Puppy Linux Discussion Forum

[snayak]

Hi,

To my knowledge,
Dingo puppy was based on Native puppy. (T2)
Lucid puppy was based on Ubuntu.
Slako puppy is based on Slackware.
Wary puppy is based on which one?

Sincerely,
Srinivas Nayak

[Lobster]

To my knowledge,

All Puppys are based on Puppy scripts
some with binaries from other distros

Dingo puppy was based on Puppy + T2 binaries
Lucid puppy used Ubuntu binaries
Slacko puppy uses Slackware
Wary puppy is binaries compiled in Puppy for older hardware

Hope that is helpful

[snayak]

I understood this as,

Any Puppy = "Linux Kernel" + "Puppy Scripts" + "Some other Binaries"
Dingo = "Linux Kernel" + "Puppy Scripts" + "T2 Binaries"
Lucid = "Linux Kernel" + "Puppy Scripts" + "Ubuntu Binaries"
Slacko = "Linux Kernel" + "Puppy Scripts" + "Slackware Binaries"
Wary = "Linux Kernel" + "Puppy Scripts" + "T2 Binaries for older hardware".

Am I correct?

Sincerely,
Srinivas Nayak

[nooby]

Ooops you wrote while I also wrote. You are a better thinker than
what I am.

I guess your latest take on it is most likely very close to the fact yes.

my old very sloppy text. Don't read it!

Lobster knows much more than me and he is more generous too.
I am a bit of a "word police" or something.

I trust the words you use "based on" is highly misleading.
Unless you use them like this.
Puppy is based on ideas that Barry Kauler had on how to set up
something that he could feel okay with using.

So Puppy is based on his ideas and to make them workable
he used the means that where at his .... You get it?

So T2 is important and Barry made scripts that is unique to his way
of making use of T2?

So to say that a puppy is based on Ubuntu or based on Slackware
can be extremely misleading.

Are not Puppy always very particular in that it uses Barry's scripts
but are able to make use of some ubuntu repo programs if one
adjust them to fit into the way Puppy is set up?

Same with some Slackware programs you have to make them fit into
how Puppy want things to comply.

So my very naive view is that Puppy is always based on Puppy
ways of seeing how things can be done and never based on anything else.

But one can more or less make use of programs from other repository
if one knows how Puppy wants things to be set up.

All this can be said more accurately using less sloppy words
but that is to the best of my vague understanding.

I trust that words like "based on" is highly misleading unless
one use them in a tongue in cheek way of loose relative meaning.

But I don't trust my word to be helpful at all. I am an odd thinker indeed.

Can you explain how you use the words "based on"?
How do you know if others agree with that usage of these words

[Lobster]

[snayak]

Many Thanks nooby and Lobster.

[nooby]

Happy you took my careless words in the friendly way they where intended.
The reason I reacted so strongly is that some noobs actually have trusted
reviewers usage of the words "based on" to mean you can count on that
every ubuntu program can always works as is on Puppy.

Maybe a few actually does but I trust that very many need to be made
puppy like to work. to be made into pets or sfs and the libs to be adjusted?

But I do know too little.

In case you have missed the great news.

You can now have a multi user Puppy named FatDog 64 600
but unfortunately it is only for 64-bit machines

[snayak]

By the way, I was long time curious to know what exactly T2 is.

Is it "scripts to build/compile puppy OS" + "scripts of puppy OS that brings a easy-to-use desktop from a bare kernel"?

Is there anything more in T2?

[jamesbond]

[nooby]

And Barry Kauler describe his usage of T2 here
http://bkhome.org/t2/

and here
http://bkhome.org/blog/?viewDetailed=02582