tahrpup64 6.0.5 CE

[jangelelcangry]

Are you using tahrpup64 6.0.6? If so, I am afraid, the problem occurs under certain conditions.

Yes.

Are the extra sfs's put in the psubdir?
Then how about putting them outside the psubdir?

I don't know what psubdir is but what I know is that the SFS Files are loaded from root directory.

Is restart a reboot of the computer or just a restart of SFS-Load?

It's a reboot after saving the session, rebooting again, running bugfix and installing DevX or other SFS from quickpet or downloading them from ibiblio.

[bigpup]

All additional sfs packages need to be located in /mnt/home.
The programs that load and unload additional sfs packages expect them to be in that location.
So, /mnt/home is the place to put them.

Why?
/mnt/home is outside of the Puppysave.
The sfs packages are just on the partition, not inside a directory.

So, put all the additional sfs packages in /mnt/home and see if you are still having problems.

[jangelelcangry]

All additional sfs packages need to be located in /mnt/home.
The programs that load and unload additional sfs packages expect them to be in that location.
So, /mnt/home is the place to put them.

Why?
/mnt/home is outside of the Puppysave.
The sfs packages are just on the partition, not inside a directory.

So, put all the additional sfs packages in /mnt/home and see if you are still having problems.

They are already on /mnt/home. I always place them there in case I delete the save session ( e.g. FGLRX breaks the system)
when you install an SFS from quckpet, the SFS files are sent directly to /mnt/home and when you load them from another directory SFS-Load will ask you to move it to mnt/home.

[bigpup]

What format is the partition Tahrpup64 6.0.6 is installed on?
Are you using a save file or save folder?
How much memory in computer?

Anything you may have done just before having this sfs load problem?

SFS Load is working OK for me.

Note:
I am using a different kernel source, because I changed kernel to one different than what comes in Tahrpup64 6.0.6
I have it using kernel 4.9.15.

[jangelelcangry]

What format is the partition Tahrpup64 6.0.6 is installed on?
Are you using a save file or save folder?
How much memory in computer?

Anything you may have done just before having this sfs load problem?

EXT4
Save folder
HDD: 50.5/55.9GB
RAM 8GB 7.75GB according to htop
other than format the partition and start over again nothing.

[bigpup]

If you are willing to do it.

Reformat to EXT3.
Install Tahrpup.

EXT4 has had issues recently in some Puppies.
Depending on what program you used to do the format.
There is now a 64bit EXT4.
Puppy can only 100% handle 32bit EXT4.

EXT3 has never been a problem.

[jangelelcangry]

If you are willing to do it.

Reformat to EXT3.
Install Tahrpup.

EXT4 has had issues recently in some Puppies.
Depending on what program you used to do the format.
There is now a 64bit EXT4.
Puppy can only 100% handle 32bit EXT4.

EXT3 has never been a problem.

So, gparted's uses the 64-bit ext4. I'll try it and post what happens soon.

[mikeslr]

Hi jangelelcangry,

I think you've misunderstood bigpup. Puppies can read drives formatted as 64-bit Ext4. However, grub4dos can not boot from them. IIRC, if you use gparted under Tahrpup to format a drive as Linux Ext4, gparted will format it as 64-bit Ext4. Puppies can read it, but not boot from it. Which is why bigpup suggested that you format it as Linux Ext3.

If I've understood these, Linux Ext3 is "limited" in that it can not support a drive exceeding 4 Terabytes, https://www.redhat.com/archives/ext3-us ... 00001.html, while 32-bit Linux Ext4 can support drives up to 16 Terabytes and 64-bit Ext4 can support drives up to 1024 Petabytes. One Petabyte equals 1000 Terabytes. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petabyte.

Also, bear in mind that the above 16 Terabyte limit applies only if it is managed as an entirety. Although I'm not aware of any, there may be partitioning applications which can divide a 32 Terabyte drive into two 16 Terabyte partitions, four 8 Terabyte partitions, etc.

Considering how many Linux users not running an internet server will have a need to access a drive exceeding 16 Terabytes, I have to wonder why the creation of the 64-bit Ext4 format is the result when Ext4 formatting is chosen? Maybe it's not? Maybe gparted run from other operating systems provides a choice? But gparted under Puppies doesn't.

mikesLr

[jd7654]

I have to wonder why the creation of the 64-bit Ext4 format is the result when Ext4 formatting is chosen? Maybe it's not?

Puppies create 32-bit Ext4, command line and GParted. It's usually other newer distros like Ubuntu 17 or Debian 9 that create 64-bit Ext4.(unless that is overridden with -O ^64bit)

[jangelelcangry]

Hi jangelelcangry,

I think you've misunderstood bigpup. Puppies can read drives formatted as 64-bit Ext4. However, grub4dos can not boot from them. IIRC, if you use gparted under Tahrpup to format a drive as Linux Ext4, gparted will format it as 64-bit Ext4. Puppies can read it, but not boot from it. Which is why bigpup suggested that you format it as Linux Ext3.

