The world has changed

What features/apps/bugfixes needed in a future Puppy
Message
Author
User avatar
koulaxizis
Posts: 452
Joined: Sun 17 Jul 2011, 18:43
Location: Greece
Contact:

Re: I could not disagree more

#21 Post by koulaxizis »

Q5sys wrote:
6502coder wrote:For people who want a fat Linux distro OOTB there are plenty of choices out there. I do not understand why so many Puppy users are so obsessed with "defending" Puppy and "converting" other people to Puppy. I choose to use Puppy for the same reason I choose to drink the beer I drink -- because I like it, and I could not care less who does or does not agree with my choices.
Psychology 101.
When people like something they want others around them to like it as well.

The problem is that when they try to introduce Puppy to friends, family, colleagues, etc; it falls short on those peoples expectations.

The reaction by these people who want to promote puppy; is to try to force the community to make puppy into what 'others' expect a computer should be. This causes people to try to push features and software that most people don't use; or at the very least shouldn't be included in puppy to begin with. Case in point, the push for SAMBA to be included as a default software package.
SAMBA is not needed by most people, and shouldn't be included in a minimal distro. Yet there are Puppy users that have been on a campaign for years about including it by default becuase it fits 'their opinion' of what should be included.

Puppy is great because it focus on running on older/minimal hardware with the least amount of bloat. Bloat can be added in later by a user, but should NOT be included by default. Lets for example talk about the look and feel of puppy; Theming. Users who want to focus on Puppy looking beautiful could come together and help develop/package different theme options so a user could eaisly change the look of their puppy. But has anyone done that, not really. A user or two has done it, but no real simple options have emerged from the community.
SFS packages are a simple way for users to help expand a regular puppy into new territories. To use my system as an example. I'm using Lighthouse 601 right now. The Base system is right around 200mb. I have an additional 1.4gb of expansion SFS files for all the extra software I'd want.
If a team of people got together they could take a Official release (like Slacko), and create a ton of SFS packages so users could easily update and expand their system.

But has anyone in the community stepped forward to do this? Not yet sadly.
For puppy to grow and encompass more users, we need more people to get involved in the creation. Right now the development work is spread too thin. If I had more time, I'd be willing to pitch in, but I dont. I'm behind in the dev work I'm planning to do with Slackbones and Lighthouse.

I'm willing to help guide someone who is willing to put forth the effort to expand the offerings of Slacko.
Hello Q5sys! :) I believe that you are partially correct. Yes, Puppy is great for being minimal. And yes, Puppy can be easily expanded. But i still think that Volhout's idea is good.
"What if ...... under the puppy flag (mainstream, sanctioned by Barry) once in every 2 years, there is a well tested FAT version of puppy. The one for computer users. The one that has it all. This could coincide with a LTS release."
I totally agree on expanding a small Puppy with SFS files but as i discussed with another user yesterday, as far as i know it is supposed to be not a good idea to load more than 5 or 6 sfs files. Sfs are much better and cleaner for the system and the save file. But how can someone load many sfs files without combining them?
[b]Christos Koulaxizis[/b]
[i]Woof woof from Greece![/i]

[color=darkred][url=https://sourceforge.net/projects/puppystuff/][ Puppy Stuff Repository ][/url][/color]

User avatar
sunburnt
Posts: 5090
Joined: Wed 08 Jun 2005, 23:11
Location: Arizona, U.S.A.

#22 Post by sunburnt »

koulaxizis; You`re reading old info. for old Puppy versions. The Boot Manager is old.
We need a law; All web pages must be dated. I`ve read stuff and found it`s 10 years old.!

sfs_load can easily load 20 or 30 SFS files at once due to Puppy using the "aufs" union.
The old Puppies use "unionfs" which is no longer used. So don`t be worried about that.

Complex file systems are slower and less reliable. But aufs has no "real" problems though.
I have said for years now that union file systems are complex, slow, and unnecessary.
.

