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 Mon 01 Sep 2014, 22:34
All times are UTC - 4
 Forum index » Advanced Topics » Puppy Derivatives
Puppy getting fatter
Moderators: Flash, JohnMurga
Post new topic   Reply to topic View previous topic :: View next topic
Page 2 of 2 [23 Posts]   Goto page: Previous 1, 2
Author Message
oui

Joined: 20 May 2005
Posts: 2066
Location: near Woof (Germany) :-) Acer Laptop emachines 2 GB RAM AMD64. franco-/germanophone, +/- anglophone

PostPosted: Fri 24 May 2013, 04:50    Post subject:  

Hi Tronkel

tronkel wrote:
@oui wrote:

Quote:
in my eyes, Puppy has already reached 10 years now and it continues to use only ONE main sfs file


Yes, that's a good point.

In the early days when the Puppy ISO's were small, nobody really thought about the fact that with one sfs you are loading everything into memory whether or not you need all that software that you might never use.

Now that Puppy has got bigger, this would certainly be more of an issue than before - but not too serious as yet. Would be cool if some developer could look at this and implement what Oui has suggested in his previous post.

I read somewhere that Linus Torvalds is also not happy about the ever-expanding size of the Linux kernel. Seems not to know what to do about it though. New hardware is appearing at an ever-accelerating rate and inevitably has to be catered for within the kernel. So it's a real concern nowadays.


I have to say: That what RSH did implement, also covers this field of management and would be really very good but reduces the freedom for amateur coders to change heavily the system because they are dependant of a perfect working download depository and a very strong organisation of the depository would be needing to cover the terrible wide scope of visions of all Puppy coders! And organisation is probably that what the Puppy world is missing more...

"My" (*1 way with pre defined subdir is more flexibel... Only the subdir are predefined, correspond to parts of the old main.sfs and the content can be free as each author will wish after that (name, size, content of the file itself: the system has only to collect and concatenate the parts one after the other, hopping that that works harmonic Rolling Eyes ; SliTaz does that since version 4.0 with 4 little *.sfs-segments but without subdir's so that the names and interdependences are rigorous!) and realize itself. it makes the remastering different and probably more complicated (*2 but can also simplify parts of the system: you don't need «load SFS on fly» any more: that what is in the correct subdir will be taken, the system has nothing to search any more! And it would be possible to mark what goes into RAM and what has to be read from HD or other slow memory on system poor concerning RAM equipment (*3 .

kind regards


(*1 My way is not my way: It is copied from the Linux system management with the fixed name of the main dir of tree

(*2 must not be so: to install the 4 SliTaz *.sfs file fragments frugal, you only need to concatenate them with the command «cat» to a only one big sfs file! I suppose that the system does about that, or somewhat with the same effect internally loading the system and continue to work with a bigger file or memory content as the fragments handled at development time and beeing to find in the ISO!
I did realize very big SliTaz.sfs file on my laptop having very more RAM as my PC's but I were always limited with a proportion 1:3 (if size of compressed file is 1 you need 3 time this size of RAM)... after that, kernel panic follows! for coders having yet old hardware, often young people with good formation and ideas as well as a lot of energy because they don't have family to care of etc., but low budget, it is extremely limitativ!

(*3 a simple flag file, also empty, named f. ex. «please.ram», placed in the concerned subdir, would be enough! I usually don't need to put libreoffice into the RAM to enter individual letters slowly hit clumsy on my keyboard each after the other, but I need some applications in RAM needing all the calculation power of my system to build some big pictures or convert sounds using a complicate algorithm...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
oui

Joined: 20 May 2005
Posts: 2066
Location: near Woof (Germany) :-) Acer Laptop emachines 2 GB RAM AMD64. franco-/germanophone, +/- anglophone

PostPosted: Fri 24 May 2013, 05:15    Post subject:  

Hi backi

backi wrote:
Hi everyone !
oui is complaining about loading to much unwanted or seldom used programms into ram . I go the way modular as you propose .

What i did ,to get out all the unwanted stuff to make “ Barebone “ vesions of for example Dpupexprimo or Precise Puppy ....i do remaster .

Removed mostly all unwanted multimedia - internet-network -games -document stuff
remaster it to get a slim version .
Later i replace sfs - vesions of my favourite programms (like oui does ) place them convenient in some named directorys .Then symlink them and load them only on demand via sfs-loader or sfs-executer .
So i dont have to carry permanently the whole truckload in ram .
Spares me alot of megabites for the main iso.Programms i seldom use are only loaded temporarly via sfs files (configuratins for them can be saved ) spares me ram too .To reduce even unnecessary drivers i used Zdrive-cutter to remove more radical bloat , .. but does only work on that particular machine .
RHS did some consequent work with remastering and using sfs files instead of permanenty installed programms or pets .That concept is making Puppy more modular similar as in slax or porteus .
But this only make sense on older hardware low in ram .


