Puppy Linux Discussion Forum

Lobster · Last edited by Lobster on Sun 31 Jul 2011, 03:01; edited 2 times in total

Poor Larry and Mick. Rolling Eyes

No sooner is 5.2 out and that mad cructacean (that would be me Embarassed

)
is clamouring for a 5.3 direction . . .

Rather than post to them privately about plans
I thought let us post here

Possible features:

1. A more developed Quick Launch similar to this (Lucid Lit)
http://www.murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?p=477503#477503
or the one used in Linux Mint.
That might also involve an evolved Quickpet . . .

2. Automatic 'personal storage file growth'/movement into a swap file

3. Control Panel (for settings wizards etc)

4. Built from latest Woof

In effect 5.2.1 could be the Alpha of 5.3 Smile

Update: many of these features now available in Lucid 525

Puppy Lucid
Staying Frisky

smokey01 · Joined: 30 Dec 2006 Posts: 1642 Location: South Australia

I have mentioned this before but I will again.

Puppy needs to be able to install additional package to a separate sfs file or at least have the option to use the savefile or an additional sfs. I think the savefile should be used for settings only. This way all the same favourite programs could be used in various distros by simply loading the sfs at bootup.

sc0ttman · Joined: 16 Sep 2009 Posts: 2199 Location: UK

Lobster · Posted: Fri 14 Jan 2011, 06:29 Post subject:

Some great points guys. Many thanks.

Remember Larry says here
http://www.murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?p=485371#485371

fenex2004 · Joined: 12 Jun 2010 Posts: 34

NE1 · Joined: 12 Jan 2011 Posts: 41

I would love to see an update for installing packages, where it tracks whether certain files are already installed.

e.g.
If the same file already exists, it does not replace it (as this eats space in a save file, if it is a file that is included with Puppy).

When uninstalling, it does not remove files that existed previously (so other things do not break (e.g. when doing an install to test something out (that happens to include a lib that you already have (and is used by other programs)), then removing it for what ever reason)).

This would probably apply mostly to lib modules, etc.

Maybe this could be optional (for situations where you might be upgrading something, and it should overwrite existing files, etc)...

Just a thought...

scsijon

gcmartin · Joined: 14 Oct 2005 Posts: 2691 Location: Earth

There is only one thing that I see is needed. Its has been needed since I joined the forum. I have asked several times, but it "scares" everyone to the point that no-one dares to do anything about it. (BTW, this is not a dare. "Dare" is emotional...this is not.)

How about for starters we do something very, very simple. Let's have a distro that announces which set of hardware it is targeted at. And, let support them by developing and contributing with that hardware objective in mind.

Barry is very clear in what he intends WARY for. That's an objective.
From a CPU standpoint, FATDOG is clear in what its intended for. That, too, is an objective.

Puppy 5.x should take an equally supportive position and clearly describe the 'minimum" hardware configuration that the PUP is intended to run on. If Barry has already addressed the very old hardware in Retro-WARY, shouldn't Puppy 5.x state that its a middle ground between really old and 64bit current machines. "Shouldn't it be stated>"

Hope this helps.

ttuuxxx · Posted: Thu 31 Mar 2011, 21:56 Post subject:

ya well stick the last unstable branch of abiword I compiled for 5.2 in the alpha, since it was stable as hell and playdays was just tooooooooooooooooooooooooo over cautious to the point of being paranoid, like it couldn't of been removed in the next release if there were issues, which to this day is still ZERO reported, lol.
ttuuxxx

Iguleder · Posted: Fri 01 Apr 2011, 06:19 Post subject:

Whoa, we're at 5.3 already ... don't you think it's time to talk about 6.0? Smile

ttuuxxx · Posted: Fri 01 Apr 2011, 07:33 Post subject:

nooby · Joined: 29 Jun 2008 Posts: 9477 Location: SwedenEurope

What sc0ttman and smokey01 suggests sounds good to me.

To be able to do as Quickpet but instead of havingthem in pupsave one have them as portable sfs or tcz or something one can have on a media USB or HDD or whatever and use when one need and when not needed one unmount it again and when one shut down it does not grow the pupsave that should ahve as little as possible of things that is difficult to delete when once it is there.

Haha I have a cache with a stand up comedienne that was made some month ago and it reloads every time I boot up. Totally unnecessary taking up place not needed at all.

runtt21 · Joined: 07 Jun 2008 Posts: 1583 Location: BigD Texas

WhoDo is the MAN!!!! He should do it. I vote for HIM !!!!!! Very Happy

gerry · Joined: 26 Jul 2007 Posts: 944 Location: England

I think gcmartin has an important point- what hardware is any particular Puppy intended to run on? Early Puppies ran well on old, low spec, computers. I've tried Lucid on my 600MHz, 256MB machine, and it runs unuseably slowly. So does the current dpup. Spup is ok, but slower than Wary 5.1.1. And that is marginally slower than Puppy 4.3.1.

Have you noticed that with cars, the models in a manufacturers range gradully get improved and bigger? Until the smallest one is so big that a new smallest model, with a new name, is introduced? Same with software.

gerry

nooby · Joined: 29 Jun 2008 Posts: 9477 Location: SwedenEurope

gerry don't get me wrong now but how do you measure if it run fast or slow apart from a gut feeling? You do glxgears or some similar? Go to a site that measure browsers or what. Take time from boot to start of a typical program? Slow in what way?