Puppy Linux Discussion Forum

rich pearl · Joined: 20 Oct 2006 Posts: 9

on a TP 560x -- Pentium MMX-233mhz w/ 64ram -- that has been configured for wireless and sound, using Loadlin to load the Litepup, i have successfully installed and loaded opera 9.02_STATIC_ QT, gxine 0.5.9, and the xine_extra_codecs, but the results have been mixed. i can either get audio with .mov files, or video with .wmv files, but not both. flash, fwiw, works fine.

being a novice here, i have no idea how to approach a resolution. and i'm not sure, either, how hard i should work on it. the standards for internet multimedia are moving far past the capabilities of a puny 233mhz notebook. too, bad. nine years old and still functional, but.... **sigh**

gxine, btw, needed just four files -- libmozjs.so, libnspr4.so, libplc4.so, and libplds4.so. i copied them from a working pc and put them into the folder i created at /usr/lib/mozilla.

raffy · Joined: 25 May 2005 Posts: 4315 Location: Manila

Paul (Pakt) and others are currently working on the ebox-2300 (TU) which is on sale at www.ewayco.com - that means its video functionality is still being tested (watch for announcement of its alpha build), as it has only 200 Mhz processor and 128 MB RAM.

Maybe grab one of the boards there: get one with a C3 800 Mhz processor, or the newer C7 processor at minimum 1 Ghz speed (both processors are embedded in the board).

You may want to check local retailers for VIA C3 or C7 boards before ordering from overseas. Newegg and others retail barebone boxes of these boards (no RAM or drive).

MU · Posted: Mon 22 Jan 2007, 23:09 Post_subject:

the ebox-iso was just uploaded, Pakt is sleeping and will announce it tomorrow officially.

http://puppyfiles.org/isos/

Mark

raffy · Joined: 25 May 2005 Posts: 4315 Location: Manila

Yes, this should solve the problems about Xorg as this is a full Puppy build.

I tested the sound at maximum setting, and it is not too loud while playing MP3 via my headphones. An external amplifier/speaker should therefore be needed if you want a louder sound setting.

JohnMc · Joined: 07 Apr 2006 Posts: 118

Not wishing to sound snarky, but I hope no one is suggesting puppy reverse engineer IE Rolling Eyes

JohnMc · Joined: 07 Apr 2006 Posts: 118

The discussion on variants of the std puppy just boils down to an observation -- there always seems to be 3 major models:

- Lean Puppy. Just the guts you add what you want as packages.
- Std Puppy - Core release as done by Barry K.
- Max Puppy - A kitchen sink version of Std.

What I suggest is the the Puppy Foundation take up the matter as a standardization effort. When an new version of puppy is offered it is available in all three variants. Two of them already come avaialble anyway, Unleashed and Std so the issue is the Max version and package rules. Under the proper conditions the 3 variants would be a matter of scripting the builds.

The one thing that would augment the Max Puppy is a screen that offers package choices of the default apps. That way someone could select Opera over Seamonkey, etc as a picklist for any install other than just the liveCD.

The Puppy community is offering the 3 variants by various members as remasters. Why not codify it a little bit?

And I am not against remastering by any means. GrafPup I use off and on to do some audio and video work as needed. Its a great variant.

Just some thoughts from an enduser.

Todd · Joined: 31 Aug 2006 Posts: 308

The answer to your question is simple. Puppy is not a community project. Barry alone develops puppy. There is no foundation, as such. Basically all we have is a community of users. Barry takes suggestions from users. Sometimes he even includes programs they have written. When all is said and done, however, Puppy is a single developer project. In addition, Puppy is not open source. It's components are, but Puppy itself is a copyrighted work created by Barry. Having said all this, I think this is for the best. If Barry can sell his work to someone wanting to have their own linux distribution to run on micro-computer like devices (like pocket pc's), more power to him. I wouldn't be surprised if he hasn't been approached already.

Todd

BarryK · Posted: Mon 05 Feb 2007, 18:48 Post_subject:

Er, no Todd, that is wrong. Puppy is open source, free. The only thing that I "own" are the names "Puppy Linux" and "PuppyOS" and some logos. Yes, there are a few scripts in Puppy that have just "copyright Barry Kauler", which could be seen as placing some restriction, but I intend Puppy 2.14 will have "LGPL" on those -- mostly because most of them are getting to be multi-author efforts, and it's a bit silly having just my name as copyright owner.
Awhile back I dumped the "permission required" thing for creating ones own distro, as the naming is the only issue and that is quite clear in the legal text in the FAQ.

Actually, the naming rights thing also applies to domain names, and 'puppylinux-foundation.com' is in violation. However, as has been discussed elsewhere, enforcing is not practical for an individual.

Todd · Joined: 31 Aug 2006 Posts: 308

So, from what I hear you saying, it is basically the same setup as Slackware? With Slackware, ". . .you can still redistribute a distribution. . . you just can't call it 'Slackware'. . ." (http://slackware.com/trademark/trademark.php).

Todd

amish · Joined: 24 Sep 2006 Posts: 616

BarryK · Posted: Tue 06 Feb 2007, 13:45 Post_subject:

Meshica7 · Joined: 30 Mar 2008 Posts: 44

raffy · Joined: 25 May 2005 Posts: 4315 Location: Manila

You install the undeb (unrpm) package then in console:

Meshica7 · Joined: 30 Mar 2008 Posts: 44

Cool beans! I will give it a whirl tonight.