you are right. I do exactly the same but it is the wrong way because it makes a terrible lot of work for nothing!

in the past, Puppy did publish base versions, the barebones you are naming above, as well as full filled versions. else in the new time, BarryK did announce the new Quirky first as a kind of barebone with only about 50 Mb on his blog but realize it differently after that with a copy of the new Racy in the big kernel.

divers barbones did really become a Puppy legend, so 2.17 or 3.01

full filled versions were really the main Puppy usage as long Puppy did not offer some well developed package management system...

but each one getting actually a modern Puppy with the most actual kernel and finding obsolete files in it taking a lot of room in memory regret such a conception! you have to install somewhat only to amend an obsolete part! and, in the new Quirky, no way actually to change it and actualize...

why a browser in it if after the fresh first start the browser itself announce «this version is obsolete and is not safe any more! pls actualize!» or somewhat else...

(ok, this is not the matter in Precise 5.6; the browser is actual but not the flashplayer)

kind regards
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
backi

Joined: 27 Feb 2011
Posts: 433
Location: GERMANY

PostPosted: Fri 24 May 2013, 08:43    Post subject:  

HI oui !

Yes thats right..... means a lot of work (for nothing?! ).
Someone who is new to this business having a well equipped Linux working OOB.. is a lucky guy .

Dont wanna be unthankful to all those keen developers .
But would find it also quite convenient to choose downloading Barebone or Full version too.... Pimp it later to your needs .
Bodhi Linux comes that way .

But i find newer Puppys not realy very bloated .

Cheers!.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
Moose On The Loose


Joined: 24 Feb 2011
Posts: 515

PostPosted: Fri 24 May 2013, 09:43    Post subject:  

tronkel wrote:
@oui wrote:

Quote:
in my eyes, Puppy has already reached 10 years now and it continues to use only ONE main sfs file


Yes, that's a good point.

In the early days when the Puppy ISO's were small, nobody really thought about the fact that with one sfs you are loading everything into memory whether or not you need all that software that you might never use.


If it is being loaded from CD, there could be multiple SFS files on the CD but still if you want to unmount the CD, you sort of have to read all of the stuff into memory in case it is needed. On a memory stick, there is less need to be able to unmount so perhaps for that case breaking it into multiple SFSs makes sense.

The fact that Puppy uses a lot of script files makes the compression make a big difference in size. Compression of text is very efficient.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
gcmartin

Joined: 14 Oct 2005
Posts: 4238
Location: Earth

PostPosted: Fri 24 May 2013, 13:44    Post subject:  

Let's view this for consideration.

Many/most of this community is using PCs which are vastly different from those of say, 1998, which the original Pups were targeted for.

In fact, with the cost of a stick of RAM today, used/new, we get the benefits that comes with RAM.

Now, given that we have the Big RAM PCs (usually because it was originally used with Windows/Apple), we load a PUP. Doesn't matter which one. Anyone's choice!

What happens is that we drop a Puppy off in a Basketball gymnasium. For some of the more fortunate members who use their PCs for several other OSes, as well, they drop a Puppy into the middle of a Soccer Stadium.

With all that room for Puppy to run around in, and given that Puppy is Ligthning Fast, what is the concern of "any" PUP's size. Just as long as it has comfortable space to run around in.

I don't have a position on PUP's size. Its not of concern for me. There are so many PUPs and Linux distro which bring all sorts of pre-packaged technologies that my biggest problem is settling on the choice for which I should use for my main PCs and which distros I should choose for my TV, my Home security, my Internet controllers, my etc.

The size is of no concern of mine. The abiltiy of it to provide needed functionality and to do it rapidly is what I need most. Same with my smartphone, my tablet, my work desktops, my ...

I'm sure this is the case for most of you too.

"Size ONLY matters in sex!" At least, that's what she says.

_________________
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 
oui

Joined: 20 May 2005
Posts: 2066
Location: near Woof (Germany) :-) Acer Laptop emachines 2 GB RAM AMD64. franco-/germanophone, +/- anglophone

PostPosted: Fri 24 May 2013, 17:02    Post subject:  

Hi gcmartin

your opinion

gcmartin wrote:
In fact, with the cost of a stick of RAM today, used/new, we get the benefits that comes with RAM.


is not realist at all.

I have here only 5 type of PC's at home and no one can use the RAM stick of the other Rolling Eyes

even my Dell Optiplex SX270 can not use the stick of the burned Optiplex SX280 and also the contrary would not be possible. the plugs have other dimensions etc. If I will extend the memory of the (not burning Laughing ) older one I have to spend more money for a stick made by Dell, an American Cy I think, as to buy a complete other PC with more memory from a Chinese brand Laughing (but I have no room on my desk and in my environment for other PC than "book" PC's excepted laptop or new android solutions in coming, I have a laptop but I don't like to use it because of the poor resolution of the screen...).

and

there are billions of old PC in use in all the world

and Puppy is actually the main answer how to use them better!

if you are using Puppy with a modern top PC, it is good for Puppy Rolling Eyes but I really become a bad opinion of you as well as of the Linux movement Razz ! if Linux is only good to run in form of Puppy (out the RAM to be performant), poor Linux...

