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 01 Aug 2014, 02:08
All times are UTC - 4
 Forum index » Advanced Topics » Puppy Derivatives
The journey to Archpup..
Moderators: Flash, JohnMurga
Post new topic   Reply to topic View previous topic :: View next topic
Page 6 of 6 [79 Posts]   Goto page: Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6
Author Message
Iguleder


Joined: 11 Aug 2009
Posts: 1873
Location: Israel, somewhere in the beautiful desert

PostPosted: Fri 15 Mar 2013, 17:30    Post subject:  

stifiling - I guess it's frustrating when your creation doesn't get the status you want it to have. But, there's a well-known proverb in the social circles I belong to, which says "life's a b**ch" Laughing

I know how this feels, because my creations aren't recognized by Barry as Puppy-related, too. And guess what - there's nothing wrong about being different and re-inventing the wheel, especially in the FOSS world. Just keep doing what you do best and don't look back in anger. Wink

What Barry says makes sense. Barry, as the mind behind Puppy, gave you three reasons why ArchPup does not fit in his the definition of a Puppy derivative - it doesn't which came first. ArchPup isn't built using Woof, doesn't use PPM and doesn't have the JWM/ROX-Filer combo. So ... this is a distribution based on Puppy (e.g uses parts of Puppy and Arch) and not a Puppy flavor (e.g a genuine Puppy that uses parts of Arch).

You're right - it's unfair that FatDog64 gets attention and recognition from Barry, while ArchPup doesn't, like some forgotten lovechild - but I understand why - the former is much closer to Puppy, since it has everything except the use of Woof.

2c

_________________
My homepage
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website MSN Messenger 
ICQ Number 
stifiling

Joined: 29 Dec 2007
Posts: 388

PostPosted: Fri 15 Mar 2013, 17:37    Post subject:  

Iguleder wrote:
stifiling - I guess it's frustrating when your creation doesn't get the status you want it to have. But, there's a well-known proverb in the social circles I belong to, which says "life's a b**ch" Laughing

I know how this feels, because my creations aren't recognized by Barry as Puppy-related, too. And guess what - there's nothing wrong about being different and re-inventing the wheel, especially in the FOSS world. Just keep doing what you do best and don't look back in anger. Wink

What Barry says makes sense. Barry, as the mind behind Puppy, gave you three reasons why ArchPup does not fit in his the definition of a Puppy derivative - it doesn't which came first. ArchPup isn't built using Woof, doesn't use PPM and doesn't have the JWM/ROX-Filer combo. So ... this is a distribution based on Puppy (e.g uses parts of Puppy and Arch) and not a Puppy flavor (e.g a genuine Puppy that uses parts of Arch).

You're right - it's unfair that FatDog64 gets attention and recognition from Barry, while ArchPup doesn't, like some forgotten lovechild - but I understand why - the former is much closer to Puppy, since it has everything except the use of Woof.

2c


you a lil late to the party dude. show's over.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
puppyluvr


Joined: 06 Jan 2008
Posts: 3186
Location: Chickasha Oklahoma

PostPosted: Sat 16 Mar 2013, 10:32    Post subject:  

Very Happy Hello,
Quote:
and really...it's the OP that's looking more and more like the idiot.

Really?
First, I WAS able to build an Archpup back in `09 using Unleashed, but the ppm was broken. I posted screenshots back then, and asked for assistance, and got no reply.. So I let it go.. I tried again recently using woof, but could only get a cli, so I started this thread..
Second, I have the current "Archpup" and it is interesting, but not a "Puppy"..
I agree that the PPM must work for it to be a Puppy.
I disagree about the Rox/Jwm part, as several new Puplets use Xfce/Thunor..

FWIW I dont really care about Arch.. I tried because it had not been done.
(Well, apparently it had, but not to my knowledge).
I have done a Tinycore (worked, but was huge), and a Fedora (failed) as well. Also trying to build a Puppy using LFS scripts.

I like to try new things. If I am an idiot, so be it...

_________________
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 poster's website 
stifiling

Joined: 29 Dec 2007
Posts: 388

PostPosted: Sat 16 Mar 2013, 17:57    Post subject:  

I'm not trying to insult ANYONE.

puppyluvr,

I do not think that you are anything other than a smart dude. You got further than i had gotten in trying to accomplish this goal and i was rooting for you also. my exact thoughts when i saw this thread pop up was, "YES! this goal is being tackled by someone who actually knows what they're doing. And he's also having some success."

I was the person that was most wrong in this thread, by not thinking more first, about what i said, before i said it. So if anyone deserves to wear the 'dumbbell cone hat' it's me.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
Display posts from previous:   Sort by:   
Page 6 of 6 [79 Posts]   Goto page: Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6
Post new topic   Reply to topic View previous topic :: View next topic
 Forum index » Advanced Topics » Puppy Derivatives
Jump to:  

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
[ Time: 0.0558s ][ Queries: 13 (0.0060s) ][ GZIP on ]