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 Sat 17 Aug 2019, 18:55
All times are UTC - 4
 Forum index » Taking the Puppy out for a walk » Suggestions
Is it time to fork the Legacy Woof-CE Branch to gitlab?
Moderators: Flash, Ian, JohnMurga
Post new topic   Reply to topic View previous topic :: View next topic
Page 1 of 1 [10 Posts]  
Author Message
s243a

Joined: 02 Sep 2014
Posts: 2025

PostPosted: Fri 09 Aug 2019, 15:27    Post subject:  Is it time to fork the Legacy Woof-CE Branch to gitlab?
Subject description: Keeping the root philosophy of Puppy Alive
 

The subject is perhaps a rhetorical question because there is nothing stopping anyone from forking woof-CE if they I want. Rather than forking the legacy branch I chose to fork the woof-Next branch and many people that have had philosophical differences with woof-CE developers have chosen to expand the scope of what constitutes puppy. In other words they chose to work on puppy-like system rather than woof-CE and this is essential because new ideas are needed for the ideas of puppy to grow and prosper but what do we leave behind as we look towards the future?

What we possibly may leave behind is the ideas of freedom which puppy represents. In the words of mavrothal

mavrothal wrote:

Lately we see increased conformity with mainstream linuxes, a focus on ease of development and occasionally, “because is better” changes.
The JWM/ROX, trim to the max, root-only, Gtk2+, shell/gtkdialog, hack-as-you-go, layered OS, that is easy to use focusing on the linux newby holding-hands-in-every-step, is giving way to a highly configurable (ie needs knowledgable users going through lists of options), multi-user, multi window managers, increasingly gnome compatible, minimally if at all trimmed, increasingly well defined OS.
I do not think that either one is necessarily better for the user but it should be clear where it is going and why. Kind of a SWOT analysis.

Puppy distinguished itself offering simpler, often unorthodox, solutions to various problems, that worked OOTB with minimal hardware requirements. Usability and use case was at the core of its philosophy.
How would puppy repeat that in a conforming era? Which use-cases and/or develop-cases need to be addressed? (packaging for example is mainly a develop-case). Where is the priority (if prioritisation is needed)?
Still interested in old hardware? CD boot/save (as size increases this becomes painful)? 64bit only? Still focussing on retirees? (User average age is 60+ according to an older forum poll). Are fed up XP/Vista users still a target (they do not exist anymore)? Should it be able to run say, an Apache server with all the goodies? Is it going to be updatable through packages (ie through the savefile/folder)? Should… ?(put your option here). You get the idea.

Higher conformity actually means that will be directly comparable with the big dogs and probably lose the remaining learn-to-hack puppy wildcats (that actually many current “conformist” stared as). So how would it be different than the live CDs of the main distros?

https://github.com/puppylinux-woof-CE/woof-CE/issues/1494#issuecomment-517136238

and this isn't to say that on average the development of woof-CE isn't good but we can acknowledge someones good work while at the same time disagree with the philosophy behind their work.

I am unconformable with the dropping of various legacy support (e.g. serial mice and CRT monitors, underdog, kernals without devtmpfs, etc...) just to "simplify the code". I doubt that such simplifications have a noticeable impact on performance and I doubt that they have a significant impact on how easy the puppy code is to read. The situation isn't that dire because the as wdlkmpx notes the current woof-CE supports puppies as old as slackware 14.0, And I tend not to use puppies older than this given the excellent support of some recent pups (e.g. dpup stretch) on old hardware.

In fact I use dpup stretch on a computer with on 1GB of ram and the recent rasberri pi 4 has a max of 4GB ram. Given the impressive specs of these recent reasberri pi boards, I'm wondering I'm wondering if woof-CE has drank the rasberri pi koolaid. While I agree that puppy should support that rasberri pi, I don't think that the existence of said boards should be used as an excuse to kill off support for old hardware.

