Woof-based Puppy builders wanted

News, happenings
Message
Author
mcewanw
Posts: 3169
Joined: Thu 16 Aug 2007, 10:48
Contact:

Re: What is Puppy?

#91 Post by mcewanw »

peebee wrote: [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
The above hits the nail on the head in my point of view. Puppy is a playground as much as an everyday used OS.

As for DebianDog... I would hope everything in Puppy world would not end up just being like modified DebianDog systems - DebianDog is just one approach, albeit I think, proving to be one of the good ones (which is why I put effort into that distribution's development).

However, it would be incorrect to suggest that DebianDog is yet just another Debian Live system. It is very much, I feel, a special Debian Live based system which draws on much of what could be called the Puppy philosophy. It belongs on this forum because, aside from the care taken to preserve the correct multiuser operation of its Debian core components, its look and feel, including utilities and small Puppy or Puppy-like apps, is being developed by this forum's members. The major difference, as a playground for Puppy forum members, including those who like to develop new utilities and apps, is that petget (and thus dotpet) is discarded in favour of dpkg (with apt frontend) - (but there are excellent sfs load/unload utilities provided in DebianDog anyway - I often fire up sfs files from Puppy on DebianDog - wine, gimp, inkscape - most all have worked excellently for me). Using a new package manager system takes a bit of getting used to, but it is an easy transition once begun. From the playground point of view, it is a matter of knowing how to package a small utility/app - what to use instead of dir2pet, for example.

Yesterday, I created my second deb package for DebianDog, from one of my puppy apps (pAVrecord) untarred from the dotpet into a directory. To repackage it for DebianDog all I needed was (instead of dir2pet) the DebianDog provided utility make-deb-package, which incidentally was created by a Puppy user and forum member, RSH, for Puppy itself (who incorporated ideas from forum member Semme). And DebianDog developers, in particular Toni and Fred, are likewise providing much information, including small utilities and apps that could usefully be adopted or adapted in whatever Puppy build systems are developed. That collaborative development effort, as peebee alludes, is what this forum, and Puppy itself is all about. That, complex synergy, I say, is what really makes Puppy different from other distributions - it is the forum and the playground of 'Puppy' rather than woof or any other build system to authorize its authenticity.
github mcewanw

User avatar
sunburnt
Posts: 5090
Joined: Wed 08 Jun 2005, 23:11
Location: Arizona, U.S.A.

#92 Post by sunburnt »

I agree with William ( mcewanw ).
Further more, what`s the advantage to trying to blend Puppy and Debian?
Puppy`s only advantage is it`s extensive boot media types and methods.
And personally I think a CD-DVD is a terrible boot device ( Flash is growling... :lol: )
HD, USB, and PXE, ( and soon Web boot ) are the only needed boot methods.

Doesn`t it make sense to just take std. Debian and mod it to do what you want?
Some things about std. Debian I don`t like, but it is a standard, Puppy`s an orphan.
Rather than making another mutt, clean-up Debian so it shines.
.

jamesbond
Posts: 3433
Joined: Mon 26 Feb 2007, 05:02
Location: The Blue Marble

#93 Post by jamesbond »

sunburnt wrote:Further more, what`s the advantage to trying to blend Puppy and Debian?
Puppy's versatility and Debian's vast repository.
Puppy`s only advantage is it`s extensive boot media types and methods.
A very worthwhile advantage worth keeping, I would say.
And personally I think a CD-DVD is a terrible boot device ( Flash is growling... :lol: )
I'd stay out of politics :lol:
Doesn`t it make sense to just take std. Debian and mod it to do what you want?
It does. And I think saintless and his team is doing a wonderful job doing that.
Rather than making another mutt, clean-up Debian so it shines.
Ahh ... but when that modified Debian wags like a mutt, smells like a mutt, and barks like a mutt, in the end you've gotten yourself a mutt :lol:

It's just two different approaches to the same goal, really; and there is no reason that one excludes another. Isn't puppy about choice? :wink:
Fatdog64 forum links: [url=http://murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?t=117546]Latest version[/url] | [url=https://cutt.ly/ke8sn5H]Contributed packages[/url] | [url=https://cutt.ly/se8scrb]ISO builder[/url]

User avatar
battleshooter
Posts: 1378
Joined: Wed 14 May 2008, 05:10
Location: Australia

#94 Post by battleshooter »

jamesbond wrote:Isn't puppy about choice?
Moat wrote:Package incompatibility between derivatives... so many derivatives = scattered resources/scattered compatibility.
And isn't that one of Puppy's best features and worst flaw?

