Puppy Linux Discussion Forum

panzerpuppy · Joined: 02 Oct 2007 Posts: 632

I'd vote for Slack compatibility,but with an i686 multimedia optimized kernel (T2).

Isn't the latest version of Slackware i686 optimized?

Pizzasgood · Posted: Mon 29 Sep 2008, 13:35 Post subject:

cb88 · Joined: 28 Jan 2007 Posts: 1160 Location: USA

this thread is stupid and pointless ttuuxxx lacks the ability to even compile ffmpeg even after i told him how to fix it (and yes it compiles just fine on T2 and even on slackware where i compiled it along time ago from svn)

he is not qualified and neither am I i don't have the time/resources to build puppy and probably couldn't do it if i did have time need i mention that i have compiled ffmpeg again Confused

and ttuuxxx hasn't

ttuuxxx doesn't have the ability but has the time and he is also arrogant as if he does have the ability to do it

if ttuuxxx wants to build puppy then fine i just hope it is never official and btw ubuntu is an unstable piece of bloat use debian if at all get a clue

I know this post is harsh but im fed up with all this silliness and with my statistics class too...

KF6SNJ · Posted: Mon 29 Sep 2008, 14:29 Post subject:

If ttuuxx wants to create a 5.0 fork, let him. I see no issue with parallel distributions of puppy. Perhaps it could be called Puppy - HotDog. I am starting to setup to look at and re-work ChurchPup. I am not qualified, but I am going to try. Who are we to say who is and isn't qualified? Linux itself developed from people trying something new, regardless of thier "qualifications". Isn't that part of how we are to where we are with our numerous derivatives? Personally, I think that there is plenty of room in the puppy community for this. I would also like to see a "SuperHacker" puppy that has compilers for every known programming language. That could be cool (though it may actually prove rather bloated).

Reason for Edit: Grammer Error.

cb88 · Joined: 28 Jan 2007 Posts: 1160 Location: USA

sure ttuuxxx can do that thats just fine... flooding the forum with what amount to takover notices is not fine however

if ttuuxxx wants to "try something new" there is no one stopping him but I sure don't want him ordering me around or posting polls just to manipulate things into what the "people" want puppy isn't about that we have the load of calculators for a reason they are tiny and they all work pretty decent just cause another distro uses only galculator doesn't mean we should

ttuuxxx is saying things that only noobs on this forum ask... like why soo many calculators or why is it not based on ubuntu these have NEVER been questions asked seasoned puppy users as far as I know the answers soon become clear anything ive ever seen based on ubuntu was slow and the calculators are neat and small whats next add open office and KDE!? time to get back to our roots of smallness uniqueness and original inventiveness

supperhacker puppy ROFL... and would even have lolcode compiler uberbloat here we come!

ttuuxxx · Posted: Mon 29 Sep 2008, 15:42 Post subject:

cb88 · Joined: 28 Jan 2007 Posts: 1160 Location: USA

could be the live issue with the wierd union issues and all

IMO this thread itself is childish why do you need approval to make a derivative? and who made you release coordinator? since when have we even had a release coordinator or needed one?

"i don't have the time/resources to build puppy and probably couldn't do it " ... i meant alone which is how you make it look for yourself

also i believe it was you who corrupted the last thread by deleting your posts wasn't it instead of putting your thoughts out there on the line and letting people see what you really think.

how is saying that you are overzealous at the very least untrue or throwing a monkey wrench in the works at all?

also the name is cb88 please don't yell it

"I might have to install puppy for once and give it a shots again"

so you have never actually installed puppy or configured grub... of course i don't believe that but that is they way you are twisting my words

ttuuxxx · Posted: Mon 29 Sep 2008, 16:01 Post subject:

cb88 · Joined: 28 Jan 2007 Posts: 1160 Location: USA

so now you act like i said you haven't done an HD install which i clearly didn't say

notice the edit times people

ttuuxxx · Posted: Mon 29 Sep 2008, 16:13 Post subject:

KF6SNJ · Posted: Mon 29 Sep 2008, 17:05 Post subject:

ttuuxxx,

I fully support you trying to initiate this project. You know far more about computers that I do. I think you will be able to make this puppy fly. I think you have a good idea of what needs to be done. I would be happy to test the first few alphas to see what I see. Who knows, you may be unto something big.

MU · Posted: Mon 29 Sep 2008, 17:30 Post subject:

I really would recommend, that localization gets a higher priority.

I installed Puppy 409.
Neither xorgwizard nor the networkwizard includes localization, though I had provided patches in the past.
With xorgwizard, there was a parallel development, so I can understand it.
But networkwizard already was localized in some versions of Puppy, and now is off again, because a fork of the networkwizard is used instead.

It certainly is great to have better wifi support now, but really disappointing to see, that former hard work is completely dropped.

Mark

disciple · Posted: Mon 29 Sep 2008, 18:05 Post subject:

Once again, don't panic!

1. Don't replace reliable calculators with the bug-ridden (but very nice) galculator. Fix the bugs first Smile

2. Don't add unnecessary libs or large programs like the Gimp. The main Puppy should not be bloated, or he will lose his usefulness to a lot of people, and slowly lose his identity and become just another medium (non-Gnome/KDE) distro. We should instead make much greater use of addon squashfiles. These could be put together by different people, and could be updated more or less frequently than the main Puppy .iso
We could have an openoffice .sfs, a devx .sfs, a graphics .sfs (Gimp, Cinepaint, Pencil, Xnview...?), a FF/Thunderbird .sfs - even a KDE! .sfs and a Gnome .sfs
Since FF/Thunderbird and openoffice are such a big deal for many people, we could even drop Abiword/Gnumeric and/or Seamonkey from the base distro and put them in squashfiles.
This would be much more sustainable than several forks of Puppy (feel free to make bloated forks though Smile

) - even Nathan hasn't been able to really keep Grafpup going.

technosaurus · Joined: 18 May 2008 Posts: 3843

maybe to calm things down a bit

a dingo/T2 fork for more hard core developers (at least for now) using ftp://distro.ibiblio.org/pub/linux/distributions/puppylinux/t2-dingo/
from Barry's forum post http://www.murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?t=32972 and http://www.t2-project.org/packages/
T2 should allow 64 bit and ppc (and more) architectures - start with 4.1 final, devx.sfs and http://dl.t2-project.org/source/t2-7.0-rc2.tar.bz2

and a 3.x slackware version (already in progress) http://puppylinux.org/community/puppy-ce/talking-stick/lassie

and a minimalist 2.x version for older systems

or work on Simplux (puppy + gentoo) while Leachim is working on his Simplicity compiler

Does anyone still want a 2.4 kernel? guess that could be T2 also or 1.x based

OR if you can't play well with others - make your own puplet

HairyWill · Joined: 26 May 2006 Posts: 2949 Location: Southampton, UK