More quotes:
wdlkmpx wrote:

Specially using old CRT monitors.. unless you live in a country where the electricity bill is always low no matter how much electricity you consume.. those monitors should be confiscated and recycled. I did put my 17" CRT monitor OVERPRICED, someone asked if $1 was really the price and i said "yes, but i changed my mind, these things should be recycled".

https://github.com/puppylinux-woof-CE/woof-CE/issues/1494#issuecomment-519775274

01micko wrote:

Old hardware is something that is fading. Many people find cheap tablets and phones are the way to go. Until recently my main dev box was a circa 2007 core2duo that shipped with vista! Slacko64 and even slackware proper ran perfectly fine on that. I think any distro would struggle on an old pIII or an old athlon-xp these days. Both of mine died an age ago. the cost of a new PSU outweighs the cost of a cheap dell or HP core 2 in decent condition. Yeah I can hear the sage's out there screaming "landfill!" but in all practicality these old boxes chew a lot of power with inefficient and old design. Should their use be encouraged?

I'd rather see (and am trying to do) leaps forward in puppy development in efficient arm designs such as rpi, odroid, cubie etc, older ones included. These are cheap and can run on an off the shelf battery for days or of a phone charger. Power consumption is very low.

So perhaps Puppy's goals should be redesigned slightly, which certainly doesn't stop anyone still supporting the old clunkers.

A redesign in package and management certainly wont stop that and as far as end user is concerned.. will they even notice? It's true, it mainly concerns developers.

https://github.com/puppylinux-woof-CE/woof-CE/issues/1494#issuecomment-517233890

I disagree with 01micko here because if the woof-CE team is going to tell people to recycle their CRT monitors and serial mice then do they really have the right philosophy to keep old hardware alive? Perhaps I'm being a slight hypocrite here because I myself got rid of all my CRT monitors mostly for space reasons but also for picture quality. However, CRT monitors can have high resolution so the picture quality thing isn't necessarily true (depending on hardware).

Start of geopolitical rant

I also strongly object to the so called "green fanaticism". I'm saying "so called" because is this dogma really green or is it anti-industrial rhetoric? I understand the irony in my last sentence but we have mainstream politicians (i.e. @AOC) claiming that we only have 12 years to do something about climate change. My question is, "Or what?". Does she think the world will end and if so why is there such and aversion to nuclear power? If people really thought the world was going to end than nuclear power is by far the best short term strategy to eliminate CO2 emissions within the power industry.

Wind and Solar are unreliable without massive storage systems which are expensive and inefficient at best (e.g. haling weights up mountains or pumping water up into reservoirs) or have serious environmental and social costs at worse (e.g. disposal of batteries and child labour for the mining of cobalt in the Congo), Let's not also forget about the the military force necessary to secure the rare earth elements needed for the so called "green economy". These resources are largely in China and Africa. China is making large geopolitical moves into Africa,and also leading the united states in Artificial Intelligence and other aspects of the tech industry e.g. 5g).

This doesn't mean that we shouldn't build wind and solar but it does mean that we might have fossil fuel systems as backup or to handle peak loads. We also shouldn't ignore things such as carbon capture as part of clean coal technology. China is gaining geopolitical influence in Europe due to things like the "Belt and Road Initiative" and Canada is falling for both European propaganda by focusing their green tech initiatives on wind tech and American Propaganda by not building pipelines to the coast (The United States doesn't want Canada to use pieplines to sell oil to China. They want Canadian oil on the cheap!). This isn't to say that Canada shouldn't use wind tech but for green technology but geothermal energy will better lavage the intellectual Capital developed in Canada around the oil and gas industry. Also money is needed to build green tech and Canada should be able to get this money by selling their oil at fair international market value.

Geothermal tech can also be combined with solar thermal tech and this is advantages in Canada because geothermal is the most efficient at the times of years where solar is the least efficient (i.e. Canada doesn't get much light up north in the winter).


End of Geopolitical rant

Anyway, why I suggest forking the legacy branch is because there isn't any active development on this branch and if we move it to gitlab it will make the legacy code searchable. It will also satisfy nosystemd's desire for puppylinux to distance its-self from Microsoft owned servers (see thread).

I suggest that in this fork we rename the master branch as something like puppy-standard and have the legacy branch as the main branch for this gitlab fork. I could do this but I don't have time to maintain it. So really this thread is only rhetoric at this point unless the ideas in this thread inspire someone to act.

