain.

What I'm seeing:
3a. DebianDog: pure debian, full debian repos, all working, people happy.
3b. This effort: pure ubuntu, full ubuntu repos, (hopefully) less broken packages than original upup, people happy (at least happier).

The only reason (I can see) to build from other distro's binaries is so that you can use their repos. If it proves otherwise (because those packages becomes broken when installed), then there is no point of depending on that parent distro anymore.

So - either we make puppy "more compatible" with the parent distros so we can use their repos better (DebianDog and my script is two different way of attacking the same problem); or totally drop ubuntu/debian/slackware and start building pure-breed puppies (T2, LFS or otherwise) - and we're back at square-one of "puppy's lack of packages."

As for upgrades - we'll tackle it when we get there Wink As mavrothal said, there is ways to prevent core packages getting updated. I've done it for slapt-get, I'm sure we can do that for apt-get too.

EDIT: packdude package lists - are they parsable through shell scripts?

Last edited by jamesbond on Sat 31 May 2014, 06:58; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
mavrothal


Joined: 24 Aug 2009
Posts: 1603

PostPosted: Sat 31 May 2014, 06:58    Post subject:  

Iguleder wrote:

EDIT: this really troubles me. With this design, what makes Puppy different from a minimal Debian installation with JWM and ROX-Filer? And what about package upgrades - if we use our own kernel instead of the Debian one, what happens when there's a kernel package in Debian?

Yes if you just use deb packages and maybe change a couple of things you indeed get minial-debian. But keeping rootfs-skeleton and rootfs-packages you have all the puppy goodies and scripts dropping (excluding if conflicting) the corresponding deb packages. No wireless infra for example or the equivalents of pApps you may have included.
The major problem I still see with this approach is apps that pull a trackload of dependencies and for those puppy usually provides pets compiled differently to decrease bloat. The other major problem is that some distros do not split packages like puppy while is some packages NLS files are bigger than the actual binaries.
Hmm... maybe at the end of the day we still need to have a bistro-compat-spesific puppy repo.

PS: The "problem" with having full distro packages is that in order to provide the same functionality as current puppies you'll probably need an 1GB machine and end up running at comparable speeds as the mother distro. So why bother...
Actually I think that is this 1% puppy-flaws that provide 99% of its strengths...

Last edited by mavrothal on Sat 31 May 2014, 07:05; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
Iguleder


Joined: 11 Aug 2009
Posts: 1890
Location: Israel, somewhere in the beautiful desert

PostPosted: Sat 31 May 2014, 07:04    Post subject:  

jamesbond wrote:
EDIT: packdude package lists - are they parsable through shell scripts?