User avatar
koulaxizis
Posts: 452
Joined: Sun 17 Jul 2011, 18:43
Location: Greece
Contact:

#23 Post by koulaxizis »

sunburnt wrote:koulaxizis; You`re reading old info. for old Puppy versions. The Boot Manager is old.
We need a law; All web pages must be dated. I`ve read stuff and found it`s 10 years old.!

sfs_load can easily load 20 or 30 SFS files at once due to Puppy using the "aufs" union.
The old Puppies use "unionfs" which is no longer used. So don`t be worried about that.

Complex file systems are slower and less reliable. But aufs has no "real" problems though.
I have said for years now that union file systems are complex, slow, and unnecessary.
.
Ok, my mistake!! I'm not very knowledgeable about technical details, so i have to ask stupid things some times! Thank you for the information mate!! :D

I had the same problem translating the wiki into Greek. Some info are outdated and many links are "dead". We should do something about these thing otherwise novice users like me will be misinformed...
[b]Christos Koulaxizis[/b]
[i]Woof woof from Greece![/i]

[color=darkred][url=https://sourceforge.net/projects/puppystuff/][ Puppy Stuff Repository ][/url][/color]

Volhout
Posts: 547
Joined: Sun 28 Dec 2008, 08:41

FAT against SFS/PET

#24 Post by Volhout »

@Q5sys,

It is exactly the PPM-SFS-PET stuff that requires skills that the average USER does not have. There are various problems.

- when a pup is released a basic PPM is set up. There is a varietey of programs in the PPM that get some basic testing (maybe ?), but my gut feeling is that they are simply compiled using the applicable devx and when no missing libs...OK ready. There is no thorough testing on all pgms in the PPM.

- many pups have a PPM that has links to UBUNTU or SLACKWARE. Very nice. Do you really expect that my mom knows how to install Stellarium from UBUNTU packages in Precise.... come on..... wake up.

- The PPM does not show in any way what program does what. There is a small explanation, but if my mom needs a program to edit a text file, she would not know where to start.

I am not sure about your age Q5sys, but maybe you will have replace "mom" with "granny" and get a better feeling of what I try to explain. And try to get into the mind of people that make a living with the work they do on a PC (running puppy). Every hour they spend on configuring, updating, adding, is a loss of money. It should do the job OOTB. I really appreciate what you do for Puppy linux, but you are in a different group of enthousiasts, you have skills that many don't have. That I don't have, and my mom doesn't. We get confused if a popup says "missing library", and my mom would fetch the telephone book and call the major to find out if the library in het town has closed.

I would embrace a FAT puppy that has a selection of packages that is well thought out. Actually I don't even think users care about what internet browser they use. It should work. So they do not want XX choices in PPM they don't know. Chromium, Chrome, Opera, Firefox, Seamonkey, Midori, ...... They want an icon, or menu entry that says "internet".

And my proposal is to make such a puppy once every 2 years. And the PPM should focus on programs that appeal to users (i.e. Stellarium or a Bridge game). Devx is not needed. USERS don't need an ftp server. But they will expect the PC to function in a windows-alike environment until they really believe in Puppy to be a replacement. Hence...SAMBA.

Menu structures could be very simple ... since 50% of all the programs that are distributed now with Puppy are developer oriented. They should go. Seamonkey is preferred web browser because it has a HTML editor.... haha ... users don't write HTML.... They don't know what it is. Maybe they recognise the word from MS-WORD in the list "save as HTML".

It is a change of mind.
Last edited by Volhout on Mon 19 Aug 2013, 10:04, edited 6 times in total.

Volhout
Posts: 547
Joined: Sun 28 Dec 2008, 08:41

FAT against SFS/PET

#25 Post by Volhout »

I do not understand why so many Puppy users are so obsessed with "defending" Puppy and "converting" other people to Puppy.
Pride....
Last edited by Volhout on Mon 19 Aug 2013, 12:28, edited 2 times in total.

bark_bark_bark
Posts: 1885
Joined: Tue 05 Jun 2012, 12:17
Location: Wisconsin USA

#26 Post by bark_bark_bark »

I think a FAT puppy would be real hard to upload to puppy's primary server. Plus how would we decide as a community what to include?

