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, 10:42
All times are UTC - 4
 Forum index » Taking the Puppy out for a walk » Misc
Archpup 13.2 info
Moderators: Flash, JohnMurga
Post_new_topic   Topic_locked View_previous_topic :: View_next_topic
Page 4 of 6 Posts_count   Goto page: Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 Next
Author Message
simargl8

Joined: 06 Feb 2013
Posts: 65

PostPosted: Sat 09 Feb 2013, 12:31    Post_subject:  

No, no, you didn't understand what was my point, with Slitaz as example.
Archlinux has support for 46000 packages when you take AUR in count.
All packages (or, I'm guessing 99%) from Puppy linux repository are in Arch
repos. My question is why waste time for converting those 1% and not write
real PKGBUILD that will compile them from source.
OR, we could make our own repository and ADD those missing packages.

I'm afraid otherwise there will be too much file conflicts, wrong permissions as
someone before mentioned. And I firmly believe that pet is poor package format,
for many reasons, it's just my opinion but with good arguments.
Back to top
View user's profile Send_private_message Visit_website 
mavrothal


Joined: 24 Aug 2009
Posts: 1700

PostPosted: Sat 09 Feb 2013, 12:46    Post_subject:  

But the packages you pick for inclusion are mostly gtkdialg front end bash script that usually conflict with nothing and can offer the functionality of the 70MB Gnome panel in few KB.
It is actually all the "P-apps" that make puppy so fast and functional. This and some nice compiling when things from the compatible distro become "heavy".
That's the pets you want, not glibc.

pet2arch offers the ability to include them and still have pacman keep track of everything.

_________________
Kids all over the world go around with an XO laptop. They deserve one puppy (or many) too Very Happy
Back to top
View user's profile Send_private_message 
stifiling

Joined: 29 Dec 2007
Posts: 388

PostPosted: Sat 09 Feb 2013, 14:16    Post_subject: Re: pet-to-arch(pup) converter
Sub_title: Success in my home PC
 

mavrothal wrote:
Now if we play the "Who needs" game, then why Arch is not good enough and we need Archpup


ArchPup is 6 times smaller than Arch Linux. ArchPup runs on an NTFS partition. ArchPup is easier to install than Arch Linux. USB booting Arch Linux is just as hard as compiling XBMC is on Puppy.

these are a few reason why "Just install normal Arch Linux" is 'not' the answer.

Same goes for puppy. "Just install normal Puppy Linux".....normal Puppy Linux is a mile behind, in a 100 yard dash against ArchPup. Arch Linux is also losing that same race, just as badly.
Back to top
View user's profile Send_private_message 
mavrothal


Joined: 24 Aug 2009
Posts: 1700

PostPosted: Sat 09 Feb 2013, 14:54    Post_subject:  

I like your enthusiasm stifiling, but I'm really impressed by the magic.

Here is an Arch package.
Abra katabra.
The pachage is 6 times smaller, runs 3 times as fast and does twice as many things as the original!
Wow!
Razz

_________________
Kids all over the world go around with an XO laptop. They deserve one puppy (or many) too Very Happy
Back to top
View user's profile Send_private_message 
stifiling

Joined: 29 Dec 2007
Posts: 388

PostPosted: Sat 09 Feb 2013, 15:45    Post_subject:  

mavrothal wrote:
I like your enthusiasm stifiling, but I'm really impressed by the magic.

Here is an Arch package.
Abra katabra.
The pachage is 6 times smaller, runs 3 times as fast and does twice as many things as the original!
Wow!
Razz


Sounds like you don't have a valid rebuttal.

You said, "Just install Arch Linux" 3 times already. Gave you a few reasons why that should be eliminated from your arsenal of excuses.

See if you can think of something different. "Just install Arch Linux" doesn't apply. Please do not use "Just install Arch Linux" in comparison to ArchPup. Arch Linux is just as crappy to ArchPup, as Puppy Linux is to ArchPup. "Just install Arch Linux".....doesn't work. X that one off the list.
Back to top
View user's profile Send_private_message 
mavrothal


Joined: 24 Aug 2009
Posts: 1700

PostPosted: Sun 10 Feb 2013, 00:54    Post_subject:  

stifiling wrote:

Sounds like you don't have a valid rebuttal.



Oh boy,… here comes the long post… Rolling Eyes

Let me say this again: why not use Arch linux if you want to use the machine. ie have your office apps, image and video editing, video chatting, VPN, remote desktop, etc.
Have it in running a system that actually has anything of any value or importance.
Not a "production" system, but let's say "a system that you backup regularly".

For such a system Archpup may look smaller, because of the SFS compression but is actually not. Also what you are gaining in read speeds you lose in processing (unsquashing) and memory load. And of course if you install all the extra apps n your save file then the apparent size difference, disappears.
So is it "6 times smaller"?
I wish...

