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 Fri 24 Oct 2014, 20:15
All times are UTC - 4
 Forum index » Taking the Puppy out for a walk » Announcements
5 years
Moderators: Flash, Ian, JohnMurga
Post_new_topic   Reply_to_topic View_previous_topic :: View_next_topic
Page 3 of 6 Posts_count   Goto page: Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 Next
Author Message
puppyluvr


Joined: 06 Jan 2008
Posts: 3213
Location: Chickasha Oklahoma

PostPosted: Tue 08 Jan 2013, 21:42    Post_subject:  

Confused Hello,
Quote:
read my post


Well, I guess I must be blind, cause it doesnt explain WHAT SFS?
I made a pet, which if installed, works fine..
Maybe I am being an idiot here, and would gladly admit so..
But first explain how you ran a pet from an heretofore unknown SFS, and expected it to work as if installed as intended.
Maybe my hours of testing were in vain, IDK..
I INSTALLED THE PET to Jwm/Openbox/Icewm/E-16 ect and it WORKED as expected.. on Pups from 2.15 to 5.25.. But I am able to accept I may have missed something.. So INSTALL IT AS INTENDED.. Then test it and tell me where it fails for you, and I will correct, if possible, your issues..
Perhaps it cant find "/initrd/pup_ro5" or wherever the SFS is mounted, IDK..
What I do know is it works for everyone who installs it as intended...

So, in essence, I respond to your criticism with an attempt to resolve your issues with my app..
So please forgo the SFS and try it as intended, and tell me if it gives you trouble then, and I will be happy to help, if I can..

_________________
Close the Windows, and open your eyes, to a whole new world
http://puppylinuxstuff.meownplanet.net/puppyluvr/
Puppy Linux Users Group on Facebook

Puppy since 2.15CE...
Back to top
View user's profile Send_private_message Visit_website 
puppyluvr


Joined: 06 Jan 2008
Posts: 3213
Location: Chickasha Oklahoma

PostPosted: Tue 08 Jan 2013, 21:53    Post_subject:  

Very Happy Hello,
To be fair, I realize some new Pup`s have no /root/my-roxapps so a mkdir would be in order, but as I made it 2 years ago, that is to be expected.. Wink

_________________
Close the Windows, and open your eyes, to a whole new world
http://puppylinuxstuff.meownplanet.net/puppyluvr/
Puppy Linux Users Group on Facebook

Puppy since 2.15CE...
Back to top
View user's profile Send_private_message Visit_website 
jpeps

Joined: 31 May 2008
Posts: 3220

PostPosted: Tue 08 Jan 2013, 23:28    Post_subject:  

puppyluvr wrote:
Very Happy Hello,
To be fair, I realize some new Pup`s have no /root/my-roxapps so a mkdir would be in order, but as I made it 2 years ago, that is to be expected.. Wink


The directories are all present, which is how I ran the scripts and know that they toggle on/off instead of loading new instances. As I noted, the fishtank worked as expected. The issue apparently is related to gtkdialog when loaded by an SFS, if it's working as a pet. Anyway, you don't want testing, and I don't take orders, nor am I seeking help. I figured as long as I was taking up space in the thread, I might as well try your app. There's also the possibility of conflicts with other programs, etc., etc. Anyway...enough. Happy birthday.
Back to top
View user's profile Send_private_message 
RSH


Joined: 05 Sep 2011
Posts: 2420
Location: Germany

PostPosted: Wed 09 Jan 2013, 02:07    Post_subject:  

Hi.

I don't want to make trouble on your birthday, but I can confirm some issues, when using XToys from sfs. Can't remember in detail but I did decide then, not to use it, because I want to run all my applications from sfs. What doesn't work from sfs I don't use generally.

Happy 5th birthday (I had my 1st about four months ago Smile )

RSH

_________________
LazY Puppy
RSH's DNA
SARA B.
Back to top
View user's profile Send_private_message 
jpeps

Joined: 31 May 2008
Posts: 3220

PostPosted: Wed 09 Jan 2013, 03:18    Post_subject:  

RSH wrote:
Hi.

I don't want to make trouble on your birthday, but I can confirm some issues, when using XToys from sfs. Can't remember in detail but I did decide then, not to use it, because I want to run all my applications from sfs. What doesn't work from sfs I don't use generally.

Happy 5th birthday (I had my 1st about four months ago Smile )

RSH


Puppyluvr doesn't understand why a tester might be reluctant to install 281 files in 72 directories to view a fish tank.
Back to top
View user's profile Send_private_message 
puppyluvr


Joined: 06 Jan 2008
Posts: 3213
Location: Chickasha Oklahoma

PostPosted: Wed 09 Jan 2013, 13:57    Post_subject:  

Very Happy Hello,
Quote:
Puppyluvr doesn't understand why a tester might be reluctant to install 281 files in 72 directories to view a fish tank.