I use Puppy because all my PC's are limited in RAM and processor power (I drive an old car, I have an old bike, my house, made of stones, will be in 7 years 100 years old but did never be broken under wind power. It seems that American people knows only an answer: develop more technical power, more short live machinery! we have a different vision of our world and environment!)

the billion of old PC's in the world are a step worse than my PC's...

and opinions as your opinion are the reason why the live time of PC's are as short. you only require more hardware instead to use the actual hardware correctly (or better if correctly is not possible any more)...

Quote:
The size is of no concern of mine. The abiltiy of it to provide needed functionality and to do it rapidly is what I need most.


Puppy did offer in 20 Mb in 2003 more functionality and rapidly AND BUILT-IN SOLUTIONS than M$ deliver for a lot of money at the same time!

the actual Slitaz 4.0 offers today yet in 34 Mb probably more for modern hardware and can be extended for no cost!

did you already think about the matter that the most PC's (except playing stations and PC's used as playing stations) are used to enter 8 bit characters slowly using an old mechanical keyboard system Rolling Eyes and the power is only used to produce background pictures and trays and icon bars ?

kind regards
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
gcmartin

Joined: 14 Oct 2005
Posts: 4238
Location: Earth

PostPosted: Fri 24 May 2013, 18:43    Post subject:  

@oui, Agreed. You echo exactly what I try to summarize. In a way, we are saying the same thing differently.

The other primary complaint that used to be echoed over the years is about download time increases. This has been seen across all of the distrowatch products over the years. That is an issue where size does/can bring a downside. Its is a hardship when there's not enough bandwidth, or time, or limited accounts or unreliable links or just bad downloads. I too have been hit where my download ended corrupted and having to do it again. Its a hardship that is endured across the Internet.

But, IMHO, we are free to select and choose the flavor that we think the developers have provided to meet our needs. Agreed.

_________________
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 
CLAM01

Joined: 22 May 2010
Posts: 79

PostPosted: Fri 24 May 2013, 20:43    Post subject:  

Puppy Linux, in the form it is, essentially, today, dates from the 2.x.x series, which began when? Late 2006, or early 2007? Counting the sizes of the preceding 1-series is disingenuos.

The 2-series puppies were "under 100mb", between 94mb and 98mb in basic form. Basic form 301 was 98mb to 101mb, as I recall. In those you had an abiword whose best feature was its automatic save-upon-crashing, because it crashed often. You also had a a seamonkey that would do all sorts then, but that few websites will talk to today. And, then, if you wanted any kind of multimedia you had to download 30 to 50 mb of Win-codecs and link them in, and download about the same of Windows fonts, if you wanted your Abiword .docs to render in Windows users' Microsoft Word and Office.

The 2-series was cranky and had to be cajoled to load on a number of machines. 301 was the first pretty much really plug and play puppy. There were few machines it would not load on, and few it would not run satisfactorily on, provided the processor had MMX, if it was a Pentium 1, or was a 2 (which meant it had MMX).

The 5-series puppies of today weigh in at 130 to 190 mb, don't need codecs and fonts added to play multimedia and communicate with the M$ enchained, and will still run on anything with an MMX processor, and reasonably well. I can run them on my 166 mhz P1mmx Dell Latitude cp laptop with 256mb of swap and 64mb of ram, though not as satisfactorily as before one memory bank went out, when it had 128 mb ram. Slower than 301 or 217, but those ran comparatively slow, too, back then. Amazingly slow, we notice, when we compare them to what we are used to with modern processors, memory and buss speeds of today.

When I customized my puppies back then the remasters came out about 300mb. Today my remasters, fitted to my needs, come out about 320mb. Most of the bulk seems to be libraries: When I've started with a bare-bones puppy and added libraries as demanded by my needed features, the bulk has come up to about my usual when starting with a standard puppy.

I run the 4 and 5 series puppies of today without swap, and on some machined without hard-drives, running them in ram (down to 512mb), from CDs or flash-drives, with added sfs files on the flash-drives.

I would argue that modern puppies are not fatter, they are better developed, with more muscle,more strength, more power and better coordination.

Multiple sfs files Puppies have used since way back, too, Note the Z-drive, to contain little used modules, as well as the usual optional programs one user may want to add and another not.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
Display posts from previous:   Sort by:   
Page 2 of 2 [23 Posts]   Goto page: Previous 1, 2
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: 0.1049s ][ Queries: 12 (0.0145s) ][ GZIP on ]