We all have strong opinions about different pieces of software.
....

User avatar
stu91
Posts: 145
Joined: Mon 06 Aug 2012, 15:11
Location: England. Dpup. Dell Inspiron 1501

Re: I could not disagree more

#27 Post by stu91 »

Q5sys wrote:
6502coder wrote:For people who want a fat Linux distro OOTB there are plenty of choices out there. I do not understand why so many Puppy users are so obsessed with "defending" Puppy and "converting" other people to Puppy. I choose to use Puppy for the same reason I choose to drink the beer I drink -- because I like it, and I could not care less who does or does not agree with my choices.
Psychology 101.
When people like something they want others around them to like it as well.

The problem is that when they try to introduce Puppy to friends, family, colleagues, etc; it falls short on those peoples expectations.

The reaction by these people who want to promote puppy; is to try to force the community to make puppy into what 'others' expect a computer should be. This causes people to try to push features and software that most people don't use; or at the very least shouldn't be included in puppy to begin with. Case in point, the push for SAMBA to be included as a default software package.
SAMBA is not needed by most people, and shouldn't be included in a minimal distro. Yet there are Puppy users that have been on a campaign for years about including it by default becuase it fits 'their opinion' of what should be included.

Puppy is great because it focus on running on older/minimal hardware with the least amount of bloat. Bloat can be added in later by a user, but should NOT be included by default. Lets for example talk about the look and feel of puppy; Theming. Users who want to focus on Puppy looking beautiful could come together and help develop/package different theme options so a user could eaisly change the look of their puppy. But has anyone done that, not really. A user or two has done it, but no real simple options have emerged from the community.
SFS packages are a simple way for users to help expand a regular puppy into new territories. To use my system as an example. I'm using Lighthouse 601 right now. The Base system is right around 200mb. I have an additional 1.4gb of expansion SFS files for all the extra software I'd want.
If a team of people got together they could take a Official release (like Slacko), and create a ton of SFS packages so users could easily update and expand their system.

But has anyone in the community stepped forward to do this? Not yet sadly.
For puppy to grow and encompass more users, we need more people to get involved in the creation. Right now the development work is spread too thin. If I had more time, I'd be willing to pitch in, but I dont. I'm behind in the dev work I'm planning to do with Slackbones and Lighthouse.

I'm willing to help guide someone who is willing to put forth the effort to expand the offerings of Slacko.
I think since i started using puppy it has gone from T2 > Ubuntu > Slackware > Ubuntu + all the derivatives and various base distro versions. This constant flip flopping makes it very difficult to do anything with puppy as you more often than not end up doing the same work over and over:?

Volhout
Posts: 547
Joined: Sun 28 Dec 2008, 08:41

over

#28 Post by Volhout »

The new "puppy project" is Arch linux based. It is not a derivative ...

User avatar
Q5sys
Posts: 1105
Joined: Thu 11 Dec 2008, 19:49
Contact:

#29 Post by Q5sys »