Well geez, when you put it like that.. Wink
Look, all I am saying is if you use something in a way it wasnt intended to be used, and it doesnt perform properly, then the "weakest link" isnt my GUI, its gtkdialog and SFS related..
I`m not arguing the merits of 5.6mb (unpacked) of silly toys..
I never made an SFS of it because it is so small, and petget will remove it easily.. However, I do stand by my stuff, so tonight I will make a working SFS of it, if I can.
So I`ve gone from celebrating 5 years on this forum, to defending a silly little app I made 2 years ago.. Rolling Eyes
Maybe we got off on the wrong foot, maybe my defending GUI`s annoyed you, IDK. Much of my stuff could use updating, but as a 48 year old single parent with 3 jobs, I have not had the time...
Still, it is what it is. It does work as I intended it to. If even 1 user enjoys it, then I am still happy.... Very Happy

_________________
Close the Windows, and open your eyes, to a whole new world
http://puppylinuxstuff.meownplanet.net/puppyluvr/
Puppy Linux Users Group on Facebook

Puppy since 2.15CE...
Back to top
View user's profile Send_private_message Visit_website 
jpeps

Joined: 31 May 2008
Posts: 3220

PostPosted: Wed 09 Jan 2013, 14:46    Post_subject:  

puppyluvr, welcome to the world of developing Smile

(and it isn't worth losing a marriage over)
Back to top
View user's profile Send_private_message 
gcmartin

Joined: 14 Oct 2005
Posts: 4368
Location: Earth

PostPosted: Wed 09 Jan 2013, 14:53    Post_subject:  

The discussion that are being raised here are kinda aimed wrongly.

Let me see if I can help.

It is my understanding that PUPPY Linux is a distro which comes with a PPM. Its the OFFICIAL way to bring needed subystems and application into your public distro's playground.

Several years ago, outside of Puppy Linux AND WHEN INTERNET SPEEDS WERE SLOW even on Internet Backbones, a group began with another methods of compression packaging and layering named SFS. In that design, it was anticipated to take advantage of, not just compression, but also a layering approach.

Fast forward: Over the years several distro packagers has chosen to take using SFS: some for compression and others for layering.

Puppy, seeing this trend has added SFS to its arsenal as SFS moved from a skeleton to what it is now.

Here's what I understand as OFFICIAL. PPM will and continues to process PETs. ANY PUPPY DEVELOPER who creates a PET will have their PET processed correctly by the PPM subsystem such that it can be interrogated for installation and uninstalled if necessary along with all the other things PPM does to make user lives simple, straightforward, and smooth.

Officially, JAMESBOND, Playdayz, Pemasu, and 01Micko has all shared from time to time that its a Developer's CHOICE (maybe I should say "RIGHT" to determine what vehicle to use for the distribution of his product.

This recent posts seems to be making attempts to deny or change the developers offering method to the Puppy distro user community.

As users, we sometimes forget this very fact. Most, if not all, distro developers are working in community to do something that is good for the users based upon technology that they glean useful.

Further, a user who is non-sophisticated will ALWAYS use PPM to add functionality. But, a sophisticated Linux user will draw upon their great knowledge to add stuff to their desktop experience.

To those sophisticated users, I think we can approach this in a different manner.

Here's an option which "MAY" satisfy the SFS issue for those who would prefer that as a deliverable method.
  • Help PuppyLuvr by posting an SFS of his subsystem
  • Request that after your test finding and the method of installation you used on the distro you have so that others can see your finding too.
This level of cooperation is a much better approach for both the developer and users, as well as those who would like to choose their method of installation; namely in or out of the PPM process used by MOST currently available PUPs.

There is much work being done at the community level in SFS and some distro developers are taking advantage of add SFS processing into PPM.

BUT TO BE SAFE, PET PROCESSING CONTINUES TO WORK.

Lastly on the note about the number of programs in a PET, I not so sure that the comment has merit given the fact that most of us use JAVA, FLASH, and all sort of apps that used object oriented development. So,pointing to the fact that a PET might contain more bytes than one would like is NOT a good measure in pushing any developer to SFS.

I will share that some of the development community will upon request make a PPM PET from the SFSs they offer. In some cases, the PET has been actually a wee-bit smaller and in others, the PET has been a wee-bit larger. So the idea of compression might NOT be item in consideration anymore. Oh well.

Maybe a helpful approach is in order.

