Page 38 of 190 [2837 Posts]   Goto page: Previous 1, 2, 3, ..., 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, ..., 188, 189, 190 Next
Author Message
Atle
PostPosted: Sun 17 Feb 2013, 11:46    Post subject:

Hi Mikeslr...

that is one heck of a nice answer. Actually I had this idea about this PAE stuff to be a bit similar to aparteid:-) ITs for some folks only...

I feel its hard to make new spinnoffs as things get complicated with the PAE stuff. If 64 bit versions are better, its at least something people will understand, as PAE is like really really greek to most folks out there.

So is what you say, that it should have been Precise 32 AND 64 bits and not Precise and retroprecise? Even there with this retro one can get confused.



All my laptops are good old crap machines with little ram and sometimes very small hard drives. I have done great testing with RetroPrecise on this machines and it looks great, even if not to much of interest in the Precise repo yet.

When i talk about making a new version of Lucied, i simply mean the old one being made over like a shineover and some bugs to be removed as they are probably still there. No new kernel or advanced stuff. Just a simple makeover of the 005 version to become more up to date as Lucid DOES have a lots of programs and are very much my favorite puppy.

Mikeslr... I have tested Slacko, the non PAE version and what is a bit stunning is that you can remove the entire installation from its partition, even if not running "pfix=ram" and just replace it with another Slacko or some other puppy, run grub4dos and then reboot the new OS.

Is there some difference in how Lucid and Slacko uses the ram? Is Slacko less dependent on its files on the drive than Lucied?

The reason i ask is that i am investigating a little bit around making a perfect RAM ONLY version of Lucid of Slacko to boot FROM your Android phone. Been experimenting a bit and found out it works well, but needs a custom ISO that gives you a great surfing experience with a RAM ONLY file system.

The reason for thinking RAM ONLY(might be the wrong way to say it), is that once you have booted from your phone, you can use the USB to connect to internet via the phone.

In some androids it possible to use other system, as ram only is not needed if you use the phone as a wifi hotspot.
mikeslr
PostPosted: Sun 17 Feb 2013, 10:45    Post subject: There probably won't be a Lupu Updated -- but don't panic

Hi Atle,

It is highly unlikely that there will be an “updated” or "upgraded" version of Lupu for the following reasons:
1. In building Lupu, binaries from Ubuntu 10 & 11 were used. If I remember correctly, Lupu is about 2/3s compatible with those distros. Ubuntu 12 uses not only a newer kernel but also a newer glib (which I think means graphics library). Consequently, the packages developed for Ubuntu 12 are not backward compatible with Lupu as they are dependent upon that newer library.
2. You can't just use newer apps, or even substitute a newer kernel, the latter, itself, being a PITA. Upgrading Lupu would require not only the use of the newer kernel, but also the new glib: essentially building the new version “from scratch.” If you did that you end up with Precise Pup.
3. Both Pemasu and jejy69 have published non-pae versions of Precise Pup, although jejy69's version is admittedly difficult to keep track of. He is primarily interested in developing alternate Windows and File Managers for Puppy. So his threads on the Forum providing the link to the non-pae precise ISO also discusses his Slacko pups. You can download jejy69's Lxpup 11.12 no pae version from here:
http://lxpup.weebly.com/lxpup.html. Its default windows manager is Lxde which, although takes a little getting used-to, actually is very customizable and refreshing. It has Playdaz's seal of approval.
Pemasu's version can be downloaded from here: http://murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?t=77697 It is my “work-horse.”
Either can use the applications developed for the PAE-Version of Precise. Additionally, with few exceptions, either can also use the applications developed for Lupu/Lucid although before doing so I would exercise caution: Back-up your SaveFile &/or use PaDS, http://www.murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?t=81511&sid=45284380b8aa384ba4d3157ea00e07ce to convert a Lupu pet to an SFS. Just installing the pet may overwrite newer libs neede by the newer applications in your SaveFile breaking those apps. Deleting the pet will not re-install the needed libs. An SFS only “overwrites” the libs in the “merged system” not the SaveFile. Unloading an SFS returns libs in the SaveFile to priority.