Volhout wrote:@Q5sys,
It is exactly the PPM-SFS-PET stuff that requires skills that the average USER does not have. There are various problems.
i think your doing a disservice to most users. i believe that most users do have the ability to do this with a litte guidance and support. I dont believe for a moment that most puppy users are only point-and-click skilled.
Volhout wrote:
- when a pup is released a basic PPM is set up. There is a varietey of programs in the PPM that get some basic testing (maybe ?), but my gut feeling is that they are simply compiled using the applicable devx and when no missing libs...OK ready. There is no thorough testing on all pgms in the PPM.
That is a major disservice to the developers like Micko and others who put a great deal of time and effort into their releases. Everything thats in the PPM for official relases has been tested by multiple people prior to release. Sometimes issues do crop up, but those are usually dependant on another change that a user did on their system beyond just installing a single program via the PPM.
Volhout wrote: - many pups have a PPM that has links to UBUNTU or SLACKWARE. Very nice. Do you really expect that my mom knows how to install Stellarium from UBUNTU packages in Precise.... come on..... wake up.
I cant speak for Precise since ive never used it, but installing from the Slackware repo in the PPM of Slacko requires a simple search followed by a click to install. This is not a complex process. Using Stelarrium as your example, why exactly should this be installed by default? How many people actually use Stellarium? But back to the point, are you saying that your mother is incapible of installing programs with a few clicks and reading an on screen dialog?
Volhout wrote: - The PPM does not show in any way what program does what. There is a small explanation, but if my mom needs a program to edit a text file, she would not know where to start.
First off no one should be entering the PPM to edit a text file because this is already built into puppy. When a puppy release is made, and this applies specifically to official releases, most of what a user needs is already installed. Give me an example of a program that is needed that is NOT included in either the default ISO or in the PPM thats needed for most users? Most of what a user would need, and lets keep in mind that you have been speaking specifically about non technical users with not very much skill. What tasks does a non-skilled user need to do thats not included by default in the official ISO?
Volhout wrote: I am not sure about your age Q5sys, but maybe you will have replace "mom" with "granny" and get a better feeling of what I try to explain. And try to get into the mind of people that make a living with the work they do on a PC (running puppy). Every hour they spend on configuring, updating, adding, is a loss of money. It should do the job OOTB. I really appreciate what you do for Puppy linux, but you are in a different group of enthousiasts, you have skills that many don't have. That I don't have, and my mom doesn't. We get confused if a popup says "missing library", and my mom would fetch the telephone book and call the major to find out if the library in het town has closed.
No one should be trying to run a business on puppy, unless they are skilled with linux, simply because Puppy is NOT a full featured Distro and does not have the support commuity behind it. Anyone trying to do so, is only hurting themselves. There are plenty of Full Service Distros that would be better for buisness uses than Puppy. If someone chooses to run Puppy as their Business OS, im sorry, but its their own fault when they have to spend time trying to do things on puppy instead of focusing on their business. And anyone in this community who pushes Puppy on a business user is doing them a major disservice, since Puppy does not have the software availability nor the support of a full distro like Mint, Fedora, Suse etc. If a user has problems installing programs with Puppy - They need to use a Ditro that is better for their business! Business needs are not met by Puppy unless the user is skilled in Linux. Trying to Force Puppy to be a Business OS takes a great deal of time and i would argue must be custom built to that users needs. A better choice for the user would simply be another Distro.
Dont get me wrong; I love Puppy. But i realize its short commings and where it is not beneficial. Common sense dictates that you use the best tool for the job at hand. Anyone whos not a zealot should realize that means puppy is not the best option every time and in every case. Trying to make Puppy that is a recipe for disaster since no single OS can ever be everything for every user.
Volhout wrote: I would embrace a FAT puppy that has a selection of packages that is well thought out. Actually I don't even think users care about what internet browser they use. It should work. So they do not want XX choices in PPM they don't know. Chromium, Chrome, Opera, Firefox, Seamonkey, Midori, ...... They want an icon, or menu entry that says "internet".
Again your dumbing down regular users. If users are truly that dumb, they have no business using a minimal linux distro. I believe most people in this community are intellegent people, and simply need someone to guide them along the pathway of learning. Besides, i personally believe that dumning down an OS is a bad idea. But to ask the question again from before. What task/application do these 'I want an internet button' users need thats not included by default in Puppy?
Volhout wrote: And my proposal is to make such a puppy once every 2 years. And the PPM should focus on programs that appeal to users (i.e. Stellarium or a Bridge game). Devx is not needed. USERS don't need an ftp server. But they will expect the PC to function in a windows-alike environment until they really believe in Puppy to be a replacement. Hence...SAMBA.
Have you even checked out PhatSlacko?
Volhout wrote: Menu structures could be very simple ... since 50% of all the programs that are distributed now with Puppy are developer oriented. They should go. Seamonkey is preferred web browser because it has a HTML editor.... haha ... users don't write HTML.... They don't know what it is. Maybe they recognise the word from MS-WORD in the list "save as HTML".

