 |
Puppy Linux Discussion Forum Puppy home page: puppylinux.com
|
The time now is Thu 09 Sep 2010, 07:55
All times are UTC - 4 |
| Author |
Message |
technosaurus

Joined: 18 May 2008 Posts: 1949
|
Posted: Thu 26 Mar 2009, 13:24 Post subject:
New Puppy based on the best parts of many distros Subject description: Debian, Puppy, woof, Tiny Core and others |
|
Here is my basic overview of the plan I have come up with.
Start a very minimal desktop that is Lenny compatible... try to get it down to about 5-10MB using Kernel 2.6.29+, busybox, minimal X, JWM
Use parts of Barry's woof scripts to build sfs modules for each package (or set of packages). Up to 255 are supported now (Certain packages will need a small modification that I will explain in a minute)
For programs with executables we would need to set up a small script that mounts its sfs and any dependencies, then executes the program. This can be done by giving the mount/run script the same name as the executable, but putting it in the lowest level of the "PATH" so that it is only mounted on first run. (If we wanted to get really inventive with resources we could even unmount the sfs when the program closes, but this may cause problems with shared library sfs when multiple programs are running that require it)
For packages without executables (libraries, docs...) we would simply need to add a script with the same name as its loader script to the sfs that does nothing, but is higher in the hierachy of "PATH"
I would recommend shifting the order of execution of many things to background after jwm (in XVESA) is loaded and use an sfs module that contains xorg to mount and run the xorg wizard from the desktop if one so chooses.
Much of the sfs loading could be integrated into a build script that would make basic assumptions based on the package name ... lib* *DEV, *DOC and *NLS would get the non executable treatment and others would assume that the base package name was the same as the executable (for building the sfs and mount script) and each mount script would be based on dependencies.
A compromise alternative would be to have an extra couple of sfs files that would make up the traditional default puppy packages that would be loaded after JWM. Then use the build scripts to make sfs modules other packages and dependencies not contained in the default sfs modules after referencing a "packages.list" type of file to exclude already installed packages.
This would give us the boot speed of TCL, the package base of Debian (or Slackware, Ubuntu or Arch), the flexibility of woof, the modularity of Puppy and expandability of SLAX
This is just a rough idea at the moment. I am undecided on doing each package as a module (maybe 255 is not enough)
_________________ Puppy Web Desktop Now with pet packages - Pet Packaging 100 & 101
|
|
Back to top
|
|
 |
Aitch

Joined: 04 Apr 2007 Posts: 4891 Location: Chatham, Kent, UK
|
Posted: Thu 26 Mar 2009, 15:12 Post subject:
|
|
Hi Techno
Sounds cool
I sometimes wonder if my brain has a few less connections than yours
You seem to consistently come up with some very imaginative projects
How long before we see a totally independent, TechnoOS, I wonder?
Good luck with it....
Aitch
|
|
Back to top
|
|
 |
technosaurus

Joined: 18 May 2008 Posts: 1949
|
Posted: Thu 26 Mar 2009, 23:24 Post subject:
|
|
also on the drawing board is to bring back the zdrv.sfs and come up with a script that will cut down the zdrv to only include the modules needed by the user's hardware (Mandriva started doing this in 2009.0) If memory serves me correctly Barry played around with this in 4.1 development
_________________ Puppy Web Desktop Now with pet packages - Pet Packaging 100 & 101
|
|
Back to top
|
|
 |
raffy
Joined: 25 May 2005 Posts: 4329 Location: Manila
|
Posted: Fri 27 Mar 2009, 08:30 Post subject:
great |
|
Sounds a flexible build, which I like very much.
As far as I can tell, the problem with zdrv.sfs is that it has to be mounted before use, and this imposes limitations. What is not yet done is a script to remove unneeded drivers from pup.sfs.
_________________ Puppy user since Oct 2004; serving safepup for kiosk, breeezy for eee and minipup for miniPC. Pleased with PuppyLinux? Donate to Barry!
|
|
Back to top
|
|
 |
ttuuxxx