I really like Moat's suggestions earlier on in this thread. They make sense, but I'm afraid Lobster may be right in that herding developers is like herding cats.
[url=http://www.murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?t=94580]LMMS 1.0.2[/url], [url=http://www.murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?t=94593]Ardour 3.5.389[/url], [url=http://www.murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?t=94629]Kdenlive 0.9.8[/url]

User avatar
mavrothal
Posts: 3096
Joined: Mon 24 Aug 2009, 18:23

#95 Post by mavrothal »

After at least 5 major GNU/Linux base distros and few hundreds derivatives of those 5, are we really discussing why have one more or one less?... :?
Because the next one does one thing better that all the others (I think :shock: :D )
== [url=http://www.catb.org/esr/faqs/smart-questions.html]Here is how to solve your[/url] [url=https://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~sgtatham/bugs.html]Linux problems fast[/url] ==

jamesbond
Posts: 3433
Joined: Mon 26 Feb 2007, 05:02
Location: The Blue Marble

#96 Post by jamesbond »

battleshooter wrote:I'm afraid Lobster may be right in that herding developers is like herding cats.
battleshooter, you are counted as part of the "developers" group because you build SFS-es :) (many of which I like and use, thanks!). Now, the real question is not about the cats, its about you - do you want/like to be "herded"? :wink:
Fatdog64 forum links: [url=http://murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?t=117546]Latest version[/url] | [url=https://cutt.ly/ke8sn5H]Contributed packages[/url] | [url=https://cutt.ly/se8scrb]ISO builder[/url]

jamesbond
Posts: 3433
Joined: Mon 26 Feb 2007, 05:02
Location: The Blue Marble

#97 Post by jamesbond »

mavrothal wrote:Because the next one does one thing better that all the others (I think :shock: :D )
Tell me about it. I was thinking to add Fedora/Mageia support to woof-next. And then I learnt that they use *different, incompatible* versions of RPM :evil: May be next time then :shock:
Fatdog64 forum links: [url=http://murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?t=117546]Latest version[/url] | [url=https://cutt.ly/ke8sn5H]Contributed packages[/url] | [url=https://cutt.ly/se8scrb]ISO builder[/url]

User avatar
sunburnt
Posts: 5090
Joined: Wed 08 Jun 2005, 23:11
Location: Arizona, U.S.A.

#98 Post by sunburnt »

Yes of course Puppy is all about choice, I just question the advantages of reinventing Debian`s wheel.
The O.S. structure is what`s std. or not, the polished product is only the O.S.`s interface ( services & apps.).

slavvo67
Posts: 1610
Joined: Sat 13 Oct 2012, 02:07
Location: The other Mr. 305

#99 Post by slavvo67 »

I've considered trying to build a puppy and then I noticed that Woof requires 1/2 TB? Is that right? Not sure if I want to go out and buy a new drive for Woof.

One of these days, I'll take a crack at it...

But if you turn off the number lock and your wifi gets disconnected, don't come running to me!

User avatar
battleshooter
Posts: 1378
Joined: Wed 14 May 2008, 05:10
Location: Australia

#100 Post by battleshooter »

@jamesbond

I think I'm more of an over enthusiastic end user than a dev. Ultimately I didn't create anything and it's not my code. At best a package manager.

But I did consider being "herded" and all it's implications.

If I really was to follow Moat's suggestions I'd take the best of Carolina, and combine it with Slacko or Precise, one of the mainstreams, And then I'd only compile SFSs for the mainstream puplets.

However, I don't have that skill to transfer, and yet I wouldn't be willing to move from Carolina either. So if was a dev, I'd be one of those stubborn cats that wouldn't move in the right direction.
[url=http://www.murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?t=94580]LMMS 1.0.2[/url], [url=http://www.murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?t=94593]Ardour 3.5.389[/url], [url=http://www.murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?t=94629]Kdenlive 0.9.8[/url]

User avatar
mavrothal
Posts: 3096
Joined: Mon 24 Aug 2009, 18:23

#101 Post by mavrothal »

slavvo67 wrote: and then I noticed that Woof requires 1/2 TB? Is that right?
1/2 TB? :shock:
How/where did you noticed?
Usually 10GB is more than enough even to build your kernel
== [url=http://www.catb.org/esr/faqs/smart-questions.html]Here is how to solve your[/url] [url=https://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~sgtatham/bugs.html]Linux problems fast[/url] ==

