A vote for a modular use of Puppy Linux

For talk and support relating specifically to Puppy derivatives
Message
Author
User avatar
mikeb
Posts: 11297
Joined: Thu 23 Nov 2006, 13:56

#161 Post by mikeb »

unionfs-fuse and chroot into packages perhaps.

squashfs is designed to minimise usage overhead... speed ups are mainly in their creation.

Library conflicts...perhaps less hijacking of other distros packages might help :D ..to me thats not an sfs issue.

Not sure if anything I have come across recently offers an improvement over the current methods though the puppy implementation has room for improvement.

mike

User avatar
RSH
Posts: 2397
Joined: Mon 05 Sep 2011, 14:21
Location: Germany

#162 Post by RSH »

mikeb wrote:did you happen to notice a low compression build of mksquashfs... seems like a speedy number with only a small size penalty.
http://murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic. ... 88&t=89173
I have used this now for some remasters.

My Osiris Studio is usually at 303 MB (the SFS) and its size increases up to 328 MB when using the low compression build of mksquashfs, which is not too much of course.

But the speed is incredible!!!

I will setup my OS now to have options in LazY Remaster Suite and SFS P.L.U.S. to choose normal or low compression mksquashfs.
mikeslr wrote:And "low-compression" squash files are a great idea. Today, hard-drive (even USB-Key) space is cheap, while using CPU to decompress files as needed is wasteful.
Yes, agreed.

The only reason to use high compression mksquashfs -like the xz mode- to me is related to upload/download times. But this is only to do just once per file. I think a small script to let the user change easily compression of already downloaded SFS files (just drag'n'drop) should be very useful.
[b][url=http://lazy-puppy.weebly.com]LazY Puppy[/url][/b]
[b][url=http://rshs-dna.weebly.com]RSH's DNA[/url][/b]
[url=http://murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?t=91422][b]SARA B.[/b][/url]

User avatar
mikeb
Posts: 11297
Joined: Thu 23 Nov 2006, 13:56

#163 Post by mikeb »

puppy 4 was standard sfs and slax 6 added lzma... yes indeed it makes (slowly)smaller modules but 1. I have noticed some difference using a large program like libre office and 2. when lzma or xz is used it requires that such handling is included along with squashfs which makes the resultant smaller sfs less widely compatible. (slax can use puppy sfs but not the other way around even though the software is compatible for example.)

I think I mentioned some pages ago the aufs penalty seems very little but high compressed sfs do make a discernable difference.


mike

User avatar
RSH
Posts: 2397
Joined: Mon 05 Sep 2011, 14:21
Location: Germany

#164 Post by RSH »

I have noticed some difference using a large program like libre office
What kind of difference?
high compressed sfs do make a discernable difference.
Would this be more of a advantage for the user or more like a disadvantage?
[b][url=http://lazy-puppy.weebly.com]LazY Puppy[/url][/b]
[b][url=http://rshs-dna.weebly.com]RSH's DNA[/url][/b]
[url=http://murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?t=91422][b]SARA B.[/b][/url]

User avatar
mikeb
Posts: 11297
Joined: Thu 23 Nov 2006, 13:56

#165 Post by mikeb »

ignoring the slower compression I notice a small difference with the speed large apps open when the compression is higher.

Not a great deal but the less compressed versions are a little snappier....

mike

User avatar
LazY Puppy
Posts: 1934
Joined: Fri 21 Nov 2014, 18:14
Location: Germany

#166 Post by LazY Puppy »

Since I don't have access anymore to my old RSH account and therefor I'm unable to change the topics title to 'discontinued', I'm going to post here:

THIS IS NOW DISCONTINUED AND NOT SUPPORTED ANYMORE!

All my work done is by now combined and continued into T.O.P.L.E.S.S.
RSH

"you only wanted to work your Puppies in German", "you are a separatist in that you want Germany to secede from Europe" (musher0) :lol:

No, but I gave my old drum kit away for free to a music store collecting instruments for refugees! :wink:

Post Reply