Here to help
PS. Please remember, I am only trying to help. I have no interest in taking sides. Just only to eyes open enough to help anyone I can.

_________________
Get ACTIVE Create Circles; Do those good things which benefit people's needs!
We are all related ... Its time to show that we know this!
3 Different Puppy Search Engine or use DogPile
Back to top
View user's profile Send_private_message 
jpeps

Joined: 31 May 2008
Posts: 3220

PostPosted: Wed 09 Jan 2013, 16:28    Post_subject:  

gcmartin wrote:
The discussion that are being raised here are kinda aimed wrongly.

Let me see if I can help.


No offense, but, as usual, you're not understanding some basics. There is nobody monitoring the quality of pets. Users just click on things. If an SFS is breaking down, there's a strong likelihood that something isn't quite right , even if the pet works. There's the little issue of data corruption, for example. In the present case, how many of those 281 files are actually being used? Is it necessary for them to be scattered around in 72 different directories? Am I asking the system to do ungodly tasks for a seemingly very simple process (eg, loading a fishtank app).

Coding is an art; there's good code and a lot of bad code. It's too easy to put buttons on a group of other peoples binaries and scripts, and make a pet. Therein lies the problem.

re: installing/uninstalling: Again, a user just clicks on a few buttons without understanding what's happening. I have my own scripts that check what the files are, what is getting overwritten, etc, and my own uninstaller that gets rid of all the open directories and all the files. Our uninstaller, if you've noticed, is very conservative...meaning lots gets left behind (all the open directories, etc). I'm not worried about uninstalling overwritten files, because I don't load them to begin with.
Back to top
View user's profile Send_private_message 
RSH


Joined: 05 Sep 2011
Posts: 2420
Location: Germany

PostPosted: Wed 09 Jan 2013, 17:34    Post_subject:  

Quote:
This recent posts seems to be making attempts to deny or change the developers offering method to the Puppy distro user community.

I don't know if I did get this right.

I don't want to deny anything but I would like to see a BIG change in the developers offering method for programs!

Generally in Linux!

Why?

So, in my humble opinion Linux, especially Puppy Linux has only one BIG issue: the f... symbolic links in the directories of the libraries!
I would like to see hanging the guy who has invented the method to use symbolic links, exactly named as another, for the use of linking it to different libraries in different programs.

I do know a lot of Linux applications from windows. Each application comes as portable application and comes with its own qt, gtk, libs etc.

Why isn't this possible in Linux, especially Puppy Linux?

If Puppy Linux could arrive a stage wherein each application would call its real libraries (and not just symbolic links, which are used for different libraries by different programs), almost all problems relating to PET and/or SFS will be gone!

And also almost all discussion on that.

Then the user would be REALLY free to choose the OS, the programs and the way how to use/install, which would be a great benefit to advise new users of Puppy Linux.

So, just three things to do:

1. Stop talking Cool
2. Kill the guy Wink
3. Kick out the f... symbolic links from /lib and /usr/lib etc Evil or Very Mad

A small step for the dog, but a giant leap for the puppy... Laughing

RSH

EDIT:

Just to remind:

Each an every year, tons of GB are wasted for the use of new blinking stuff around the same old applications.

But to have all three different versions of a library included in the OS is too much waste of working and/or saving space?

Naahhh......!

Such behavior, such look on computers and its programs and interfaces has to change - immediately!

_________________
LazY Puppy
RSH's DNA
SARA B.
Back to top
View user's profile Send_private_message 
01micko


Joined: 11 Oct 2008
Posts: 7835
Location: qld

PostPosted: Wed 09 Jan 2013, 19:26    Post_subject: with great power comes great responsibility  

Who'd be a developer?

I can sympathise with both of you, puppyluver, jpeps.

Jay, I know the amount of time it takes to learn, then develop stuff. It can be detrimental to certain things therefore balance is needed. There is a fine line between "hobby" and "addiction". No need to drum that in I guess!

I started out with eye candy in pwidgets. I wrote some terrible code. Learned from that and now my code isn't so terrible, not saying it's good but it is a lot simpler and doesn't try to exceed my capabilities. That boundary is gradually pushed up. As for eye candy now, I generally steer clear of it in my personal setups. Sure I, supply compiz for slacko (sfs, with bold warnings) and that is directly based on dinky's work, you mention in the OP.

jpeps, I can fully understand your point. Especially since we can't be fully sure what puppy any application was developed on or for. These days, there are many library incompatibilities between versions. While diversity is great it has a price. I just wonder if we could make a new kind of "sandbox" type thing, say a ~32~64M disposable savefile mounted on top of the existing save file, it may well be possible with the layered filesystem, bit beyond me though. Still, that would be useless to the many who prefer "full" installs.