User avatar
mavrothal
Posts: 3096
Joined: Mon 24 Aug 2009, 18:23

#102 Post by mavrothal »

battleshooter wrote:if was a dev, I'd be one of those stubborn cats that wouldn't move in the right direction.
All directions are good!
Saluki/Carolina share code with "main stream" puppies (bidirectionally). Someone just needs to do the sharing... :wink:
== [url=http://www.catb.org/esr/faqs/smart-questions.html]Here is how to solve your[/url] [url=https://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~sgtatham/bugs.html]Linux problems fast[/url] ==

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

#103 Post by Ted Dog »

I do not like cats, yet they always try to warm up to me. How upto date is T2 I tried years back to roll my own pre MacTel mac PowerPC spin but bogged down on Xwindows not finishing.

User avatar
CatDude
Posts: 1563
Joined: Wed 03 Jan 2007, 17:49
Location: UK

#104 Post by CatDude »

Hi
Ted Dog wrote:I do not like cats......
:shock: :shock:
[img]http://www.smokey01.com/CatDude/.temp/sigs/acer-futile.gif[/img]

User avatar
peebee
Posts: 4370
Joined: Sun 21 Sep 2008, 12:31
Location: Worcestershire, UK
Contact:

OB Precise 14.07, Woof-CE build

#105 Post by peebee »

vicmz has joined the club.....

OB Precise 14.07, Woof-CE build

Great to see another Woof-based Puppy builder......
ImageLxPup = Puppy + LXDE
Main version used daily: LxPupSc; Assembler of UPups, ScPup & ScPup64, LxPup, LxPupSc & LxPupSc64

User avatar
mavrothal
Posts: 3096
Joined: Mon 24 Aug 2009, 18:23

#106 Post by mavrothal »

:D
Now it time for some code contribution in woof-CE :wink:
== [url=http://www.catb.org/esr/faqs/smart-questions.html]Here is how to solve your[/url] [url=https://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~sgtatham/bugs.html]Linux problems fast[/url] ==

User avatar
ASRI éducation
Posts: 3197
Joined: Sat 09 May 2009, 12:10
Location: France
Contact:

#107 Post by ASRI éducation »

mavrothal wrote:Now it time for some code contribution in woof-CE :wink:
I will try soon to make my contribution to woof-CE (before that, I must better understand the functioning of Git).
Cordialement,
Projet ASRI éducation => [url=http://asri-education.org/]Association[/url] | [url=http://forum.asri-education.org/]Forum[/url] | [url=http://dl01.asri-education.org/]Dépôt[/url] | [url=http://kids.asri-education.org/]Espace kids[/url]

wanderer
Posts: 1098
Joined: Sat 20 Oct 2007, 23:17

#108 Post by wanderer »

I would like to use woof-ce to try to build an absolutely minimal debian based iso

That is an iso that will only boot to busybox ash shell

any advice would be appreciated

thanks

wanderer

User avatar
mavrothal
Posts: 3096
Joined: Mon 24 Aug 2009, 18:23

#109 Post by mavrothal »

wanderer wrote: That is an iso that will only boot to busybox ash shell
That's what inird usually is. Puppies/FatDog etc have code to stay with initrd and not switch to the layered file system.
But you can do this almost with any distro that used initrd.
== [url=http://www.catb.org/esr/faqs/smart-questions.html]Here is how to solve your[/url] [url=https://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~sgtatham/bugs.html]Linux problems fast[/url] ==

jamesbond
Posts: 3433
Joined: Mon 26 Feb 2007, 05:02
Location: The Blue Marble

#110 Post by jamesbond »

wanderer wrote:I would like to use woof-ce to try to build an absolutely minimal debian based iso

That is an iso that will only boot to busybox ash shell

any advice would be appreciated

thanks

wanderer
Try woof-ce "next" branch. Then look at the package list, which you can cutdown to minimal (shell-only).

cheers!
Fatdog64 forum links: [url=http://murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?t=117546]Latest version[/url] | [url=https://cutt.ly/ke8sn5H]Contributed packages[/url] | [url=https://cutt.ly/se8scrb]ISO builder[/url]

Post Reply