Sure. Here's an example of packdude -l (a list of all packages in the repository):
Code:
alsa_lib|1.0.27.2|Core audio library
aterm|1.0.1|Terminal emulator
bc|1.06|A numeric processing language
beaver|git30052014|A text editor
bftpd|4.2|An FTP server
binutils|2.17|Assembly tools
ncurses|5.9|A terminal handling library
bwm_ng|0.6|A network monitor
calcoo|1.3.15|A calculator
calcurse|3.1.4|A personal organizer
conky|1.9.0|A system monitor
curl|7.37.0|A file transfer library
dhcpcd|3.2.3|A DHCP client
dialog|1.2-20140219|A tool for displaying dialogs through shell scripts
diffutils|3.3|Patch creation and file comparison tools
dillo|git30052014|A web browser
dropbear|2014.63|A SSH server and client
gnu_efi|3.0u|A common functions library for UEFI applications
elilo|3.16|A UEFI boot loader
evilwm|1.1.0|A window manager
sdl|1.2.15|A graphics and audio abstraction layer library
ffmpeg|2.2.2|A complete multimedia solution
findutils|4.4.2|File search tools
fuse|2.9.3|An interface for user-mode file systems
gbase|0.5|A base converter
gcalendar|0.6.0|A calendar
gcolor|0.4|A color chooser
gdk_pixbuf|git30052014|An image loading library
gdmap|0.2|A disk usage visualizer
grun|0.8.1|An application launcher
gtkcat|0.1|A disk cataloger
gtkdialog1|1.3|A tool for displaying graphical dialogs through shell scripts
gtkdiskfree|1.6.5|A disk usage analyzer
gtkedit|1.0|A text editor
gtkfind|1.1|A file search tool
gtkfontsel|1.1|A font chooser
gtklepin|0.2|A note taking application
gtksee|0.6.0b-1|An image viewer
guiftp|0.1|A FTP client
lbzip2|2.5|Compression tools
xz|5.0.5|Compression tools
libarchive|3.1.2|An archive handling library
guitar|0.1.4|An archive manager
gzip|1.6|Compression tools
htop|1.0.3|A process viewer
ircii|20131230|An IRC client
isolinux|4.07|A BIOS boot loader for ISO9660 file systems
libnl_tiny|svn30052014|An IPC library
iw|3.14|A wireless network interface configuration tool
jwm|2.2.2|A window manager
lazy_utils|git30052014|System tools
less|458|A file viewer
libxml2|2.9.1|A XML parsing library
linux|3.10.40|An operating system kernel
lynx|2.8.8|A web browser
mandoc|1.12.3|A man page formatting tool
mhwaveedit|1.4.23|An audio recording and editing tool
tinyalsa|git30052014|Core audio library
mpg123|1.20.0|A MP3 player
nano|2.2.6|A text editor
nc|110|A generic TCP client or server
ncdu|1.10|A disk usage analyzer
ogg122|git30052014|An Ogg Vorbis player
sqlite|3080403|An embedded database
packdude|git30052014|A package manager
useatbelt|git31052014|A driver loader
patch|2.7.1|A file patching tool
rfkill|0.5|A tool for disabling network interfaces
rox|git30052014|A file manager
screen|4.0.3|A terminal multiplexer
shed|1.15|A hex editor
squashfs_tools|4.3|SquashFS file system manipulation tools
sylpheed|1.0.6|An e-mail client
tinyunmute|git30052014|An audio volume unmuting tool
tinyxserver|git30052014|A display server
vile|9.8|A text editor
wget|1.15|A HTTP and FTP client
wpa_supplicant|2.1|A tool for association with wireless networks
x11vnc|0.9.13|A VNC server
xchat|git30052014|An IRC client
xev|1.1.0|A X11 events inspection tool
xhippo|3.5|An audio player
xmodmap|1.0.8|A X11 keyboard map manipulation tool
ytree|1.97|A file manager

_________________
My homepage
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website MSN Messenger 
ICQ Number 
neerajkolte


Joined: 10 Feb 2014
Posts: 249
Location: Pune, India.

PostPosted: Sat 31 May 2014, 07:17    Post subject:  

jamesbond wrote:
Come on, how come it's only me, mav, saintless and stemsee? Others?
We the users are there too. We don't have the knowledge of systems yet. So we are silently watching the progress.
jamesbond wrote:
either we make puppy "more compatible" with the parent distros so we can use their repos better
Yes that would really make people happy. I really liked the way this thread, Debiandog, and Packdude are going.
Keep up the good work.

- Neeraj

_________________
"One of my most productive days was throwing away 1000 lines of code."— Ken Thompson
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
Iguleder


Joined: 11 Aug 2009
Posts: 1890
Location: Israel, somewhere in the beautiful desert

PostPosted: Sat 31 May 2014, 07:27    Post subject:  

I think we should define our goals first.

As I see things, our goals are:
1) Being an independent, lighweight distro
2) Sustainability - easy development suitable for a small development team, without a great burden of maintenance
3) Being a good distro which does many things (multimedia, internet, development) and does them well

Using the packages of another distro gives us (2) and (3), but makes us less independent. For example, if Ubuntu moves to systemd (and it does) and Puppy is a mini-Ubuntu, we have to deal with that. Someone else decides for Puppy what's good for Puppy.

