Puppy Linux Discussion Forum Forum Index Puppy Linux Discussion Forum
Puppy HOME page : puppylinux.com
"THE" alternative forum : puppylinux.info
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

The time now is Sat 25 Oct 2014, 19:06
All times are UTC - 4
 Forum index » Advanced Topics » Puppy Derivatives
Lxpup 14 final 7-20-2012
Moderators: Flash, JohnMurga
Post_new_topic   Reply_to_topic View_previous_topic :: View_next_topic
Page 15 of 48 Posts_count   Goto page: Previous 1, 2, 3, ..., 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, ..., 46, 47, 48 Next
Author Message
aragon

Joined: 15 Oct 2007
Posts: 1698
Location: Germany

PostPosted: Thu 20 Sep 2012, 05:43    Post_subject:  

hi Jejy69,

just tested this pup in virtualbox ... very nice!!!

aragon

_________________
PUPPY SEARCH: http://wellminded.com/puppy/pupsearch.html
Back to top
View user's profile Send_private_message 
swiftlinuxcreator

Joined: 07 Dec 2010
Posts: 20

PostPosted: Thu 20 Sep 2012, 12:20    Post_subject: LXDE vs. JWM
Sub_title: How much heavier is LXDE than JWM + ROX
 

Jejy69:

How much heavier is LXDE than the JWM + ROX combo of the parent distro? I see that your LXDE derivative has an ISO size of just 137 MB, which is nearly the same as that of Wary Puppy. I was under the impression that LXDE is substantially heavier than JWM + ROX, just as Xfce is substantially heavier than LXDE, and GNOME/KDE is substantially heavier than Xfce.

I am the founder and lead developer of a Linux distro called Swift Linux. It was originally based on antiX Linux, but I have switched it to a Linux Mint Debian Edition base.

Although I haven't tried Lxpup yet (which I will do soon), you have made me consider changing the desktop of Swift Linux from IceWM + ROX pinboard to LXDE. You said that you chose LXDE because it's more user-friendly and more complete out-of-the-box than JWM is. I've been sticking to IceWM + ROX pinboard for Swift Linux simply because it's what antiX Linux uses.

The reason I never considered using LXDE until now is that I perceived it as being substantially heavier than IceWM + ROX pinboard. The biggest challenge for developing Swift Linux isn't RAM but the size of the ISO. One of the main selling points of Swift Linux is that it fits onto a CD. (LMDE is sized around 1.2 GB, so I have a LOT of chopping to do.) If switching to LXDE saves me much of the effort needed to polish IceWM + ROX pinboard while only adding a few MB to the size of the ISO file, the change would be well worth it. (I'm sure I can use the time I save to figure out what other packages I can safely cut.)
Back to top
View user's profile Send_private_message 
Tman


Joined: 22 Jan 2011
Posts: 814
Location: Toronto

PostPosted: Thu 20 Sep 2012, 14:37    Post_subject:  

Hi Swiftlinuxcreator,

I did try out one of your versions before, when I was distro-hopping .. it was nice, but I prefer good-old puppy Smile

From my experience, you would only notice the difference in performance between LXDE and icewm in really old machines or modern-under-powered ones. When I say, really old, I mean low-end Pentium 3's or under.

If you're talking about "heavy" size-wise, Icewm starts off pretty light, but can get pretty big once you start adding on themes. Openbox themes, in contrast are usually smaller.
Back to top
View user's profile Send_private_message 
Jejy69


Joined: 20 Jan 2011
Posts: 707
Location: Perpignan

PostPosted: Thu 20 Sep 2012, 15:03    Post_subject:  

Hello !

Nooby,

I am also sorry for my behavior, which is not good either ... I would cut short this mishap, and I hope to resume with a friendly understanding. Surely I had a bad week, and I would not stay on this problem ... Sad
Thanks you.
Back to top
View user's profile Send_private_message 
Jejy69


Joined: 20 Jan 2011
Posts: 707
Location: Perpignan

PostPosted: Thu 20 Sep 2012, 15:49    Post_subject:  

Aragon, thanks to try it, but above all thank 01Micko for the excellent Slacko base.

swiftlinuxcreator, ISO base (Slacko by 01Micko) is about 115mo. The desktop environment LXDE themes, including libs therefore add about 50MB in ram, either 22mo in compressed ISO. LXDE is obviously heavier than JWM. This is incontestable.

