Puppy Linux Discussion Forum

[sunburnt]

Ibidem; Correct. My post on the first page shows the 3 files that run it ( It`s old now ).

First is a unique script that exports the pkg. name+ver., runs script 2 passing app. exec. and args.
Second is a generic script, mounts Sq. files and unionfs-fuse, runs script 3 passing app. exec. and args.
Third is a generic tiny ( 31 b ) "hook" script that does chroot and runs the app`s. exec.

There`s a RW config. dir. layer, on a RO app. dir. layer, on a RO / layer, all on a union dir.
Chroot into the union dir. and all 3 layers should be accessible as / . Right?
I look at the union dir. and all of the layers ARE there. Chroot isn`t playing nice.
xMahjongg runs just fine in this setup, but so far nothing else works.

### I`m now thinking of different ways to use the union without chroot.
I thought of 5 unions, Save layers mounted on each: /etc, /var, /opt, /root, /usr/share
Each of them like this: unionfs-fuse /tmp/OS/etc=RW:/tmp/OS/sq.mnt/etc=RO /etc
Links in /etc point to the AppPkg /etc dir. So the config. files are in AppPkg.

Also 1 union like Puppy ( chroot ) with a Save layer of only configs. and links on / .
No App. installs in Save because there`s no need to with AppPkgs.

For Puppy I`ve said before that there should be 2 Save files, for configs. and apps.
.

[greengeek]

[greengeek]

[sunburnt]

Thanks greengeek; All "loose file" apps. in one layer, and everything else in the other.

Portable to the future... Never gonna happen, they keep changing everything.
JWM has changed, and the apps. change for no reason at all it seems.
GTK folks redo all kinds of stuff on a regular basis, and so do many others.
Only the base Linux O.S. stuff stays the same, neer as I can tell...

Standards. IF they don`t wanna, it`s okay, then they`re just not compatible.
What if Firefox`s user base fell because they didn`t follow "app. standards".

[jpeps]

Exactly. It's a much better idea to keep backups and config notes somewhere that you can browse before screwing up the new distro. It's way too easy to forget what you've configured.

[sunburnt]

jpeps; And mixing the apps. and those config. files make for a real mess.
Make it easy to do separate backups of the configs. and also the apps.

Speaking of mixing, how about /root and /home for configs. and user files?
At least put the config. files in a hidden sub dir. so the noobs don`t bork it.

[greengeek]

[sunburnt]

You have the layers reversed. And config. not personal.

I`d like to think you`re right, but I don`t see any historical evidence for it.
Especially the big app. guys, they really don`t care.
It`s the "Uncle Bill" syndrome, "Do it my way or not at all...".

[greengeek]

[greengeek]

[sunburnt]

Ahhh. You mean selections. Layers refers to the union FS.
Puppy has it`s main SFS file at the bottom, add-on SFS on top of that, and the Save at the very top.
This way the files in the Save overshadow all the other layers.

[greengeek]

yeah, sorry, I'm not too clear on the distinctions between fs layers and sfs layers yet.

Can someone tidy up the linux filesystem please...
(and make it easy for dummies...)

[sunburnt]

SFS file has a FS that is mounted just like the Save file, or partitions, or CDs.
Any number of these items or ordinary dirs. can be unioned into one view.

It`s what allows a live CD to work, otherwise you couldn`t write to it.
And SFS files are read only too, so it makes SFS files writable also.

[greengeek]

I wonder if would it be possible to build a puppy that could use a "personal sfs" that became the container for all the "user specific" info like wireless key etc.

So that a remaster could easily exclude that personal info and just pickup the base puppy plus installed apps.

[sunburnt]

The dual Save file idea is just that. Remove the config. layer before remastering.

As said, the mixing of the configs. and installed apps. make for a mess.
As said, one Save file layer for apps. only, the other for everything else.