Maybe a hybrid approach is the right thing to do: run Ubuntu in a chroot (along with Apt, Ubuntu's X server, etc') on top of an independent base without many packages (just a kernel and Busybox).

_________________
My homepage
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website MSN Messenger 
ICQ Number 
stemsee


Joined: 27 Jun 2013
Posts: 359
Location: London

PostPosted: Sat 31 May 2014, 07:35    Post subject: kernel
Subject description: kernel
 

"Unfortunately fully compatible is impossible in my opinion if you keep Puppy kernel, ... "

I was using my kernel-3.13.9-EmSee-pae and running debian dog rather nicely! I don't think the kernel is a puppy kernel or the problem, rather the initrd is a puppy initrd. This issue needs clarifictaion.

Compiling the kernel for chroot, lxc, requires additional options like cgroups, and group-scheduling support etc

Very minor configuration.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message MSN Messenger 
mavrothal


Joined: 24 Aug 2009
Posts: 1603

PostPosted: Sat 31 May 2014, 07:55    Post subject:  

Iguleder wrote:
I think we should define our goals first.

As I see things, our goals are:
1) Being an independent, lighweight distro
2) Sustainability - easy development suitable for a small development team, without a great burden of maintenance
3) Being a good distro which does many things (multimedia, internet, development) and does them well

Using the packages of another distro gives us (2) and (3), but makes us less independent. For example, if Ubuntu moves to systemd (and it does) and Puppy is a mini-Ubuntu, we have to deal with that. Someone else decides for Puppy what's good for Puppy.

Maybe a hybrid approach is the right thing to do: run Ubuntu in a chroot (along with Apt, Ubuntu's X server, etc') on top of an independent base without many packages (just a kernel and Busybox).


The whole woof idea was/is this exact hybrid approach.
The question is can we make the building process more simple/effective while keeping the puppy characteristics?
If not, what and how much do we sacrifice?
If we go for maximum compatibility where innovation/difference is coming from?
If we are to make a simple build system that will just take debs and makes them into an an OS so more can people can build woof-puppies, what new are they going to offer? Why would we need more people to make pups? So we can have a different initial set of debs?...

So, I thing that being an "independent, full-featured, fully functional OOB, with maximum installation flexibility but lightweight and efficient" distro is what defines puppy.
For systemd/GNOME3 there is Fedora/RHEL

_________________
Kids all over the world go around with an XO laptop. They deserve one puppy (or many) too Very Happy
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
saintless


Joined: 11 Jun 2011
Posts: 2377
Location: Bulgaria

PostPosted: Sat 31 May 2014, 08:03    Post subject:  

Iguleder wrote:
...For example, if Ubuntu moves to systemd (and it does) and Puppy is a mini-Ubuntu, we have to deal with that. Someone else decides for Puppy what's good for Puppy.

I think Ubuntu or Debian will never remove the choice to switch between systemd and sysvinit. It will be huge mistake if it happens. This doesn't makes the distro less independent but only more flexible. If you use latest Gnome systemd boot will be needed but otherwise you can't use Gnome anyway on any linux. If we refuse to include systemd boot as option in Puppy more and more packages will not work in the future from Debian/Ubuntu repository. Then why trying to use this repositories with Puppy?
The package manager problem can't be solved with new made package manager and updating again and again separate repository for puppy with new package versions will be never ending process.
It will be new Puppy with the same old problems.

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


Joined: 11 Jun 2011
Posts: 2377
Location: Bulgaria

PostPosted: Sat 31 May 2014, 08:09    Post subject: Re: kernel
Subject description: kernel
 

stemsee wrote:
"Unfortunately fully compatible is impossible in my opinion if you keep Puppy kernel, ... "

I was using my kernel-3.13.9-EmSee-pae and running debian dog rather nicely! I don't think the kernel is a puppy kernel or the problem, rather the initrd is a puppy initrd. This issue needs clarifictaion.