_________________
Find me on minds and on pearltrees.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website 
s243a

Joined: 02 Sep 2014
Posts: 2025

PostPosted: Fri 09 Aug 2019, 16:11    Post subject: Re: Is it time to fork the Legacy Woof-CE Branch to gitlab?
Subject description: Keeping the root philosophy of Puppy Alive
 

s243a wrote:

mavrothal wrote:

Lately we see increased conformity with mainstream linuxes, a focus on ease of development and occasionally, “because is better” changes.
The JWM/ROX, trim to the max, root-only, Gtk2+, shell/gtkdialog, hack-as-you-go, layered OS, that is easy to use focusing on the linux newby holding-hands-in-every-step, is giving way to a highly configurable (ie needs knowledgable users going through lists of options), multi-user, multi window managers, increasingly gnome compatible, minimally if at all trimmed, increasingly well defined OS.
I do not think that either one is necessarily better for the user but it should be clear where it is going and why. Kind of a SWOT analysis.

Puppy distinguished itself offering simpler, often unorthodox, solutions to various problems, that worked OOTB with minimal hardware requirements. Usability and use case was at the core of its philosophy.
How would puppy repeat that in a conforming era? Which use-cases and/or develop-cases need to be addressed? (packaging for example is mainly a develop-case). Where is the priority (if prioritisation is needed)?
Still interested in old hardware? CD boot/save (as size increases this becomes painful)? 64bit only? Still focussing on retirees? (User average age is 60+ according to an older forum poll). Are fed up XP/Vista users still a target (they do not exist anymore)? Should it be able to run say, an Apache server with all the goodies? Is it going to be updatable through packages (ie through the savefile/folder)? Should… ?(put your option here). You get the idea.

Higher conformity actually means that will be directly comparable with the big dogs and probably lose the remaining learn-to-hack puppy wildcats (that actually many current “conformist” stared as). So how would it be different than the live CDs of the main distros?

https://github.com/puppylinux-woof-CE/woof-CE/issues/1494#issuecomment-517136238

and this isn't to say that on average the development of woof-CE isn't good but we can acknowledge someones good work while at the same time disagree with the philosophy behind their work.

I am unconformable with the dropping of various legacy support (e.g. serial mice and CRT monitors, underdog, kernals without devtmpfs, etc...) just to "simplify the code". I doubt that such simplifications have a noticeable impact on performance and I doubt that they have a significant impact on how easy the puppy code is to read. The situation isn't that dire because the as wdlkmpx notes the current woof-CE supports puppies as old as slackware 14.0, And I tend not to use puppies older than this given the excellent support of some recent pups (e.g. dpup stretch) on old hardware.

In fact I use dpup stretch on a computer with on 1GB of ram and the recent rasberri pi 4 has a max of 4GB ram. Given the impressive specs of these recent reasberri pi boards, I'm wondering I'm wondering if woof-CE has drank the rasberri pi koolaid. While I agree that puppy should support that rasberri pi, I don't think that the existence of said boards should be used as an excuse to kill off support for old hardware.

More quotes:
wdlkmpx wrote:

Specially using old CRT monitors.. unless you live in a country where the electricity bill is always low no matter how much electricity you consume.. those monitors should be confiscated and recycled. I did put my 17" CRT monitor OVERPRICED, someone asked if $1 was really the price and i said "yes, but i changed my mind, these things should be recycled".

https://github.com/puppylinux-woof-CE/woof-CE/issues/1494#issuecomment-519775274

01micko wrote:

Old hardware is something that is fading. Many people find cheap tablets and phones are the way to go. Until recently my main dev box was a circa 2007 core2duo that shipped with vista! Slacko64 and even slackware proper ran perfectly fine on that. I think any distro would struggle on an old pIII or an old athlon-xp these days. Both of mine died an age ago. the cost of a new PSU outweighs the cost of a cheap dell or HP core 2 in decent condition. Yeah I can hear the sage's out there screaming "landfill!" but in all practicality these old boxes chew a lot of power with inefficient and old design. Should their use be encouraged?

I'd rather see (and am trying to do) leaps forward in puppy development in efficient arm designs such as rpi, odroid, cubie etc, older ones included. These are cheap and can run on an off the shelf battery for days or of a phone charger. Power consumption is very low.

So perhaps Puppy's goals should be redesigned slightly, which certainly doesn't stop anyone still supporting the old clunkers.