RSH, as for libs and symlinks, don't hold your breath for your wish! It's a complex eco-system that I don't fully understand, but I believe that it's to do with different versions of libs needing some common ground, if that makes sense. Often development of versions proceeds at great speed, take firefox for example and it's libs, nspr, nss etc. Sometimes backward compatibility is preserved, other times not, ffmpeg is a classic example of not!

I agree that it is way too easy for anyone to create a pet. I'm guilty of distributing rubbish pets, no data loss ones that I know of but I do know of better coders than me that have released pets that have wiped entire partitions. We use at own risk.

One criticism I have of Puppy as a learning environment for Linux is the lack of multiuser support. It breeds bad habits, such as hard coding to root. I try to avoid this but sometimes it's not always possible. If not then I comment that code block. That is just a personal opinion, not on Puppy running as root, but as a general learning tool for Linux,

_________________
Woof Mailing List | keep the faith Cool |
Back to top
View user's profile Send_private_message Visit_website 
bark_bark_bark

Joined: 05 Jun 2012
Posts: 839
Location: USA

PostPosted: Wed 09 Jan 2013, 20:18    Post_subject: Re: with great power comes great responsibility  

01micko wrote:
...One criticism I have of Puppy as a learning environment for Linux is the lack of multiuser support. It breeds bad habits, such as hard coding to root. I try to avoid this but sometimes it's not always possible. If not then I comment that code block. That is just a personal opinion, not on Puppy running as root, but as a general learning tool for Linux,


Agreed using root for everyday use is a bad habit that is formed by puppy. Also having multiuser definitely would save hard drive space and time.

-Hard Drive space would be saved because less save files would have to be made. (no-multiuser=1 save for each user, multiuser=1 save for ALL users)
-Time would be saved because you don't have to go bot in RAM mode and configure it for the new user and wait for the save to be created and all that.

Also as I said ALWAYS being root is a bad habit to form, espically if you visit a lot of websites and have a lot of spam on your email. root + web/email = HUGE security risks.

_________________
Desktop: Intel 945PSN Motherboard, 3.2Ghz P-IV "Prescott 2M", 2GB RAM, 500GB WD HDD, Windows 7
(Slacko) Puppy Arcade 11 on USB Stick
Back to top
View user's profile Send_private_message 
01micko


Joined: 11 Oct 2008
Posts: 7835
Location: qld

PostPosted: Wed 09 Jan 2013, 20:44    Post_subject: Re: with great power comes great responsibility  

bark_bark_bark wrote:
01micko wrote:
...One criticism I have of Puppy as a learning environment for Linux is the lack of multiuser support. It breeds bad habits, such as hard coding to root. I try to avoid this but sometimes it's not always possible. If not then I comment that code block. That is just a personal opinion, not on Puppy running as root, but as a general learning tool for Linux,


Agreed using root for everyday use is a bad habit that is formed by puppy. Also having multiuser definitely would save hard drive space and time

Ah... be careful here, it's not our place to start this silly debate again. As you see I chose my words with care. Puppy runs as root by design. I'm only saying that it can cause bad habits for novice developers.

There are other threads devoted to user v root around the forums, that is where your discussion belongs. No offence intended.

_________________
Woof Mailing List | keep the faith Cool |
Back to top
View user's profile Send_private_message Visit_website 
greengeek

Joined: 20 Jul 2010
Posts: 2596
Location: New Zealand

PostPosted: Wed 09 Jan 2013, 21:25    Post_subject:  

Happy pupthday puppyluvr! Reading your list of accomplishments is an inspiration to keep on learning and fiddling.

And many happy returns to all the devs and assorted other helpers....
Back to top
View user's profile Send_private_message 
bark_bark_bark

Joined: 05 Jun 2012
Posts: 839
Location: USA

PostPosted: Wed 09 Jan 2013, 21:39    Post_subject:  

sorry if my above post offended anyone, that wasn't my intensions.
_________________
Desktop: Intel 945PSN Motherboard, 3.2Ghz P-IV "Prescott 2M", 2GB RAM, 500GB WD HDD, Windows 7
(Slacko) Puppy Arcade 11 on USB Stick
Back to top
View user's profile Send_private_message 
Display_posts:   Sort by:   
Page 3 of 6 Posts_count   Goto page: Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 Next
Post_new_topic   Reply_to_topic View_previous_topic :: View_next_topic
 Forum index » Taking the Puppy out for a walk » Announcements
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: 0.1144s ][ Queries: 12 (0.0073s) ][ GZIP on ]