It is a change of mind.
Would you mind making a list of the applications in Slacko 5.6 that you feel need "to go"? Id be interested to hear your opinions.

bark_bark_bark wrote:I think a FAT puppy would be real hard to upload to puppy's primary server. Plus how would we decide as a community what to include?
We all have strong opinions about different pieces of software.
100% Agreed

Volhout
Posts: 547
Joined: Sun 28 Dec 2008, 08:41

response

#30 Post by Volhout »

Hi Q5sys,

First of all, I don't want to offend anyone, and especially not 01Micko, since I highly appreciate his work, and I am using Slacko every day on my netbook. And Lucid is also based on his work.

I myself use Lucid 528 on the desktop PC's in my office and run my business with it. And I am happy with it. And yes, I ran into a few hurdles, and thanks to the responce I got on this forum, it is running fine for more than 3 years now.

So I believe in Puppy.

Stellarium is used as an example for a program that will never show up in a distro since it is not a primary function for a PC, but it is a great program for entertainment (power up your laptop when you are sitting on the deck and are looking at the sky in the night after a good BBQ, drinking one beer too many) and it has critical Qt dependencies. Things that are not in all puppies.

I have used FATslacko, Phatslacko, and have downloaded Lighthouse Mariner to try soon. And they are a lot closer to what I have in mind. But they are not official puppies. No-one can find them, unless they look at the right page at the forum. I vote to make one of these fat ones an official release, sanctioned by Barry, listed on distrowatch, etc. And THAT is the point.

So in fact, I think in many things we do agree. Only your position is that it should not be Puppy, since puppy is such a great toy for developers. Don't burden it with the load to also be a product for the mob. I agree, you do have a point in that.

One thing I do think however, is that "dumming down" a product does pay off. Allowing me (and you) to tinker around, but at the same time have something that is "iPhone-simple (or Android-simple)" is valuable. Just few icons on the desktop, or menu, but keep the terminal. And the "home" folder should contain only "documents" and "music" and "pictures". Much more confusing now.

About Slacko, and "what to remove"...... actually I just last night used the "remove buildin packages" tool and was looking what I could do to ThinSlacko to make it smaller.... I removed something 20+ items from the menu's. Things like "ftp server, 2 editors (geany, and abiword are enough), file difference checkers, some process viewers, download complete websites, pzchmview, etc.. all these tools that are for programmers. Nice tool by the way, it also removes the menu items.

Some items are also double. There are 2 programs that take a snapshort from the screen. Just pick one.... 2 programs that inform you how much disk space there is left, 2 scientific calculators, a lot of network tools that I never used. So even in thinslacko there is meat to cut (for me at least).

And then ... completely off-topic ..... I look at Slacko 533 (not thinslack) and Slacko 56 and there is 50Mbyte size difference (1.5x size). But they offer very much alike functionality. Is this difference in the kernel part ?

jpeps
Posts: 3179
Joined: Sat 31 May 2008, 19:00

Re: response

#31 Post by jpeps »

Volhout wrote:
About Slacko, and "what to remove"...... actually I just last night used the "remove buildin packages" tool and was looking what I could do to ThinSlacko to make it smaller.... I removed something 20+ items from the menu's. Things like "ftp server, 2 editors (geany, and abiword are enough), file difference checkers, some process viewers, download complete websites, pzchmview, etc.. all these tools that are for programmers. Nice tool by the way, it also removes the menu items.
Removing programs probably will have no advantage, since most take up very little disk space. Some programs, like ftp, will be very useful later on when you learn how to use it. A different approach: included programs have been carefully screened before being included. Try a few out, it's what makes puppy interesting. The advantage of inclusion by the developer is that they work, and are well tested and integrated. That's why puppy is SOOOOO much superior to something like TinyCore.

User avatar
sunburnt
Posts: 5090
Joined: Wed 08 Jun 2005, 23:11
Location: Arizona, U.S.A.