Hope this helps,

mikesLr

P.S. I've given up trying to convince Devs that modern equipment capable of accessing more than 1 CPU and 4Gbs of RAM needs a 64-Bit OS; that PAE kernels require faster CPUs than non-pae kernels so the latter are as fast or faster on non-modern equipment. PAE should be the exception in Puppy whose market is us fans and the "third-world" using 2nd hand equipment. But it's not surprising that Devs acquire modern equipment and, building for their own pleasure, are attracted to PAE kernels. Be thankful that Pemasu and jejy69 still think of us sometimes. And that 01micko still takes an interest in building a Slacko with a non-pae kernel. Slackos, by the way, run great on my computers.
Atle
PostPosted: Sun 17 Feb 2013, 07:29    Post subject:

Its been soon a year since last version of this excellent Puppy was released (5.2.8.005)... Now I wonder if there are anyone around with the idea of releasing a newer version like a 006. We are then close to the 007 version, that I feel could have a slight James Bond theme:-)

I think 5.2.8 has a long life as Precise might never overcome the problematic PAE issue, that makes it useless to me, as its no longer one distro for all, but two versions of the same whereas some works on this and other on that machine. Very confusing for most users and also a small step backwards in the sense of users loosing faith in the distro as one downloads the "flagship" and it does not even boot if this and that hardware is not present.

I seem to remember that Lucid newer missed out on one single boot for as long as I can remember.

Anyhow... Anyone with ideas about a new version of Lucid?

Best

Atle
darkcity
PostPosted: Sat 16 Feb 2013, 13:31    Post subject:

regarding installing chrome, are the following two steps still required for the latest packages?
Quote:

1. First, please uninstall any Iron, Chromium, or Chrome pets.

2. Second, install this libgconf2-4_3.1.6 pet.
libgconf2-4_3.1.6.pet

http://puppylinux.org/wikka/Chrome
futwerk
PostPosted: Wed 06 Feb 2013, 22:13    Post subject:

new backgrounds.
otropogo
PostPosted: Tue 29 Jan 2013, 03:09    Post subject: Re: How does puppy's flash boot loader pick the sfs file?
Subject description: pdev1 and psubdir don't determine which lupu_528.sfs file loaded, what does?

greengeek wrote:
otropogo wrote:
Have just completed a dizzying series of test with a newly configured USBflash boot card, trying to figure out how to control which version of the lupu_528.sfs file is loaded.
I just saw an interesting comment from ETP regarding sfs and savefile discovery here:
http://www.murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?t=24047&start=278
Possibly all puppies may benefit from further work/understanding in this area. Time consuming and tricky to cover all contingencies though.


Thanks for the link. Have responded to ETP's post there.
greengeek
PostPosted: Thu 24 Jan 2013, 14:33    Post subject: Re: How does puppy's flash boot loader pick the sfs file?
Subject description: pdev1 and psubdir don't determine which lupu_528.sfs file loaded, what does?

otropogo wrote:
Have just completed a dizzying series of test with a newly configured USBflash boot card, trying to figure out how to control which version of the lupu_528.sfs file is loaded.
I just saw an interesting comment from ETP regarding sfs and savefile discovery here:
http://www.murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?t=24047&start=278
Possibly all puppies may benefit from further work/understanding in this area. Time consuming and tricky to cover all contingencies though.
sheldonisaac
PostPosted: Fri 18 Jan 2013, 09:26    Post subject:
Subject description: re gtkdialog

(portions snipped)
pemasu wrote:
I follow the logic explained by 01micko ..

.. to use one improved gtkdialog binary only...and the others are symlinks.

Thanks to all for your posts on this issue.

I had installed the one that don570 made
http://www.murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?p=677831#677831

I did the below, and Pmusic (which looks for gtkdialog) starts normally.

Code:
/usr/sbin> ln -s gtkdialog4 gtkdialog
/usr/sbin> which gtkdialog
/usr/sbin/gtkdialog
jpeps
PostPosted: Fri 18 Jan 2013, 02:53    Post subject:

pemasu wrote:


But 01micko posted this idea, to use one improved gtkdialog binary only...and the others are symlinks. If there is incompatibility the idea was that those gtkdialog apps should be updated by the developer.

I have gone with this logic since then...as 01micko

exactly...I wish everyone was on board with this approach...but......

BTW/ update JWM-653, since it now works with java...thanks to 01micko kicking butt....

I don't know if you got around to reposting a working JRE in the SFS directory. I posted one the other board, but there's probably some new versions on the way.
pemasu
PostPosted: Fri 18 Jan 2013, 02:18    Post subject:

I follow the logic explained by 01micko at some time when the debate about gtkdialog naming was hot. Due to incompatilities of improved version at that time. I wont go to the details. They can be found from the gtkdialog thread.