Quote:
You said that you chose LXDE because it's more user-friendly and more complete out-of-the-box than JWM is.


I do not carry the word of the gospel, LXDE meets my expectations, I find it aesthetically pleasing, openbox themes are many, the bar is easily customizable, several plugins available.
At first, I was under windows, Ubuntu and then Antix Mepis Smile , so I kept habits like right click on the desktop to change the wallpaper, copy and paste inter-windows, avoiding going through a lot of third party software to change the appearance.
The question really keeping with this kind of topic is: "What habits do I have?"
Many people like to have the menu by right-clicking on the desktop, so I can not really tell you what is best. I put only highlight its specificities. In fact, none is better than the other. They do what they must do to each of us according to our tastes, which is the strength of linux and uniqueness of the human race, all different, and it's great.
Well after I go into a frenzy philosophical .... Rolling Eyes
There is also a notion of update, Icewm for example is not developed to this day it seems.

I wish you good luck, may the force be with you. Smile

Habits, choice, freedom...
Back to top
View user's profile Send_private_message 
swiftlinuxcreator

Joined: 07 Dec 2010
Posts: 20

PostPosted: Thu 20 Sep 2012, 18:28    Post_subject: LXDE vs. JWM
Sub_title: What did you add?
 

Jejy69 wrote:


swiftlinuxcreator, ISO base (Slacko by 01Micko) is about 115mo. The desktop environment LXDE themes, including libs therefore add about 50MB in ram, either 22mo in compressed ISO. LXDE is obviously heavier than JWM. This is incontestable.

I do not carry the word of the gospel, LXDE meets my expectations, I find it aesthetically pleasing, openbox themes are many, the bar is easily customizable, several plugins available.

Jejy69, thanks for the information. Exactly what do you add to Puppy Linux in order to create your Lxpup derivative? I understand that LXDE offers a number of different packages but doesn't actually require all of them and has fewer dependencies than Xfce, GNOME, and KDE. I'm suspecting that I can make LXDE more lightweight than most distros' implementations by skimping on the themes and backgrounds. (I've been doing this all along in Swift Linux. I just offer a few of the most basic backgrounds with small file sizes. I also cut out fancy themes that are less readable or take up excessive disk space.)
Back to top
View user's profile Send_private_message 
starhawk

Joined: 22 Nov 2010
Posts: 2943
Location: Everybody knows this is nowhere...

PostPosted: Thu 20 Sep 2012, 22:46    Post_subject: Re: Lxpup, multi desktop.
Sub_title: Default desktop : LXDE, with optional KDE 4.9.1, XFCE 4.10, MATE 1.4
 

Jejy69 wrote:
It runs well even on older computers produced in 1999, and it does not require 3D acceleration.


Well done! I'm staring at LXPup on my Dell Latitude CPi. 300MHz Pentium II CPU, 128mb RAM.

The sfs itself loads almost instantly on bootup, and it slows down a little after, but at desktop it tries to display 800x600 resolution (1024x768 screen -- large pixels are not pretty). xorgwizard fixed that.

Pmount (to apply the patch via USB) takes a very long time (1 minute or more) to load and mount/unmount devices. Pulling up the Puppy shutdown menu (restart x) takes at least 30 second to do its thing.

I'm impressed by the fact that it loads fast, but I am sad that it does not run fast. Still, to boot on this hardware is amazing.

_________________
Loving X-Slacko 2.1!
Custom Build: HP MOCA-AR + Core2Duo T7200 + 4gb RAM + 256gb SSD
...just needs a pretty case Wink
Back to top
View user's profile Send_private_message 
nooby

Joined: 29 Jun 2008
Posts: 10557
Location: SwedenEurope

PostPosted: Fri 21 Sep 2012, 02:58    Post_subject:  

Thanks Jejy69 I am so clumsy when I try to be funny.
I understand that my attempt misfired and I apology too.

I wish you all the best. As you see people like you here
so follow your inner drive and share your visions and
what your up to and hopefully the others share their takes too.

Computing should be fun and forget old grumpy men like Nooby Smile
Nooby is a spoiled child kind of sort so I'm hopeless to satisfy.