There is a speed difference that comes from the elimination of the security layer that is imposed to unprivileged users in Arch, but you can run as root in Arch too, if that's so important to you.
There is also a speed difference from the core libraries being loaded in RAM but this is usually only for the first time you open the app in every session, since your system is caching after that.
So, a small tick in speed vs the mother-distro.

It can run from NTFS partitions.
Actually I find this a flaw! Shocked (also for puppy)
NTFS. So primarily you are a windows user, used to be asked 5 times if you "really, truly, positively want to open this application". Laughing
And now you are granted root access in a system that you do not know very well and you are one typo/click away from messing your Windows partition (and then spend a day try to recover your "graduation pictures" Twisted Evil ).
Besides NTFS already implies that it is a hobby/test OS Rolling Eyes and is not really used
So a mark to the mother-distro on NTFS!

Installs in USB easier. Check! (Just tell me why puppy's universal installer is not there…)

Any limitations of Archpup vs Arch?
Will not run all the Arch programs due to the held back packages.
May have bugs because of the modified packages that had limited use and thus testing.
Aufs (union) file systems have some limitations. (Also the luck of xattr and acl support)

So is it "miles ahead"? No.
Is it ahead at all?
It depends on your point of view, but more important if you intent to use the system for anything more than playing with it for few hours or a week.

Now about the "miles ahead" of puppy.
Is it faster? No.
Is it smaller? No.
Does it have more features OOTB? No.
Is it easier to install and use from the GUI? No.
Can it be installed in a wider range of hardware? No.
Does it have more apps? No (to the Ubuntu or slackware repos).
Does it have better audited packages? No (if you compare what is in the pupplet repos and not what is flying Razz in the forum).
Does it have a better package managing infrastructure? By far.

So is it "miles ahead"? No.
Is it ahead at all?
It depends on your point of view… And if we are talking "hobby builds", the point of view can vary widely…

OK then,… but can it be really ahead?
It can try, by combining the best feature of both OSs.
Arch package manager and packages - Puppy apps, wizards and scripts.
Then a lot of wide testing and bug squashing and you are almost there. Cool

Can we go back to Archpup now and forget Who's on first? Razz

_________________
Kids all over the world go around with an XO laptop. They deserve one puppy (or many) too Very Happy

Edited_time_total
Back to top
View user's profile Send_private_message 
rg66


Joined: 23 Jul 2012
Posts: 549
Location: Vancouver, BC Canada / Entebbe, Uganda Africa!?!

PostPosted: Sun 10 Feb 2013, 04:22    Post_subject:  

mavrothal wrote:

Just downloaded and tried again. Works file.
Are you running it on Archpup or any other puppy?
It requires to run in Archpup and /usr/share/pacman/PKGBUILD.proto to be present.
I guess I'll put some more checks and warnings


Ya, I'm running it from Archpup with xfce. I copied PKGBUILD.proto to the working directory and same thing. It must be something I'm doing wrong.

_________________
Carolite-1.2 / Carolina-1.2 / X-precise-2.4 / X-slacko-2.2
Carolina
X-precise/X-slacko
Back to top
View user's profile Send_private_message 
simargl8

Joined: 06 Feb 2013
Posts: 65

PostPosted: Sun 10 Feb 2013, 04:54    Post_subject:  

Some of the reasons Puppy is widely considered as just a toy OS, is because it has 300 items in the menu,
most of which you would never start, so their purpose from standard user POV, is to make you feel lost Laughing
mavrothal wrote:
Any limitations of Archpup vs Arch?
Will not run all the Arch programs due to the held back packages.
May have bugs because of the modified packages that had limited use and thus testing.

What programs it will not run?
I haven't found single one.
May have bugs?
Did you see any of those bugs. Or you just assume that, because it's not old enough to must have some flaws.
On the other side having many developers and many users, testers etc. doesn't mean bug-free software or OS. Take abiword from the latest Ubuntu as example.
I'm adding pet2arch script in respect for your time. Is 0.1 latest version?
Back to top
View user's profile Send_private_message Visit_website 
mavrothal


Joined: 24 Aug 2009
Posts: 1700

PostPosted: Sun 10 Feb 2013, 05:32    Post_subject:  

simargl8 wrote:

What programs it will not run?
I haven't found single one.
May have bugs?
Did you see any of those bugs. Or you just assume that, because it's not old enough to must have some flaws.


I do not think that anybody tested the 45000 packages in Arch but I bet on it.
Pango dependent apps come to mind.
Hardware detection and display setup is another usual issue related to udev/systemd.
I can appreciate the risk vs benefit factor, but I think I would at least wait a month or so with the same version to declare it bug free.

simargl8 wrote:
On the other side having many developers and many users, testers etc. doesn't mean bug-free software or OS. Take abiword from the latest Ubuntu as example.