But 01micko posted this idea, to use one improved gtkdialog binary only...and the others are symlinks. If there is incompatibility the idea was that those gtkdialog apps should be updated by the developer.

I have gone with this logic since then...as 01micko.

So....there is diversity...Barry Kauler do the naming his way....some others other way. But there has not been much problems with it,

Also....01micko and I use the latest gtkdialog version at the time. Barry updates woof slower.
don570
PostPosted: Thu 17 Jan 2013, 21:21    Post subject:

Shouldn't you guys stick to the same naming convention that
Barry Kauler uses. He hasn't advanced to gtkdialog5.

I try to stick to his methods as close as possible.

Barry likes to make gtkdialog4 the application and gtkdialog the link.

This is an image of Exprimo which does it differently.



__________________________________________
RSH
PostPosted: Thu 17 Jan 2013, 01:15    Post subject:

I think you did not really understand my question the right way.

As you can see in my gtkdialog output, the gtkdialog4 binary version is 0.8.0

You posted a gtkdialog version 0.8.4 - also from a gtkdialog4 binary.

I want to know:

- is this file wrong renamed to gtkdialog4 after compiling?
- or is every new gtkdialog binary 0.8.0 and above renamed after compiling to gtkdialog4 - from now on

Thanks

RSH

Edit:

Or will this confusing all users/developers of Puppy Linux in the future and therefor adding a big minus to the related big list of minuses on installing and using applications? Wink
sheldonisaac
PostPosted: Wed 16 Jan 2013, 23:25    Post subject:
Subject description: re gtkdialog

(portions snipped)
RSH wrote:

I have downloaded the above linked .pet and
found a binary named gtkdialog4.

So, how did you get this output from a gtkdialog4 binary?

Code:
~> gtkdialog -v
gtkdialog version 0.8.4 r503M (C) 2003-2007 Laszlo Pere, 2011-2012 Thunor
Built with additional support for: Glade.
~>

Is gtkdialog4 the right name for this binary?

RSH, please excuse any unclearness.
Clicking the pet resulted in the binary gtkdialog4 being placed into
/usr/sbin
I copied that file into /usr/bin and renamed it to gtkdialog

It was one approach to dealing with the way gtkdialog is used by Pmusic.

Thanks,
Sheldon
RSH
PostPosted: Wed 16 Jan 2013, 23:08    Post subject:

Hi.

Here is my output on gtkdialog:

GtkDialog, which is a link to gtkdialog3
Code:
sh-4.1# gtkdialog -v
gtkdialog version 0.7.21 (C) 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007 by Laszlo Pere


GtkDialog4
Code:
sh-4.1# gtkdialog4 -v
gtkdialog version 0.8.0 (C) 2003-2007 Laszlo Pere, 2011 Thunor


GtkDialog5
Code:
sh-4.1# gtkdialog5 -v
gtkdialog version 0.8.2 release (C) 2003-2007 Laszlo Pere, 2011-2012 Thunor


I have downloaded the above linked .pet and found a binary named gtkdialog4.

So, how did you get this output from a gtkdialog4 binary?

Code:
~> gtkdialog -v
gtkdialog version 0.8.4 r503M (C) 2003-2007 Laszlo Pere, 2011-2012 Thunor
Built with additional support for: Glade.
~>


Is gtkdialog4 the right name for this binary?

Please explain...

Thanks

RSH
sheldonisaac
PostPosted: Wed 16 Jan 2013, 22:48    Post subject: gtkdialog 0.8.3 etc

don570 wrote:
Quote:
Where is a version of gtkdialog 0.8.3

I put together a package for Barrry' Kauler's Precise distro.
It should work for Lucid.

Try it and report back...

http://www.murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?p=677831#677831

Thank you very much, don570; it does indeed work.
I copied the gtkdialog4 file:
Quote:
~> which gtkdialog
/usr/bin/gtkdialog
~>

Quote:
~> gtkdialog -v
gtkdialog version 0.8.4 r503M (C) 2003-2007 Laszlo Pere, 2011-2012 Thunor
Built with additional support for: Glade.
~>
Display posts from previous:   Sort by:   
Page 38 of 190 [2837 Posts]   Goto page: Previous 1, 2, 3, ..., 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, ..., 188, 189, 190 Next

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group