A redesign in package and management certainly wont stop that and as far as end user is concerned.. will they even notice? It's true, it mainly concerns developers.

https://github.com/puppylinux-woof-CE/woof-CE/issues/1494#issuecomment-517233890

I disagree with 01micko here because if the woof-CE team is going to tell people to recycle their CRT monitors and serial mice then do they really have the right philosophy to keep old hardware alive? Perhaps I'm being a slight hypocrite here because I myself got rid of all my CRT monitors mostly for space reasons but also for picture quality. However, CRT monitors can have high resolution so the picture quality thing isn't necessarily true (depending on hardware).

Start of geopolitical rant

I also strongly object to the so called "green fanaticism". I'm saying "so called" because is this dogma really green or is it anti-industrial rhetoric?


When I say anti-industrial rhetoric, it is worth considering the concept of "green-washing". Is the Rasberri pi a "green technology" in comparison to older PC tech. Maybe, but this isn't apparent to me. On the PC level older computers typically had smaller power sources than the rasberri pi. It is true that the rasberri pi uses less power than and older PCs, but what is the environmental cost of a making a rasberri pi and how long do rasberri pi computers last relative to older computers?

In my experience the life span of a PC is something like five to ten years, especially when running something like puppy linux. In my experience the lifespan of a modern smartphone is 2-3 years (okay perhaps a bit more than than but you get the idea). One issue with all this miniaturization of technology is the parts aren't as reliable. For instance how many charging cords does one typically go through over the lifetime of a phone and what is the risk of damage to these small USB ports. Part of me wonders if the obliquity of these small usb type ports for charging applications is percisly for the reason of planned obsolesce and if things don't last as long it means that they will more quickly end up in landfills. And lets not minimize these production and disposal costs. Electronics may use, precious metals, rare earth elements or materials which are hazardous to the environment.

Also, there is the lost labour cost of constantly having to replace devices because one needs to keep replacing their software as they change devices and usually with newer software that requires more resources, and as software becomes more demanding so will the power requirements but it isn't really the power requirements I'm primarly concerned about here since the rasberri pi is energy efficient. It takes time to upgrade and configure software, there is also the time required to learn newer user interfaces. Forcing people to constantly upgrade and replace their software represents real lost labour time that could be used for other things.

Finally, I'm concerned about the complexity of supply chains. If we romanticize "green-tech" as a way of breaking free of industrialization than we need simple technology that can be easily reproduced in the event that society collapses. Newer tech might help like 3D printers but I think it is also helpful to know how to build and maintain old tech because it might be easier to recreate if we ever have to reboot civilization. On the surface the rasberri pi looks like it has a smaller footprint but how is it made? What are the labour practices? How big are the supply chains and what is the social and environmental cost of making them? So perhaps the rasberri pi is more green but by pretending that it is some kind of answer to the romanticized ideals of living off the land is so far from the truth that it's still a type of greenwashing. New tech is useful but it should never become a fetish of the green movement.

Finally, even if the idea of recreating technology after the collapse of a civilization is too ambitious it is nonetheless the case that planned obsolescence will not bode well for the robustness of a technological society post catastrophe. Prior to building new tech we must maintain old tech and hardware that doesn't last long or is hard to repair won't bode well for maintaining old tech post societal collapse and if one thinks that this is an unrealistic scenario then one really needs to consider the risk of nuclear war. This almost happened during the "bay of pigs" and all it would take to trigger a nuclear war is one false alarm, software glitch or possibly a hack in the event that the so called modernization of this military tech creates the opportunity for the hacking of ones nuclear systems.

Nuclear disarmament is over and geopolitical issues in Iran could result in a greater possibility of Nuclear war.

_________________
Find me on minds and on pearltrees.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website 
greengeek


Joined: 20 Jul 2010
Posts: 5617
Location: Republic of Novo Zelande

PostPosted: Fri 09 Aug 2019, 16:43    Post subject: Re: Is it time to fork the Legacy Woof-CE Branch to gitlab?
Subject description: Keeping the root philosophy of Puppy Alive
 

s243a wrote:
If people really thought the world was going to end than nuclear power is by far the best short term strategy to eliminate CO2 emissions within the power industry.
May I start with commenting on your geopolitical rant? I have always been negative towards nuclear power - for reasons related to passing dangerous residues down through the many generations of innocent humans that will follow us. And I do not share the idea that CO2 is a boogey man justifying the use of nuclear. I was gobsmacked to recently view the following youtube vid: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N-yALPEpV4w where the speaker offered a strong justification for more nuclear power plants in order to save the planet.