#32 Post by sunburnt »

I agree in the fat Puppy idea... Lots of work by the builder making sure everything functions.
This is best suited to builder groups, though some folks may have the process streamlined.

And rather than worrying about upgrading apps., just make a new fat Puppy instead.

# Puppy always was a case of trading up to a newer one.

Adding apps. is good in the Debian, Ubuntu, Slack versions with their good parentage.

# I`m a fan of RoxApps, easy to add and remove, and they don`t scatter files everywhere.


# Having so many Puppy parents is problematic. One parent has obvious advantages.

I`ve suggested add-on app. packs ( groups of like apps.), media, office, games, web, etc.


# Note: For new Puppy releases remember to post app. list and the download size.!
.

jamesbond
Posts: 3433
Joined: Mon 26 Feb 2007, 05:02
Location: The Blue Marble

#33 Post by jamesbond »

sunburnt wrote:# I`m a fan of RoxApps, easy to add and remove, and they don`t scatter files everywhere.
Then you may be interested in this:
- Nix OS
- Nix Package Manager, which apparently has been adopted as "The" GNU Package Manager (GNU Guix).
Interesting concept, although too much for my taste :)
Fatdog64 forum links: [url=http://murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?t=117546]Latest version[/url] | [url=https://cutt.ly/ke8sn5H]Contributed packages[/url] | [url=https://cutt.ly/se8scrb]ISO builder[/url]

User avatar
Karl Godt
Posts: 4199
Joined: Sun 20 Jun 2010, 13:52
Location: Kiel,Germany

#34 Post by Karl Godt »

I have a bit difficult to understand the term ROX-APPS . ROX-Filer and some applications are located in /usr/local/apps .
I have started to configure apps with --prefix=/usr/APPTYPE like /usr/gtk , /usr/multimedia and /usr/SDL , to have a better overview when things exhibit problems .
That needs to set LD_LIBRARY_PATH and /etc/ld.so.conf accordingly .

BTW , the world has changed ? : confused :

User avatar
6502coder
Posts: 677
Joined: Mon 23 Mar 2009, 18:07
Location: Western United States

#35 Post by 6502coder »

Q5sys is absolutely dead on in emphasizing that for certain purposes, such as running a business, Puppy is simply not a good idea. But it seems some people are bent on criticizing a pickup truck for being a lousy limousine...

As for Q5sys's reference to "Psych 101", when I said I didn't understand why people get so obsessed with promoting Puppy, I was just trying to make a point. I understand perfectly well what's going on. It's what leads to cliques in high school and fights at sporting events, and aren't we all the worse off for it? People ought to have the courage of their own convictions.

It saddens me to see so much time wasted arguing about something that is just a mirage anyway. The idea of a standard fat Puppy distro is surely an exercise in futility, quite apart from being a contradition in terms (since Puppy's whole point is to be lean). How can there be a standard fat Puppy when there's no such thing as a standard fat Puppy USER?

You can load a distro up with 2GB of the most popular, most widely-used Linux apps out there, and won't there still be plenty of users complaining that THEIR favorite app isn't included, or who cannot accept a "standard" app that was included? Even something as fundamental as an office productivity suite is rife with controversy. Anyone who thinks that Libre Office (for example) is universally acceptable is simply uninformed.

If the notion of a standard fat Puppy really is valid, and if there really is a crying need for it, then I expect that one will emerge; vacuums do tend to get filled. But I'm not holding my breath.

User avatar
sunburnt
Posts: 5090
Joined: Wed 08 Jun 2005, 23:11
Location: Arizona, U.S.A.

#36 Post by sunburnt »


starhawk
Posts: 4906
Joined: Mon 22 Nov 2010, 06:04
Location: Everybody knows this is nowhere...

#37 Post by starhawk »

6502coder wrote:standard fat Puppy USER
5'3 ~220lbs (~100kg for non US folks) here... that makes me a fat Puppy user, right? Not sure about the "standard" bit tho...

