Puppy Database

Under development: PCMCIA, wireless, etc.
Message
Author
scheck.r
Posts: 12
Joined: Wed 30 Apr 2008, 17:22

#61 Post by scheck.r »

I don't know much about databases but I recall people using portabase or treeline as very simple database software on the Zaurus pda.
Both require Qt. No Sqlite. They are available also on the desktop. Very user friendly apps.

See http://portabase.sourceforge.net/index.html
and http://treeline.bellz.org/index.html

User avatar
WhoDo
Posts: 4428
Joined: Wed 12 Jul 2006, 01:58
Location: Lake Macquarie NSW Australia

#62 Post by WhoDo »

scheck.r wrote:I don't know much about databases but I recall people using portabase or treeline as very simple database software on the Zaurus pda.
Both require Qt. No Sqlite. They are available also on the desktop. Very user friendly apps.

See http://portabase.sourceforge.net/index.html
and http://treeline.bellz.org/index.html
Thanks, scheck.r - treeline needs Python which kinda defeats the Puppy ethic, but portabase looks interesting. I have downloaded the tarball and will attempt a compile in Puppy. If successful I'll post the dotpet result here. At 256kb the download looks distinctly promising if QT is the only dependency.

The thread was really aimed at getting a fully-relational database for Puppy, but something this small might be enough for most people IF it is easier to use than TkSQlite for example.

Update: Compile from source failed due to missing directory but I downloaded the debian binary and that works. I have repacked as a dotpet here. Small, quick and relatively easy to use IMHO. Surprising how much it can do for such a little app. Good find, scheck.r 8)

Image
Last edited by WhoDo on Sun 04 May 2008, 11:23, edited 1 time in total.
[i]Actions speak louder than words ... and they usually work when words don't![/i]
SIP:whodo@proxy01.sipphone.com; whodo@realsip.com

Jactek
Posts: 37
Joined: Mon 11 Dec 2006, 00:43
Location: Hport NY

Database

#63 Post by Jactek »

At work I use an old DOS database QA4 by Symantec we have been using it since the early 90's and it works well, it works in Puppy using DosBox, also there is a program EZbase that work with DosBox. I bought a copy of Lotus Approch for Win3.1 but havnt been able to get to work with Wine or Dosbox

Jim

User avatar
WhoDo
Posts: 4428
Joined: Wed 12 Jul 2006, 01:58
Location: Lake Macquarie NSW Australia

#64 Post by WhoDo »

Just finished playing with Portabase. For less than 600kb it is certainly very versatile (see screenshot in post above). As a simple, everyday flat file database, I think it would be a great asset to Puppy and make the base version software complete.

Any comments?

Here are some more shots of relevant input/view screens.

Image

Image
Last edited by WhoDo on Sun 04 May 2008, 11:57, edited 1 time in total.
[i]Actions speak louder than words ... and they usually work when words don't![/i]
SIP:whodo@proxy01.sipphone.com; whodo@realsip.com

User avatar
Colonel Panic
Posts: 2171
Joined: Sat 16 Sep 2006, 11:09

#65 Post by Colonel Panic »

Yeah, there's some good DOS database software out there. I sometimes use PC-File, a freeware database program, in DOSBox.

Portabase sounds good though.

scheck.r
Posts: 12
Joined: Wed 30 Apr 2008, 17:22

#66 Post by scheck.r »

@ WhoDo

I'm glad you find it useful. Thanks for the pet package.

User avatar
Lobster
Official Crustacean
Posts: 15522
Joined: Wed 04 May 2005, 06:06
Location: Paradox Realm
Contact:

#67 Post by Lobster »

tried it in Dingo without success but I am notoriously inept, anyone get it working? 8)
Puppy Raspup 8.2Final 8)
Puppy Links Page http://www.smokey01.com/bruceb/puppy.html :D

scheck.r
Posts: 12
Joined: Wed 30 Apr 2008, 17:22

#68 Post by scheck.r »

Portabase works in Dingo.
Install qt-3 form official puppy3 repository using puppy package manager.

oblivious
Posts: 303
Joined: Sat 14 Apr 2007, 05:59
Location: Western Australia

#69 Post by oblivious »

I tried this in Dingo, without success :cry:

Swarup
Posts: 219
Joined: Wed 21 May 2008, 01:28

#70 Post by Swarup »

I need a database for use in Puppy 3.01-- I've read through this thread, and so many different DB applications have been discussed that it is a bit hard for a newbie like me to understand what the upshot of it all is.