Suddenly it became obvious to me why governments are criminalising CO2 - it provides a "justification" for going nuclear. The "CO2 is bad" brigade obviously stand to make a lot of money by encouraging building of nuclear power plants.


But back to puppy : I much prefer to keep old PCs running - and they can easily be powered by solar and wind technologies (at least in many parts of the world). But I also see great advantage in having devs build operating systems for low power devices like Odroid/Raspberry etc.

In fact, as my old hardware dies I will be hoping to move up to Raspberry PCs as a means of avoiding Win10 compatible UEFI style externally controlled hardware.

So I applaud both perspectives - the support of old hardware and also development of new highly efficient "old style" puppies running on highly efficient "new style" hardware.

What I see little value in is the production of puppies tied to the big distros.

If you need to run the newest software programme and it relies on the latest Debian - why would you not boot debian when you have to run it? And just use your good old puppy for everything else?
Quote:
What we possibly may leave behind is the ideas of freedom which puppy represents.
At least the old puppies are still archived (thanks Ally!) for people needing to keep old hardware alive. And fine tuning those distros is a very good way for new Puppians to learn the landscape and develop basic dev skills themselves.

Example - Darry and Watchdog take old puppies and graft new bits on.
Is this effectively what you are proposing and promoting via a more formal fork?
.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
8Geee


Joined: 12 May 2008
Posts: 2008
Location: N.E. USA

PostPosted: Fri 09 Aug 2019, 17:50    Post subject:  

Basically, if one has a Brand X computer with Puppy in it, the essential software that needs replacing is the BROWSER. The hardware usually does not need to change. The one possibility is the Video processor that can be upgraded ( NOT to modern: just to better, and acceptable to machine/Puppy-OS ).

Much of what I see according to topic is based upon
a.) newer Puppy in old computer
b.) newer computer running an older Puppy
c.) I need a turn-key puppy that I can mod

Basically a.) just needs a new(er) browser. I realize that is not easy to accomplish. Moving base-standards forward (i.e. GTK3) is a rather complicated and immense solution. And of course glibc updating is even more complicated. It boils down to entities much larger than Puppy are forcing changes upon ALL.

Request b.) holds the most promise as the faster, more efficient CPU/MPU can really speed things up. But the new computer has new hardware not found in older Pups (re: kernel). On an individual or group basis, such drivers can be made available. The problem here is the micro-code updates that must occur for a safer on-line experience.

Request c.) is the traditional Puppy approach, get something that works and tinker.

Moving towards giga-corporate is a reality we face. Puppy DOES NOT have its own Browser- no phoning home, no 3rd party "affiliates"- we have to alter a specific browser to our security/privacy needs. Some people think an app or three can fix this, some think altering the browser-behavior is sufficient, and a few do BOTH.

Finally, Puppy has end-users that are new to linux, and its characteristics. There are dual-boots aplenty even 11 years after I signed up here. People just can't be weened off Windows, because COMPANIES use it. And Windows has cut-off its legacy programs to keep Customers in line. That should be strictly prohibited in Puppy.

Consequentially, the OS/Browser world IS NOT about diversity, its about money, and keeping people employed. Thus, there is no old browser udergoing security repairs... get a new one, and ditto for the OS. Thats not PuppyLinux.

Regards
8Geee

_________________
Linux user #498913 "Some people need to reimagine their thinking."
"Zuckerberg: a large city inhabited by mentally challenged people."
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
s243a

Joined: 02 Sep 2014
Posts: 2025

PostPosted: Fri 09 Aug 2019, 21:09    Post subject: Re: Is it time to fork the Legacy Woof-CE Branch to gitlab?
Subject description: Keeping the root philosophy of Puppy Alive
 

greengeek wrote:
s243a wrote:
If people really thought the world was going to end than nuclear power is by far the best short term strategy to eliminate CO2 emissions within the power industry.
May I start with commenting on your geopolitical rant? I have always been negative towards nuclear power - for reasons related to passing dangerous residues down through the many generations of innocent humans that will follow us. And I do not share the idea that CO2 is a boogey man justifying the use of nuclear. I was gobsmacked to recently view the following youtube vid: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N-yALPEpV4w where the speaker offered a strong justification for more nuclear power plants in order to save the planet.