_________________
I use Google Search on Puppy Forum
not an ideal solution though
Back to top
View user's profile Send_private_message 
Eyes-Only


Joined: 10 Aug 2006
Posts: 1046
Location: La Confederation Abenaquaise

PostPosted: Fri 21 Sep 2012, 08:39    Post_subject:  

Hi Starhawk,

How interesting... you've described exactly how my computer responds using Slacko - regardless of the desktop/window manager environment - and it is a Dell with a 2.4gig Celeron processor, 512megs of onboard RAM with 1.6gigs of swap! Starts up in a few seconds to the desktop but is excruciatingly slow to get anything else running afterwards to the point where after an hour or so of use ( if I can endure it that is! ) the entire system will freeze up and crash.

It makes no difference whether it's a hard drive or frugal install, nor the kernel version Micko has used. And this has persisted with every version of Slacko for me, plus anything based off from it.

This is why I had asked Jejy if he could port his amazing LXDE desktop system over to Precise-Pup as for some odd reason this machine has never had a problem running anything Debian/Ubuntu-based. Imagine my delight when he returned from his vacation and ported nearly every single one! Cool Ever since it's been like Christmas for this ol' boy! Very Happy

So Starhawk, whilst you've had problems being unable to run Jejy's LXpup on that machine I'd be very curious to know your results from trying to run his version of "CheckMate Precise" also offered elsewhere in this section ( I believe? ). Between that and his "Mate Precise" desktop - from which I'm making this post now - they are both my "default Puppy desktops" as I switch back and forth between the two quite often throughout my computing session. Smile

Good luck Starhawk!

Cheers/Amicalement,

Eyes-Only
"L'Peau-Rouge"

_________________
*~*~*~*~*~*
Proud user of LXpup and 3-Headed Dog. Cool
*~*~*~*~*~*
Back to top
View user's profile Send_private_message 
starhawk

Joined: 22 Nov 2010
Posts: 2943
Location: Everybody knows this is nowhere...

PostPosted: Fri 21 Sep 2012, 11:46    Post_subject:  

I'll try it. IIRC the thing that threw me with his GNOME-Precise was that somewhere between Slacko and Precise the timezone stuff changed and I couldn't find US-Eastern in the list. Amazing how frustrating little stuff like that can be!

...but I WILL try it.

BTW, the Dell CPi I have is from 1999 -- I'm 99% sure. It has a "Y2K compliant" sticker on the bottom!

_________________
Loving X-Slacko 2.1!
Custom Build: HP MOCA-AR + Core2Duo T7200 + 4gb RAM + 256gb SSD
...just needs a pretty case Wink
Back to top
View user's profile Send_private_message 
Jejy69


Joined: 20 Jan 2011
Posts: 707
Location: Perpignan

PostPosted: Fri 21 Sep 2012, 15:09    Post_subject:  

Hello !

@ swiftlinuxcreator : Yes, you're right, Lxde requires relatively fewer libs, compared to heavyweights like gnome or KDE.
I installed all Lx applications, libfm, libpng, gvfs, gtk 2.24.10, libimlib, but I don't remember all libraries sorry... :/
After dependencies are different depending on the Puppy, because of his age, and what is already installed.

@ starhawk : follow the advice of Eyes-Only. He gives always judicious councils.

Hello Eyes-Only, how do you do my friend ?
Thank you for advice Starhawk Smile Those concerns are similar to Starhawk, it's really weird. Confused So, I will continue to update the version based on Precise.
Precise link is in the first page I believe.
Thanks you Eyes Only Very Happy
Back to top
View user's profile Send_private_message 
starhawk

Joined: 22 Nov 2010
Posts: 2943
Location: Everybody knows this is nowhere...

PostPosted: Fri 21 Sep 2012, 16:48    Post_subject:  

I tried the Precise-puppy version, as posted in thread. I will (shortly) try the newer version from the website.

As before, boot was very fast, desktop very slow. As before, appeared at 800x600 resolution (yuk!) and would not launch xorg with correct (1024x768) resolution.

The adventure ended there.

EDIT:

Quote:
Thank you for advice Starhawk Smile Those concerns are similar to Starhawk, it's really weird. Confused So, I will continue to update the version based on Precise.