I had several DB's in MSA (MS Access) a year ago, which when I shifted from Window$ to Ubuntu I imported with great difficulty into OOo Base. Only to find out as I started using Base, that compared with MSA's ease of use, Base is like something out of the middle ages. And very buggy. So, around 3 months ago I compiled the latest version of Kexi in Ubuntu, and exported all my Base DBs into Kexi. Kexi is like a good fairy c/w OOo Base. I do like Kexi-- very user friendly.

But now I've decided that for my old laptop (433 mhz celeron; 256 Ram), Ubuntu is really too much. So after some serious investigations, two days ago I've shifted all my things over to Puppy. One of the last things I haven't ported over yet is my DB which is in Kexi now.

I only have one active DB which I need to bring over now. My DB is a simple table with around 20 columns and 60 rows. I don't need to be able to do anything further than maintain my data in the table. No need for queries even with this DB.

Would the best thing be for me to compile Kexi in Puppy and just bring the Kexi DB file over? (There is a HowTo for compiling Kexi, and it includes special instructions for those compiling into a Debian-based distro. Would Puppy fall in that category? If so, then the compile would be pretty straightforward.)

Or would I be better off switching to something smaller and lighter, more suited for use in Puppy 3.01? In that case I could export from Kexi/Ubuntu as .csv, then import the .csv into the new DB application in Puppy. And if so, then of all the DB applications which have been discussed, which is recommended?

User avatar
WhoDo
Posts: 4428
Joined: Wed 12 Jul 2006, 01:58
Location: Lake Macquarie NSW Australia

#71 Post by WhoDo »

Swarup wrote:Would the best thing be for me to compile Kexi in Puppy and just bring the Kexi DB file over? (There is a HowTo for compiling Kexi, and it includes special instructions for those compiling into a Debian-based distro. Would Puppy fall in that category? If so, then the compile would be pretty straightforward.)

Or would I be better off switching to something smaller and lighter, more suited for use in Puppy 3.01? In that case I could export from Kexi/Ubuntu as .csv, then import the .csv into the new DB application in Puppy. And if so, then of all the DB applications which have been discussed, which is recommended?
Here's a suggestion; what about just using the Gnome sfs with Puppy and then you can keep Kexi in its present form? That way you get the best that Puppy can offer with the familiarity of your Ubuntu wm. Just a thought.

If you want to go smaller and lighter, Portabase is probably your best bet now, although it only imports XML and MobileDB formats. It shouldn't be too hard to get your CSV over to XML format.

If you do end up successfully compiling Kexi in Puppy format, I'll be one of the first to give it a try. I've been looking for a user-friendly database for so long now I've all but given up! Base is too buggy and nothing else is as user-friendly IMHO.

Go for it, mate!
[i]Actions speak louder than words ... and they usually work when words don't![/i]
SIP:whodo@proxy01.sipphone.com; whodo@realsip.com

User avatar
hillside
Posts: 633
Joined: Sun 02 Sep 2007, 18:59
Location: Minnesota, USA. The frozen north.

#72 Post by hillside »

Puppy has been serving as my small (read micro) business operating system and I'll have to admit that lack of a good database program has been the most difficult part.

I've been keeping my customer list on a spreadsheet. It's easy to update, allows me to sort, search, etc, and the appropriate data can be copied to the OO database for printing purposes when I need to do envelopes or mail labels. When I'm done with the print job, I just delete the table from the database and go back to my spreadsheet.