Suddenly it became obvious to me why governments are criminalising CO2 - it provides a "justification" for going nuclear. The "CO2 is bad" brigade obviously stand to make a lot of money by encouraging building of nuclear power plants.

This is possible but I going to try avoiding getting too much into the CO2 debate. I just want people to be honest that if CO2 is really the boogeyman that people say it is than we need nuclear. However, if the danger isn't as dire and as immediate than we can explore alternatives and the rate that we have to bring alternatives online will depend on how dire and immediate the threat is.

Regarding the push towards nuclear it should be pointed out that because of nuclear proliferation agreements many countries aren't allowed to enrich uranium beyond a certain level and if the reactor technology that a given country requires needs enrichment beyond this level then they are dependent on countries that are allowed to enrich uranium beyond this level.

That said, I think that the United States is more interested in keeping oil cheap then pushing Nuclear. The reason being is that they know the economic effect of a high price of oil and a $100 price of oil preceded the last the great recession.

A push towards alternatives like wind and solar also helps to keep the price of oil down. I will also point out that not only does a low price of oil help the US economy but it also helps to put pressure on governments that the United States whats to replace with their puppets (e.g. Venezuela).


Quote:
But back to puppy : I much prefer to keep old PCs running - and they can easily be powered by solar and wind technologies (at least in many parts of the world). But I also see great advantage in having devs build operating systems for low power devices like Odroid/Raspberry etc.

In fact, as my old hardware dies I will be hoping to move up to Raspberry PCs as a means of avoiding Win10 compatible UEFI style externally controlled hardware.

So I applaud both perspectives - the support of old hardware and also development of new highly efficient "old style" puppies running on highly efficient "new style" hardware.

agreed Smile

Quote:
What I see little value in is the production of puppies tied to the big distros.


Currently puppy is tied to the big distros but some puppy like systems aren't such as: easyOS, weeDog, TazPup and Fatdog64. With woof-next this will likely change because of greater flexibility in the build system. There is currently a version of woof-next that is being developed by the woof-CE developers called (ZWN):
https://github.com/puppylinux-woof-CE/woof-CE/tree/testing/zwn


Quote:
If you need to run the newest software programme and it relies on the latest Debian - why would you not boot debian when you have to run it? And just use your good old puppy for everything else?


Perhaps someone wants a light version of debian. Of course there are alternatives besides puppy for this like doglinux and MXLinux

Quote:
Quote:
What we possibly may leave behind is the ideas of freedom which puppy represents.
At least the old puppies are still archived (thanks Ally!) for people needing to keep old hardware alive. And fine tuning those distros is a very good way for new Puppians to learn the landscape and develop basic dev skills themselves.

Example - Darry and Watchdog take old puppies and graft new bits on.
Is this effectively what you are proposing and promoting via a more formal fork?
.


I agree, I'm very much appreciative of both the work by the puppy developers and also the work of people that keep old versions of puppy alive. P.S. you forgot: nic and JRB as community members which help to keep old versions of puppy alive.

_________________
Find me on minds and on pearltrees.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website 
darry19662018

Joined: 31 Mar 2018
Posts: 536
Location: Rakaia

PostPosted: Sat 10 Aug 2019, 00:36    Post subject:  

I work at the moment at a Refuse Park (Nice term for a Dump). This was done to get people into the Recycle mindset. I see an overwealming amount of crt monitors and Crt tvs,
Laptops, Desktops and even fairly recent tech. Which just adds to this country's problem with plastic (there is no market for plastic at the moment). Add to that printers whose cartridges cost more to replace than the printer.

We send off this stuff to be disassembed and the components re-used. Wire is recycled separately. I have been lucky to get a couple of good laptops that I have purchased cheaply to run Puppy on.

The big problem I see is the appliances which are not very old at all coming in especially whiteware (Goes to Metal Scrappy) and to be honest we are struggling to keep up with what is coming in.

The biggest eye-opener for me is the problem with plastic and how many products are constructed with non-recyclable materials such as pvc.

What I love about Puppy is the range of hardware it will run on and the development of being able to change kernels to remaster a pup to suit your hardware. I have really enjoyed using Busterpup and SCpup as well as older pups like Raring, 4.31 and Lucid and my favourite PUDUAN 6(the forgotten).