:P ;) :P

User avatar
ardvark
Posts: 1448
Joined: Tue 02 Jul 2013, 03:43
Location: USA

#38 Post by ardvark »

starhawk wrote: 5'3 ~220lbs (~100kg for non US folks) here... that makes me a fat Puppy user, right?

:P ;) :P
:lol:

User avatar
01micko
Posts: 8741
Joined: Sat 11 Oct 2008, 13:39
Location: qld
Contact:

#39 Post by 01micko »

ardvark wrote:
starhawk wrote: 5'3 ~220lbs (~100kg for non US folks) here... that makes me a fat Puppy user, right?

:P ;) :P
:lol:
Time to give up that soda!
volhout wrote:And then ... completely off-topic ..... I look at Slacko 533 (not thinslack) and Slacko 56 and there is 50Mbyte size difference (1.5x size). But they offer very much alike functionality. Is this difference in the kernel part ?
I don't think it's all that much off topic. The biggest factor here is that newer kernels require the mesa package, ~30M, plus the kernel is a bit bigger with more drivers included ootb, programs all grow including backend libraries, and stuff like ffmpeg, abiword, mplayer and whatever browser.

Puppy is very extensible with sfs files, and it's quite easy to make your own from a .pet (search the forum) or other distro's packages or even combine sfs files. With a bit of minor editing you can easily have libreoffice (or your preferred office suite) open programs with one click and also make them the defaults.

Puppy will never please everyone, that's not what it's for anyway. I like it because of it's speed, even on old clunkers. However my main 3 machines could hardly be classified as "old" in puppy terms. They are all 64 bit capable and could easily run most distros. However, I find my self using puppy near all the time on 2 of them, the other is my homework box, puppy only gets tested on that one.

As for PHATSlacko, there may be another version soon; the part I like about it is Samba out of the box. Very handy.

But as for an official "FAT" version? No. Barry would never agree to it.. it is his baby after all. I'm of the opinion it's not needed.

And until rox-filer and jwm don't work any more with new libraries, that will be the default interface.
Puppy Linux Blog - contact me for access

User avatar
Q5sys
Posts: 1105
Joined: Thu 11 Dec 2008, 19:49
Contact:

#40 Post by Q5sys »

Volhout wrote:Hi Q5sys,

First of all, I don't want to offend anyone, and especially not 01Micko, since I highly appreciate his work, and I am using Slacko every day on my netbook. And Lucid is also based on his work.

I myself use Lucid 528 on the desktop PC's in my office and run my business with it. And I am happy with it. And yes, I ran into a few hurdles, and thanks to the responce I got on this forum, it is running fine for more than 3 years now.
I didnt think you were intentionally trying to offend, just wanted to point it out in case you didnt realize it. I've praised 01Micko's work here for a while. I hope he stays around and continues to do great things for this community.

Volhout wrote:So I believe in Puppy.
Glad to hear it! :)
Volhout wrote:Stellarium is used as an example for a program that will never show up in a distro since it is not a primary function for a PC, but it is a great program for entertainment (power up your laptop when you are sitting on the deck and are looking at the sky in the night after a good BBQ, drinking one beer too many) and it has critical Qt dependencies. Things that are not in all puppies.
My personal opinion is that QT is a the way of the future and we need to start including it by default. But there are plenty of people that feel that gtk still has life left in it. Historically puppy has been GTK based, so there's a bit of resistance. I always pack QT up in an SFS and load it automatically.
Volhout wrote:I have used FATslacko, Phatslacko, and have downloaded Lighthouse Mariner to try soon. And they are a lot closer to what I have in mind. But they are not official puppies. No-one can find them, unless they look at the right page at the forum. I vote to make one of these fat ones an official release, sanctioned by Barry, listed on distrowatch, etc. And THAT is the point.
That's where individuals need to push the non official releases if they want them to gain use. Barry has decided not to embrace the larger sizes as official, until he changes his mind... Its up to the community to push the non official versions.