Try to apt-get install virtualbox and linux-headers or Gnome3 with kernel-3.13.9-EmSee-pae and reboot using systemd and you will see it is not fully compatible anymore with Debian. With sure you will find more problems if you keep testing.

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


Joined: 27 Jun 2013
Posts: 359
Location: London

PostPosted: Sat 31 May 2014, 08:12    Post subject:  

Iguleder wrote:
Maybe a hybrid approach is the right thing to do: run Ubuntu in a chroot (along with Apt, Ubuntu's X server, etc') on top of an independent base without many packages (just a kernel and Busybox).


This SEEMS like the best/most versatile solution (which is what i tried with saucy salamander CE on linux 3.15.0-rc6). Focusing on getting the independent base that runs several chroot systems simultaneously, with the option of sending server output to multi-monitor/desktop setup, means you can run android, on desktop 1 puppy on 2, ubuntu on 3, debian on 4, simultaneously without the overhead of full virtualisation. And have the option to layer further base sfs in the puppy chroot to add extra flavours. When i layered a precise onto a slacko and then a dpup on top of that, ppm gave access to al repos!! And all packages installed and worked successfully.

Last edited by stemsee on Sat 31 May 2014, 08:31; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message MSN Messenger 
saintless


Joined: 11 Jun 2011
Posts: 2377
Location: Bulgaria

PostPosted: Sat 31 May 2014, 08:25    Post subject:  

mavrothal wrote:
...If we go for maximum compatibility where innovation/difference is coming from?
If we are to make a simple build system that will just take debs and makes them into an an OS so more can people can build woof-puppies, what new are they going to offer? Why would we need more people to make pups? So we can have a different initial set of debs?...

Innovation/difference comes from adding puppy options to native debian/ubuntu system as remastering, loading-sfs, and all scripts that make puppy different, but removing nothing from the options debian/ubuntu gives us. Keeping such distro light as Puppy is possible.

This question really needs answer: Why we need more people to make pups and why we need so many pupps at first place?

Toni

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


Joined: 27 Jun 2013
Posts: 359
Location: London

PostPosted: Sat 31 May 2014, 08:37    Post subject: Why?
Subject description: Why not?
 

saintless wrote:
This question really needs answer: Why we need more people to make pups and why we need so many pupps at first place?


By experimenting and making mistakes we learn and make improvements, refinement and other progress. I always/only learn from my and others mistakes! We have an idea and we should pursue it to benefit all of geek-kind!

Last week I had an idea for a new instrument. Yesterday I made it. Tomorrow I will perform with it and people will be delighted and distracted in an ameliorating experience. Then I'm going to sell it and buy a new laptop! That's why we need a new operating system, 'cos I'm bored with this one already! lol
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message MSN Messenger 
peebee


Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Posts: 1401
Location: Malvern, Worcs, UK

PostPosted: Sat 31 May 2014, 08:56    Post subject: What is Puppy?  

Iguleder wrote:
EDIT: this really troubles me. With this design, what makes Puppy different from a minimal Debian installation with JWM and ROX-Filer? And what about package upgrades - if we use our own kernel instead of the Debian one, what happens when there's a kernel package in Debian?


Hi - another lurker here with not enough knowledge to contribute much....

[philosophy]What makes Puppy is this forum - and the wealth of software developed and made available by all the contributors to the forum - if a future system does not allow the software on the Puppy forum to be used - pets and sfs's - then to my mind it's no longer Puppy....software does not need to be stored in a single repository to be accessible and useful[/philosophy]

Cheers!
peebee

_________________
LxPup-14.03 = Puppy + LXDE
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
Display posts from previous:   Sort by:   
Page 4 of 8 [113 Posts]   Goto page: Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 Next
Post new topic   Reply to topic View previous topic :: View next topic
 Forum index » Taking the Puppy out for a walk » Announcements
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: 0.1332s ][ Queries: 12 (0.0128s) ][ GZIP on ]