That is a problem when you want to be bleeding edge or rolling. You sacrifice stability (For that there is Debian).
But more testers do make a better more solid release specially when you do not have the release dates set 3 years in advance and you must release no matter what...

simargl8 wrote:
I'm adding pet2arch script in respect for your time. Is 0.1 latest version?

Thanks.
v0.3 is the latest.

_________________
Kids all over the world go around with an XO laptop. They deserve one puppy (or many) too Very Happy

Edited_times_total
Back to top
View user's profile Send_private_message 
mavrothal


Joined: 24 Aug 2009
Posts: 1700

PostPosted: Sun 10 Feb 2013, 05:37    Post_subject:  

rg66 wrote:

Ya, I'm running it from Archpup with xfce. I copied PKGBUILD.proto to the working directory and same thing. It must be something I'm doing wrong.

An old trick to find out is to change the first line of the script from
Code:
#!/bin/bash
to
Code:
#!/bin/bash -x

and roll back the terminal.
Will tell you exactly what is doing and where the problem might be

_________________
Kids all over the world go around with an XO laptop. They deserve one puppy (or many) too Very Happy
Back to top
View user's profile Send_private_message 
mavrothal


Joined: 24 Aug 2009
Posts: 1700

PostPosted: Mon 11 Feb 2013, 00:46    Post_subject:  

Archpup 13.2.1 has been released and has its own thread.
_________________
Kids all over the world go around with an XO laptop. They deserve one puppy (or many) too Very Happy
Back to top
View user's profile Send_private_message 
stifiling

Joined: 29 Dec 2007
Posts: 388

PostPosted: Mon 11 Feb 2013, 05:40    Post_subject:  

mav,

i used your frisbee package in the lxde desktop. i was having a hard time getting xpupsay to work. the folder /lib/dhcpcd is in the main.sfs at /usr/lib/dhcpcd, so i moved it over there. there's also the script 'dhcpcd-run-hooks' in that same location. i pulled that file out of peebee's precise-frisbee.pet...and symlinked the files in /usr/libexec to the ones in /usr/lib/dhcpcd. and was able to get xpupsay to do it's network announcements after doing so.

Not exactly important, but i also modded the '99' files in /usr/lib/dhcpcd/dhcpcd-hooks...to use 'notify-send' rather than xpupsay.
Back to top
View user's profile Send_private_message 
simargl

Joined: 11 Feb 2013
Posts: 572

PostPosted: Mon 11 Feb 2013, 06:03    Post_subject:  

Hi stif, is xpupsay using gtkdialog-splash or it's something new ... again Very Happy
Back to top
View user's profile Send_private_message Visit_website 
mavrothal


Joined: 24 Aug 2009
Posts: 1700

PostPosted: Mon 11 Feb 2013, 08:26    Post_subject:  

stifiling wrote:
mav,

i used your frisbee package in the lxde desktop. i was having a hard time getting xpupsay to work. the folder /lib/dhcpcd is in the main.sfs at /usr/lib/dhcpcd, so i moved it over there. there's also the script 'dhcpcd-run-hooks' in that same location. i pulled that file out of peebee's precise-frisbee.pet...and symlinked the files in /usr/libexec to the ones in /usr/lib/dhcpcd. and was able to get xpupsay to do it's network announcements after doing so.

Not exactly important, but i also modded the '99' files in /usr/lib/dhcpcd/dhcpcd-hooks...to use 'notify-send' rather than xpupsay.


I actually think that xpupsay is a bit intrusive and better remove it!
I think the rewin's frisbee 3 version is much more integrate'able into the main stream. Hopefully I'll find some time to see how it works in Archpup (or maybe peebee does it)
If simargl patches dhcpcd with the dropwait patch then there is a good chance to have a small and decent network manager in Archpup. Smile

_________________
Kids all over the world go around with an XO laptop. They deserve one puppy (or many) too Very Happy
Back to top
View user's profile Send_private_message 
simargl

Joined: 11 Feb 2013
Posts: 572

PostPosted: Mon 11 Feb 2013, 08:53    Post_subject:  

What I see is that this patch adds some waiting time in seconds, so no problems if you need
that dropwait timer I will patch dhcpcd source. One problem is that this relates to version
dhcpcd-5.2.9, latest is 5.6.4, but patch is not too big so it would probably be possible to
adjust it for newer version.
Back to top
View user's profile Send_private_message Visit_website 
Display_posts:   Sort by:   
Page 4 of 6 Posts_count   Goto page: Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 Next
Post_new_topic   Topic_locked View_previous_topic :: View_next_topic
 Forum index » Taking the Puppy out for a walk » Misc
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: 0.1057s ][ Queries: 13 (0.0108s) ][ GZIP on ]