Joined: 05 May 2007 Posts: 9199 Location: Ontario Canada,Sydney Australia
|
Posted: Fri 27 Mar 2009, 09:56 Post subject:
|
|
I've already started on a version a few days back using woof and debian, My idea is make a min version and build a regular puppy non-debian around it, I don't like the extra libs etc, I fine the new package manager unstable, its crashed a few times, etc. I'll just rip apart a pet package manager in 4 series maybe 3, remove the repo parts, and have it so it installs, uninstalls, checks/rechecks for missing libs and thats about it. Packages I can compile and advertise in the forum, most don't use the repo much because puppy comes this 70% of it anyways.
ttuuxxx
_________________ The eleventh commandment "Let there be Linux"
|
|
Back to top
|
|
 |
boscobearbank

Joined: 06 Apr 2006 Posts: 61 Location: MN
|
Posted: Fri 27 Mar 2009, 10:06 Post subject:
|
|
If this is a dumb idea, please just say so, I won't feel insulted. What if apps were compiled statically? One could have a completely self-contained gimp.sfs, firefox.sfs, openoffice.sfs (now that's a scary one), etc...
_________________ Bosco Bearbank
|
|
Back to top
|
|
 |
technosaurus

Joined: 18 May 2008 Posts: 1949
|
Posted: Fri 27 Mar 2009, 13:48 Post subject:
|
|
Its not dumb at all - I have been playing with static builds quite a bit lately. I am compiling a lot of things static these days - especially those stubborn packages that have dependencies that almost nothing else requires. It actually decreases the total size when you dont have to include the shared libraries. For other programs though that use pretty standard/common libraries its better to compile shared.
_________________ Puppy Web Desktop Now with pet packages - Pet Packaging 100 & 101
|
|
Back to top
|
|
 |
technosaurus

Joined: 18 May 2008 Posts: 1949
|
Posted: Sat 04 Apr 2009, 23:28 Post subject:
|
|
Update: ... been thinking about static builds and woof... if we did a static build of the basic X + jwm using uclibc we could also use the woof scripts to download a package and all of its dependencies into a single sfs so that extra packages would include all dependencies and could therefore be from a variety of supported distros
other distro of interest is gobo linux where each package goes in its own package directory and uses symlinks to /usr/... etc
_________________ Puppy Web Desktop Now with pet packages - Pet Packaging 100 & 101
|
|
Back to top
|
|
 |
mysticmarks
Joined: 26 Feb 2007 Posts: 150 Location: California
|
Posted: Tue 07 Apr 2009, 19:28 Post subject:
ideas Subject description: comments |
|
Hey techno,
Im actually building somethign similiar, but still am learning along the way. If you have the commitment, im looking for a core group to work with. This is not exactly what you talked about, but more. I've made mention to barry and others about the endeavor, but have not had any serious commitments to help, this is not puppy, nor woof, nor anything else out there actually. (although Many aspects of BarryK and others within the linux community's work will be included...and recognized to the best of my and my teams abilty.)
Your suggestion is one facet of a much larger project im now working on. Let me know if you might feel fearless.
|
|
Back to top
|
|
 |
Fix
Joined: 26 Apr 2009 Posts: 2
|
Posted: Sun 26 Apr 2009, 18:47 Post subject:
|
|
technosaurus,
i posted about a project called PdaXrom-ng
http://wiki.pdaxrom.org/index.php/Main_Page
http://www.murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?t=41365
i believe it uses uclibc and is ported to x86, ppc, pcc 64, arm, mips. and is a 60meg distro, based on debain. might help get puppy/woof on different architectures, and still keep it lightweight. might be worth looking at.
|
|
Back to top
|
|
 |
Aitch

Joined: 04 Apr 2007 Posts: 4891 Location: Chatham, Kent, UK
|
Posted: Thu 30 Apr 2009, 12:22 Post subject:
|
|
Fix
Thanks for the link, have posted it here, for Puppy's PPC developer, Powerpup
http://murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?p=300395
Techno, [or ttuuxxx, anyone else?] powerpup needs help with static builds, if you can give any tips?
Thanks
Aitch
|
|
Back to top
|
|
 |
|
|
|
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
|