If I've understood these, Linux Ext3 is "limited" in that it can not support a drive exceeding 4 Terabytes, https://www.redhat.com/archives/ext3-us ... 00001.html, while 32-bit Linux Ext4 can support drives up to 16 Terabytes and 64-bit Ext4 can support drives up to 1024 Petabytes. One Petabyte equals 1000 Terabytes. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petabyte.

Also, bear in mind that the above 16 Terabyte limit applies only if it is managed as an entirety. Although I'm not aware of any, there may be partitioning applications which can divide a 32 Terabyte drive into two 16 Terabyte partitions, four 8 Terabyte partitions, etc.

Considering how many Linux users not running an internet server will have a need to access a drive exceeding 16 Terabytes, I have to wonder why the creation of the 64-bit Ext4 format is the result when Ext4 formatting is chosen? Maybe it's not? Maybe gparted run from other operating systems provides a choice? But gparted under Puppies doesn't.

mikesLr

Oh. Sorry for the typo. I understood that bigpup said that Tahr works with ext3 rather than ext4, It was just a typo. When I said I'll try that I meant To format to EXT 3 and re-install. Sorry for the confusion that this caused.

[dalderton]

I have been running this version for some time with no problems until recently I was forced to kill a page and when I rebooted the screen resolution had changed. With my monitor the resolution has been 1600+900 and it has now changed to 1152+864 and only lower resolutions available on the Xorg video wizard. This resolution is very unsatisfactory as everything is elongated .
Any help would be appreciated.
Regards Dennis.

[jangelelcangry]

I have been running this version for some time with no problems until recently I was forced to kill a page and when I rebooted the screen resolution had changed. With my monitor the resolution has been 1600+900 and it has now changed to 1152+864 and only lower resolutions available on the Xorg video wizard. This resolution is very unsatisfactory as everything is elongated .
Any help would be appreciated.
Regards Dennis.

Try going to setup/graphics,screen/screen resolution (xrandr)
when you see the resolutions overwrite the one highlighted for your desired resolution.

[mikeslr]

In my previous post I suggested that running gparted on Puppies and formatting a partition as Ext4 would create a 64-bit Linux Ext4 partition from which Puppies couldn't boot. jd7654 corrected me. My comment was based on the problem Woodlark reported, http://murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic. ... 862#964862. Woodlark: "I am trying to do a frugal install of Tahrpup 6.0.5 to a Dell Precision 690. I reformatted the partitions (ext4) and wiped the previous boot record (there are no other OS's). I used the Universal Installer and the Grub4Dos wizard (chose all defaults)." From which I assumed Woodlark had done that running Tarhpup from a DVD or USB-Key. Woodlark never responded to my question as to whether the partition had previously been formatted using a different Linux; and I would have assumed that reformatting it and removing the mbr under Tahrpup would have eliminated any problem which could have been caused by a different Linux's formatting.

jd7654 appears to be correct. To find out if I could duplicate the problem Woodlark's experienced, I did the following:

Booted into LinuxMint Sara (64-bit) and formatted a USB-Key to Linux Ext4. Rebooted into Tahrpup 6.0.5. Used its gparted to reformat the Key to Ext4. Copied the following from tahrpup 6.0.5 onto the USB-Key: initrd.gz, vmlinuz, puppy_tahr_6.0.5.sfs and zdrv_tahr_6.0.5.sfs. Installed grub4dos to the USB-Key allowing it to create a menu.lst there.

Rebooted the computer with the key plugged in; USB-ports having boot priority. Tahrpup booted to desktop without incident.

I'm not sure why Woodlark had a problem -- what he didn't do, or didn't do correctly. Note, I didn't think of installing Linux Mint's grub to the Key until I wrote this, and I hadn't "wiped the previous boot record", other than that which might have occurred by gparted's reformatting and grub4dos's over-riding of any prior boot record. But Tahrpup seems to be able to format partitions as Ext4 and use them as its boot partition.

mikesLr

[dalderton]

[/quote] I tried that but the Xorg wizard is not showing "xrandr" for whatever reason and it doesnt work.
Regards Dennis
It appears on further research that xrandr is present but when I opened it in the terminal it quoted 1152*864 0.0* as the maximum available. This is not the case as I have been using this program for many months at 1600*900 without problems intil the previously mentioned page kill after which it reverted to 1152*864 Very odd.
Thanks anyway Regards Dennis..

[bigpup]

I have been running this version for some time with no problems until recently I was forced to kill a page and when I rebooted the screen resolution had changed. With my monitor the resolution has been 1600+900 and it has now changed to 1152+864 and only lower resolutions available on the Xorg video wizard. This resolution is very unsatisfactory as everything is elongated .
Any help would be appreciated.
Regards Dennis.