Volhout wrote:So in fact, I think in many things we do agree. Only your position is that it should not be Puppy, since puppy is such a great toy for developers. Don't burden it with the load to also be a product for the mob. I agree, you do have a point in that.
Thats 100% in the wrong direction. I dont agree with that at all. I dont think Puppy is just a Dev Toy. But I dont think that Puppy should just become 'yet another' Linux distro by being loaded with tons of applications that rarely get used. I think we instead should make those as SFS packages which a user can load if and when they need. Leave the Bloat out, focus on the gold.

Volhout wrote:One thing I do think however, is that "dumming down" a product does pay off. Allowing me (and you) to tinker around, but at the same time have something that is "iPhone-simple (or Android-simple)" is valuable. Just few icons on the desktop, or menu, but keep the terminal. And the "home" folder should contain only "documents" and "music" and "pictures". Much more confusing now.
To quote Einstein, "Things should be made as simple as possible but no simplier." Yes I realize that's a horrible paraphrase. His point was dont dumb things down to where they loose their essence. Dont simply something so much that it becomes less useful. In our exact situation, I dont think we should dumb the experience down that much, becuase it means that we dont have to learn anything. I think a good Idiotocracy movie refence would fit here.
Volhout wrote:About Slacko, and "what to remove"...... actually I just last night used the "remove buildin packages" tool and was looking what I could do to ThinSlacko to make it smaller.... I removed something 20+ items from the menu's. Things like "ftp server, 2 editors (geany, and abiword are enough), file difference checkers, some process viewers, download complete websites, pzchmview, etc.. all these tools that are for programmers. Nice tool by the way, it also removes the menu items.
Some items are also double. There are 2 programs that take a snapshort from the screen. Just pick one.... 2 programs that inform you how much disk space there is left, 2 scientific calculators, a lot of network tools that I never used. So even in thinslacko there is meat to cut (for me at least).
Ok Now I'm confused. First you were talking about adding in more applications, now you're talking about taking them out? Also keep in mind that sometimes there are multiple menu entries becuase a program can do more than on thin. Example: MtPaint. it can take screenshots but it can also be an graphic editor. So its one program with two entries. Even if you'd go and remove almost everything, you're not saving that much space. And here we get into the debate of what should stay and what should go. For 'you' an FTP server is dumb to have, but for another user it may be very useful. I dont know if we've had a community wide discussion about default apps in a while... but most of the things are there for a good reason. Personally I think dialup can go; except for the fact that I know that there are people here that need dialup networking still. If you want a custom designed release that has your software and nothing more... contact a dev and offer them some beer money to remaster a CD for you. :P


6502coder wrote:Q5sys is absolutely dead on in emphasizing that for certain purposes, such as running a business, Puppy is simply not a good idea. But it seems some people are bent on criticizing a pickup truck for being a lousy limousine...
Perfect analogy!
6502coder wrote:As for Q5sys's reference to "Psych 101", when I said I didn't understand why people get so obsessed with promoting Puppy, I was just trying to make a point. I understand perfectly well what's going on. It's what leads to cliques in high school and fights at sporting events, and aren't we all the worse off for it? People ought to have the courage of their own convictions.
I figured it was a rhetorical question, I just felt like answering it anyway for those who might have thought 'well yea thats a good question'.
6502coder wrote:It saddens me to see so much time wasted arguing about something that is just a mirage anyway. The idea of a standard fat Puppy distro is surely an exercise in futility, quite apart from being a contradition in terms (since Puppy's whole point is to be lean). How can there be a standard fat Puppy when there's no such thing as a standard fat Puppy USER?

You can load a distro up with 2GB of the most popular, most widely-used Linux apps out there, and won't there still be plenty of users complaining that THEIR favorite app isn't included, or who cannot accept a "standard" app that was included? Even something as fundamental as an office productivity suite is rife with controversy. Anyone who thinks that Libre Office (for example) is universally acceptable is simply uninformed.

If the notion of a standard fat Puppy really is valid, and if there really is a crying need for it, then I expect that one will emerge; vacuums do tend to get filled. But I'm not holding my breath.
Agreed

Post Reply