What annoys me is not Puppy relying on those "big" distros for packages but the attitude of the big distros to abandon older hardware in favour of going 64bit only with the weak it is too hard excuse. 32bit hardware is still extremely useful and frankly very fun to use.

It is fun to tinker with old Pups like 4.31 and it is very cool that guys like Watchdog, and 8Geee and others have made Browsers that help with this.

As for what s243a is talking about I can only say this anything that is linked to Microsoft is not a good a good thing and I am in agreement with nosystemd on what he has said on the matter.

I'd like to see hardware that lasted longer and we got away from the planned obsolescence nightmare we are going through at the moment, we are becoming a world of refuse.

Finally thank you s243a for the work you are doing and others here which is developing Puppy like systems which are extremely cool.

_________________
Puppy Linux Wiki: http://wikka.puppylinux.com/HomePage

https://freemedia.neocities.org/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website 
bigpup


Joined: 11 Oct 2009
Posts: 12442
Location: S.C. USA

PostPosted: Sat 10 Aug 2019, 11:38    Post subject:  

Quote:
GitLab moved from Microsoft Azure to Google Cloud Platform in August 11, 2018, which made the service inaccessible to users in Crimea, Cuba, Iran, North Korea, Sudan, and Syria, due to sanctions imposed by Office of Foreign Assets Control of the United States.

So Microsoft owns Github and Google has control of Gitlab.

It is just Google Cloud Rolling Eyes
Are you really that stupid, that you do not think Google gets to look at the stuff that is in Google Cloud? Shocked

_________________
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 Shocked
YaPI(any iso installer) http://www.murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?t=107601
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
mikeslr


Joined: 16 Jun 2008
Posts: 3269
Location: 500 seconds from Sol

PostPosted: Sat 10 Aug 2019, 13:35    Post subject:  

Six of one; half a dozen of the other. Github was, and for now still is, open-source. Do you really think that Google was and is unaware of its contents? hasn't cloned it for exploration and exploitation purposes?

"Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely." Lord Acton.

That is true without regard for what system is being considered: political, religious, information, production, and economic to name the obvious. Concentration of power reduces individual freedom and enables tyranny by the few. It matters little if your choices have been limited by a government decree or the functional control by a "Free Enterprise" that dominates your environment.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
greengeek


Joined: 20 Jul 2010
Posts: 5617
Location: Republic of Novo Zelande

PostPosted: Sun 11 Aug 2019, 01:58    Post subject: Re: Is it time to fork the Legacy Woof-CE Branch to gitlab?
Subject description: Keeping the root philosophy of Puppy Alive
 

s243a wrote:
P.S. you forgot: nic and JRB as community members which help to keep old versions of puppy alive.
Yes indeed, definitely. I only mentioned two of the contributors that keep old distros alive and relevant. (Tuxtoo deserves a major mention too..).

In fact jrb's "enabling the zdrv" efforts enabled me to modify Slacko 5.6 to suit my needs and it has been my daily driver for about 5 years as a result.

All of the Puppians who help keep old versions useable deserve a big pat on the back. Exclamation
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
lmemsm

Joined: 27 Jun 2012
Posts: 35

PostPosted: Tue 13 Aug 2019, 08:42    Post subject:  

8Geee wrote:

Basically a.) just needs a new(er) browser. I realize that is not easy to accomplish. Moving base-standards forward (i.e. GTK3) is a rather complicated and immense solution. And of course glibc updating is even more complicated. It boils down to entities much larger than Puppy are forcing changes upon ALL.


You've brought up an issue that I've been very concerned with of late. There are just a few browser developers (Google, Mozilla, etc.). The w3c is no longer in charge of web standards. The browser developers took that over and mainly disregard any w3c suggestions they don't like. Web developers tend to only create web sites that work on the last 3 incarnations of popular browsers. They typically don't have the time or inclination to thoroughly test all browsers. Also, if tried and true web design techniques are used that port well to multiple browsers, people complain it's not web 2.0 and isn't aesthetically pleasing. So, we're stuck with a monopoly that's been created by people's tastes and what's in style, that forces you to keep upgrading your hardware and software to conform to what's popular.