I am going to guess how Tahrpup is installed.
Frugal using a save file or folder.

Resolution setting 1152+864 is not any kind of normal setting.

What have you been using for graphics driver?
What is the graphics hardware?
Tahrpup is installed on what storage device?
Formatted to what format?

I was forced to kill a page

Details???
This could be a big clue as to what happened.

You could be dealing with failing graphics hardware.
Corrupted format (file system)
Corrupted save file or folder.

[dalderton]

This is all getting a bit complex I am afraid but as a matter of interest I frugal installed Tahrpup 6.0.6 this afternoon and it worked perfectly using 1600*900 resolution straight from the go. This was on the same computer with the same monitor on a different partition on the Hard disc.Maybe if I updated the 6.0.5 it may sort the problem. I think as you say that the kill page killed the desired res.
I can transfer my stuff to the 6.0.6 but for some strange reason it wont install Opera developer. I sometimes wonder why I stay with it but any thing is better than Windows but it would be better if I knew what I was doing after using Linux for the last 15 years or so.My excuse is basically my geriatric status.
Regards Dennis.
Further to the above I updated to 6.0.6 (changed VMlinuz initrd.gz puppy_tahr64_6.0.6.sfs and zdrv_tahr64_6.0.6.sfs all worked well but still no access to 1600*900 res and wont install Opera-developer.
What Fun.

[Billtoo]

I burned the iso to a DVD, the save file is on the hard drive:

video-info-glx 1.5.3 Mon 4 Sep 2017 on tahrpup64 6.0.6 Linux 3.14.54 x86_64
0.0 VGA compatible controller: Advanced Micro Devices, Inc.
[AMD/ATI] RV610/M74 [Mobility Radeon HD 2400 XT]
oem: ATI ATOMBIOS
product: M74 01.00

X Server: Xorg Driver: evdev
X.Org version: 1.15.1
dimensions: 1680x1050 pixels (444x277 millimeters)
depth of root window: 24 planes

direct rendering: Yes
server glx vendor string: SGI
server glx version string: 1.4
OpenGL vendor string: X.Org
OpenGL renderer string: Gallium 0.4 on AMD RV610
OpenGL core profile version string: 3.3 (Core Profile) Mesa 10.1.3

Intel(R) Core(TM)2 Duo CPU E8135 @ 2.40GHz
Core 0: @800 1: @800 MHz

System: Host: puppypc9087 Kernel: 3.14.54 x86_64 (64 bit) Desktop: JWM 2.3.6 Distro: tahrpup64 6.0.6
Machine: Device: desktop System: Apple product: iMac8 1 v: 1.0 serial: W8811GXLZE2
Mobo: Apple model: Mac-F226BEC8 v: PVT serial: 1
BIOS: Apple v: IM81.88Z.00C1.B00.0802091538 date: 02/09/08

Kodi sfs works fine.

[bigpup]

I frugal installed Tahrpup 6.0.6 and it worked perfectly using 1600*900 resolution straight from the go.
I can transfer my stuff to the 6.0.6 but for some strange reason it wont install Opera developer.
Further to the above I updated to 6.0.6 (changed VMlinuz initrd.gz puppy_tahr64_6.0.6.sfs and zdrv_tahr64_6.0.6.sfs all worked well but still no access to 1600*900 res and wont install Opera-developer.
What Fun.

This indicates the old save is corrupted, messed up, not correct, etc.....

The easy fix.
I know you have a good backup of the save, when it was working correctly, that can easily replace the bad one!

The hard fix.
Try to figure out what is messed up in the save.
Here we go

In Rox file manager
Navigate to the save file/folder.
Left click on it to open it.
Inside the save is etc/X11/xorg.conf file.
Delete the xorg.conf file.
Reboot.

Any help??????


Explain will not install Opera-developer?
Details????
You do what?
You see what?

[dalderton]

Thanks again. Right I have sorted the Opera problem on the new 6.0.6 on the different partition. As to the original problem with the resolution I have tried deleting X11/xorg.conf and rebooting after which the mouse was dead. Replaced the xorg.conf with a backup and same story.rebooted in safe mode which produced the dead mouse again. rebooted in ram mode and got a untouched version with no personal content.went back to the original boot with the original save file and got the bad resolution but everything else OK.
Dont know where to go next
THanks again Regards Dennis.

[Pelo]

Happy to feed back that tahrpup 64 can provide Gramps to people whose hobby is genealogy. They are some in the forum intra muros, but many outside.

It is the first Puppy able to do it since Slacko 5.5 and Precise 5.7.1 as far as i know.
Python, libs missing, there was always something to stop the process
Sure i have old puppies at home. I would not have been stopped in my genealogical researches.
But some positive feed-back is to be done, when passengers are satisfied.
What would be a 64 bits OS without applications to run ? A supersonic as Concorde for which USA would be prohibited to land. or