Even though this is a little awkward, it has been working quite well. I could make use of subforms, but a flat database does the job well enough.

I'm not familiar with Kexi, but what I would find useful is a database system that managed child tables, had a good data entry system using forms, and did a good job with mail merge and label printing. OO base is getting close, but it's not there yet.

Swarup
Posts: 219
Joined: Wed 21 May 2008, 01:28

#73 Post by Swarup »

WhoDo wrote:Here's a suggestion; what about just using the Gnome sfs with Puppy and then you can keep Kexi in its present form? That way you get the best that Puppy can offer with the familiarity of your Ubuntu wm. Just a thought.
1. I've been searching a bit on Gnome sfs just now-- found a HowTo for an install into Puppy 4.0, but in the only 3.01 threads I saw people were struggling trying to get the sfs to work, but I hadn't found a thread where folks had gotten clear success.

2. If there is a good install for Gnome sfs in Puppy 3.01, then would that setup require more system resources (I mean cpu and ram) than the default 3.01 install with JWM? I am trying to keep system demand to a minimum.

3. If both the above items are a go, then when you say "you can keep Kexi in its present form", are you suggesting that the install of Kexi which I have now in Ubuntu, that very installation would be used somehow in puppy? Or do you mean that once I have established Puppy with a Gnome DE, then I'd be able to install Kexi the same way I had done in Ubuntu? (As a note: my Ubuntu install is on a different HD from my Puppy install. That could be changed later if needed, but for right now this is how things are arranged. And only one HD goes on my laptop at a time.)
WhoDo wrote:If you want to go smaller and lighter, Portabase is probably your best bet now, although it only imports XML and MobileDB formats. It shouldn't be too hard to get your CSV over to XML format.
"Lighter" means less demand on cpu and/or ram, right? Sounds good. From the way you are discussing the Kexi installation (below), it sounds like Portabase is easy to install in comparison. Is the Portabase.pet which you've given above on this very web page, all that is needed? (It says there, "needs Qt3 or later"-- something I need to install as well?)

If the Portabase install is easy, I might just have a quick look at it today, to see what it's like. And I'll have to have another look at Kexi later when I put the other HD in. Perhaps Kexi can export directly as XML. And actually, I still have OOo Base running with that DB in Ubuntu as well. If OOo Base can export as XML, then that would also be fine for me.
WhoDo wrote:If you do end up successfully compiling Kexi in Puppy format, I'll be one of the first to give it a try. I've been looking for a user-friendly database for so long now I've all but given up! Base is too buggy and nothing else is as user-friendly IMHO.
Is Puppy regarded as being a debian-based distribution? If so, then the compiling should be pretty straight forward. If Puppy is not correctly characterized as being in the "debian family", then is there a particular distro family of which puppy could be accurately described as being a member? That will help me a great deal in finding out what is needed to compile Kexi in it.

Swarup
Posts: 219
Joined: Wed 21 May 2008, 01:28

#74 Post by Swarup »

I just installed Portabase in Puppy 3.01, wanting to see how it is. But I can't seem to find qt3 anywhere. I looked in the Puppy package manager, but I am not finding it there. Neither under "qt3", and nor under the official depedency name "libqt-mt.so.3". Upon googling it, I got a an RPM resource page called:

RPM resource libqt-mt.so.3
Found 263 RPM for libqt-mt.so.3
webpage address:
http://rpmfind.net/linux/rpm2html/searc ... tem=&arch=

But I have no idea which of these 263 if any, is the one I need.

oblivious
Posts: 303
Joined: Sat 14 Apr 2007, 05:59
Location: Western Australia

#75 Post by oblivious »

But I have no idea which of these 263 if any, is the one I need.
There's qt-3.3.8 in the puppy package manager if you select (I think, from memory) Official Puppy 3 at the top. That's what I used.
(The database DOES work - I was trying to start it from files in the directories, but it actually created a menu entry and it starts from that - not sure where it's starting from, but it's definitely starting :lol: )