Many developers are talking about how great tools like Slack are. It seems to be replacing simpler forms of communication like IRC. (By the way, even some IRC systems are increasing security. So, you can't use them without the latest IRC clients and security modifications which may not necessarily be available in command line programs or programs with less dependencies.) None of my regular browsers are compatible with Slack. That basically puts up a barrier between those who have access to information and those who do not. It's not just systems like Slack though. What about banking systems or systems that you purchase merchandise through? Yes, it's important to upgrade security in programs. However, the upgrades shouldn't be just for a minority of select programs that large corporations or non-profits can afford to maintain. Even where I work, I see examples of exclusiveness. They upgraded their system to two level security, meaning you need two devices to get into the system. However, they assume everyone has access to text messaging to provide the second level of security. Some of the upgrades we're seeing may be due to security reasons, but many of them are due to companies wanting to create a new market, so you need to buy their latest software or hardware to continue to be able to do things you used to be able to do.

So what can be done about it? I kind of liked the idea that some users had when the Internet became too much of a social media distribution system to create an Internet II for more academic uses again. Creating a new Internet may be too big of an endeavor, but creating more accessible forms of communication over the current Internet is possible. The Puppy Linux discussion board is a great example of what can be done. It continues to be very accessible to hardware and software that may not be the latest and greatest. At one point when IE was the most popular browser, there were campaigns to make sites accessible in any browser. Now that most of the browsers are based on Open Source, those campaigns have practically stopped. Consumers need to continue to put pressure on site owners to make sites more accessible. If you're creating content for the Internet, make sure it's as accessible as you can make it. Get the word out and create places where people can share information on what content is out there that is still highly accessible and frequent those over sites that are not easily accessible.

As to the browser issue, the easiest way to make sure a browser continues to work is to be able to develop it oneself. Unfortunately, the specifications for the browser have become so complex, only a few companies can afford to build and maintain something that can fully handle all the latest standards. The developer of XFDOS and nanolinux spent quite a lot of time trying to come up with a decent browser based on webkit that can handle modern web sites. I also put in some time on the project. The developer of the fifth browser also put in similar efforts. While they're webkit based projects, they're still not going to be able to handle all the latest web sites. Some web sites search for user agent information and may refuse to work just because the required user agent isn't listed. This requires spoofing the user agent information. The webkit based browser I was working on supported AJAX, but JSON support would need to be added. Also, when I upgraded my version of gcc, some of the original developers made a few non-portable shortcuts that caused it to crash with later incarnations of the compiler. There are projects like netsurf that are attempting to redesign the browser from scratch cleanly. I looked into the project several years ago and had no luck using it. Even building it on some systems was an issue.

Most companies are attempting to provide some type of mobile phone support since that's the latest in thing. However, since the turnover for mobile devices and the update of mobile operating systems seems to be going at an even more rapid pace than PCs, how long will it be before whatever app or browser worked on your mobile device no longer works? Google is already pushing the demise of 32 bit apps in the Google store and requiring developers submit 64 bit versions of all apps. There are several inexpensive Android tablets that could eventually be rendered useless because of that switch. There are projects like libhybris that are trying to bring some of the apps available on devices like Android to the Linux desktop. However, since phones have the same problem with becoming outdated and even more rapidly than desktop computers, it doesn't look like a good solution for older systems.

The last option I can think of is to use a virtual machine. Run the latest and greatest software in a virtual machine (whether it's phone software like Android X86 or some commercial operating system) and use a later browser that way. Of course, older systems may not have the horsepower and resources to run an emulator well. Many of the newer operating systems won't even run on certain older machines due to lack of hardware resources let alone run in emulators on those machines. Emulating a mobile phone would probably be easier than some of the other operating system choices because it's design for systems that may have less processing power. Still, it's not an optimal solution.

Support alternative forms of communication (such as more accessible web sites, forum software, etc.) that are less exclusive and work with more operating systems and client software choices. Encourage or help out Open Source projects that are offering alternatives to standard browser options. Use emulators to bridge the gap when possible. That about sums up the choices I've seen so far. If there are other solutions that don't require just giving in and using what everyone else is using, I'd love to hear about them. Suggestions very welcome.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
Display posts from previous:   Sort by:   
Page 1 of 1 [10 Posts]  
Post new topic   Reply to topic View previous topic :: View next topic
 Forum index » Taking the Puppy out for a walk » Suggestions
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: 0.1285s ][ Queries: 12 (0.0199s) ][ GZIP on ]