Should I not sound like myself? Razz

_________________
Loving X-Slacko 2.1!
Custom Build: HP MOCA-AR + Core2Duo T7200 + 4gb RAM + 256gb SSD
...just needs a pretty case Wink
Back to top
View user's profile Send_private_message 
starhawk

Joined: 22 Nov 2010
Posts: 2943
Location: Everybody knows this is nowhere...

PostPosted: Fri 21 Sep 2012, 18:31    Post_subject:  

Checkmate Puppy, latest version off website...

Text portion of booting very fast. Once it tries to pull up a desktop it makes me wait a while.

Still insists that my monitor is 800x600. I think that is an issue with the neomagic graphics driver; going through xorgwizard works on this version, though, so I was able to fix it.

A note about color. This laptop is OLD. There are places where the image is, well, "dithered" is the term -- lighter pixels alternate with darker pixels to show a color that the screen otherwise could not. This is the laptop at work, not your Puplet, jejy69! ...nevertheless it is mildly annoying and I've not seen it before. Perhaps it is a function of LXDE? I don't know.

LXDE seems to detect the Dell's touchpad as a very slow model, which is the opposite of other Puppies -- usually a swipe across the pad makes the cursor practically leap off the screen with enthusiasm. Here it barely crawls. Again, I do not think that was intentional. It is easily fixed, anyways.

One thing I do not like about these LXDE Puppies is that they seem to reorganize the Puppy Menu a bit. The wizards are thrown in with other setup items, and it does not make sense to me.

While things do load slightly faster on this version of Checkmate, I think my little Dell has more than made its match. Checkmate is not for this system.

One thing that Puppy has taught me well: hardware is only half of the complete picture. The other half is what you do with that hardware -- if you run Puppy, your hardware is suddenly much more capable than it would be with Windows. However, this Dell teaches that even hardware has its limits.

Jejy69, your triumph is that it boots on this system, in an extraordinarily reasonable timeframe. The limitations of the system prevent it from being useful, not anything you have done.

_________________
Loving X-Slacko 2.1!
Custom Build: HP MOCA-AR + Core2Duo T7200 + 4gb RAM + 256gb SSD
...just needs a pretty case Wink
Back to top
View user's profile Send_private_message 
songzi

Joined: 22 Jan 2010
Posts: 28

PostPosted: Thu 04 Oct 2012, 06:11    Post_subject:  

Hi Jejy69,

I have installed LXPup on one of my desktop PCs. It works great. Thanks.

I also tried to use it on my Eeepc 900 today (running from a 8GB SD card). The only problem that I have so far is the wireless connection does not work. In Internet Connection Wizard, it says 'No network interface detected'.

Any advice? TIA.

_________________
Puppy Linux | Arch | antiX
Back to top
View user's profile Send_private_message 
Volhout


Joined: 28 Dec 2008
Posts: 403

PostPosted: Fri 05 Oct 2012, 04:13    Post_subject: wifi  

songzi wrote:
Hi Jejy69,

I have installed LXPup on one of my desktop PCs. It works great. Thanks.

I also tried to use it on my Eeepc 900 today (running from a 8GB SD card). The only problem that I have so far is the wireless connection does not work. In Internet Connection Wizard, it says 'No network interface detected'.

Any advice? TIA.


songzi,

Lxdepup is based on Slacko 5.3. I think it is the best place to your question. Most likely it is a driver issue. If you have a software version (any) that runs well on the eeePC900, try to find out what WIFI hardware is inside the 900. Atheros ? Ralink ? Broadcom ? Realtek ? In recent puppy linux versions you find this under the "connect" icon on the desktop, where it lists "eht0" for wired ethernet, and "wlan0" for wireless.

Volhout
Back to top
View user's profile Send_private_message 
Display_posts:   Sort by:   
Page 15 of 48 Posts_count   Goto page: Previous 1, 2, 3, ..., 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, ..., 46, 47, 48 Next
Post_new_topic   Reply_to_topic View_previous_topic :: View_next_topic
 Forum index » Advanced Topics » Puppy Derivatives
Jump to:  

Rules_post_cannot
Rules_reply_cannot
Rules_edit_cannot
Rules_delete_cannot
Rules_vote_cannot
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
[ Time: 0.1183s ][ Queries: 13 (0.0194s) ][ GZIP on ]