As far as I know (and I don't know much :lol:):
- Puppy is not debian-based, it is created from scratch.
- Puppy 3.01 is compatible with Slackware packages

Swarup
Posts: 219
Joined: Wed 21 May 2008, 01:28

#76 Post by Swarup »

When I had Puppy 4.0 installed, then in Package Manager there was the option at the top for 4.0, 3.01, or 2.17. But I now I am running Puppy 3.01 (I had to switch because 4.0 was not supporting SCIM), and in the Package Manager with 3.01 those options are not there at the top of the screen for 4.0, 3.01, 2.17 anymore. I think in Puppy 3.01's Package Manager, it must just default to 3.01. But I have gone into the window several times, and there is no option there for "qt-3.3.8". There IS an option for qt-4.x, which I tried several times, but every time I tried, the Package Manager would try to connect for the download and then shut down. I don't know what that means, and I don't even know if the qt-4 which it has would work. But this much I know, that qt-3.3.8 is not there, and qt.4.x will not download.

By the way, has anyone tried to compile Kexi in Puppy yet? There is a good HowTo for the Kexi compilation, which I used for Ubuntu. But the page is not only for debian users, in fact it is mainly for non-debian users. Here it is: http://kexi-project.org/wiki/wikiview/i ... rsion.html. The page is entitled, "Compiling Kexi from Subversion"-- and it has instructions for compiling for both non-debian and debian distros.

oblivious
Posts: 303
Joined: Sat 14 Apr 2007, 05:59
Location: Western Australia

#77 Post by oblivious »

Oh, that's odd. It sounds like it gives you the list from pet-packages 4...

In any event, if you download it and install it locally, that hopefully should work.

ftp://ibiblio.org/pub/linux/distributio ... packages-3

Swarup
Posts: 219
Joined: Wed 21 May 2008, 01:28

#78 Post by Swarup »

Ok, I'll try it. Right now I'm working in Ubuntu, but when I switch over I'll give it a go.

Why am I getting the 4.0 Package manager for my 3.01 install? Is there a way to switch it over to 3.01? Or even to tell it to show all three at the top of the page, like it used to do in 4.0?

Swarup
Posts: 219
Joined: Wed 21 May 2008, 01:28

Difficulty getting qt3 dependency for Portabase

#79 Post by Swarup »

I downloaded and installed Portabase (as a matter of fact I did it twice by mistake-- once a few days ago, and then again installed it again today-- so in Package Manager there are two copies listed among the list of installed .PETs. Gave the order to uninstall one, but nothing changed. There are still two.). And I went to the site you referred me to, oblivious, and downloaded "qt-3.3.8.pet" and installed it. But when I run the dependency checker for Portabase, it still gives the following output:
These dependencies required by Portabase package are missing:
File /usr/bin/portabase has these missing library files:
libqt-mt.so.3
This dependent package is missing: "qt3"

IMPORTANT: It is recommended that you install the missing packages.
So what can I do to get this qt3 installed? Isn't the package "qt-3.3.8.pet" the correct one?

When I installed "qt-3.3.8.pet", it didn't give me the usual window "qt-3.3.8.pet has been installed" afterward. It just said it was installing, and then I didn't get any other message. Neither an error message, nor an installed message. Could something have gone wrong with the install?

User avatar
hillside
Posts: 633
Joined: Sun 02 Sep 2007, 18:59
Location: Minnesota, USA. The frozen north.

#80 Post by hillside »

I installed Portabase and the qt-3.3.8.pet package. I noticed that qt-3.3.8.pet took a long time to install. I thought the system had frozen, and then suddenly I got the "All Done" message and everything was good.

For some reason, Portabase wouldn't start from the menu entry, but it worked fine from a command.

It's a nice little flat file database that allows you to build a form for data entry, but it doesn't have quite the power that I need for my work. I find a decent spreadsheet gives about as good of results (minus the data entry screen). But, I think a lot of people might find the program useful for simple database work.

Still looking for a basic relational database system that works just a bit better than OObase. I'm feeling optimistic.

Post Reply