Puppy's Future

Message

Sage · #21 Post by **Sage** » Thu 07 Aug 2008, 14:25

...and I know a man who can do it!

[Sorry, I won't be testing Muppy+Gnome, Mark - I hate Gnome!].

big_bass · #22 Post by **big_bass** » Thu 07 Aug 2008, 16:05

removed

Sage · #23 Post by **Sage** » Thu 07 Aug 2008, 17:21

Well out of order b-b. Nobody likes a loud-mouthed arrogant Yank.
For the record, I've been testing Mark's Muppies and feeding back to him publicly and privately ever since they emerged. He is a genius, unlike some of the folks around here. If you had taken the time to read just a few other offerings in this Forum, you would've perceived a general dislike of Gnome. I took my cue from comments appearing this week, including one today. Personally, I've never liked it and try to avoid distros using it. I considered it a courtesy to advise Mark that I didn't expect to help him on that diversion. You may do as you like, but if you're short of suggestions, I'm sure others can help. Otherwise, kindly leave the stage.

big_bass · #24 Post by **big_bass** » Thu 07 Aug 2008, 18:13

removed

Bruce B · #25 Post by **Bruce B** » Thu 07 Aug 2008, 22:14

Sage wrote:...and I know a man who can do it!

[Sorry, I won't be testing Muppy+Gnome, Mark - I hate Gnome!].

The initial reading is simple enough. Sage hates Gnome. No reason to even considering testing something you already know you hate. I'd be hard pressed to think Mark took it any other way.

#26 Post by MU » Thu 07 Aug 2008, 22:20

yes, I had understood it correct.
Sage likes to test Muppy, but not Gnome.

It is important to see, that Gnome is just an addon.
It shall not blow up the initial, normal Muppy.
That is, why it takes some time to get it ready.
It shall not fatten Muppy, but run immedeatly without further tweaks, if you decide to use it as addon.

Now shake hands, please ::)

Mark

WhoDo · #27 Post by **WhoDo** » Thu 07 Aug 2008, 22:24

MU wrote:Important for Puppy 3 was the slackware compatibility....[big snip]...
Instead of breaking compatibility again and again, I think it would make more sense, to have a look at enhancing compatibility with other systems.
E.g. XDG and Mime is very incomplete in Puppy.
There still is so much to do...

...and if I had your knowledge and ability, Mark, I'd be in there helping you do it!

Slackware compatibility is why I encouraged tronkel and ttuuxxx to stick with 3.01 for the next CE version. That's still going, although it needs a kick along. Your ideas are spot on for my money!

Barry was kind enough to backport a lot of the newer features from Dingo to 3.01 and there are still a few I'd like to see come back - like the desktop icon changer as just one very minor example.

Barry always intended 3.xx and 4.xx to develop side-by-side. I think it's just a version number thing with so many people - I want the latest and greatest ... oh, that one's got the higher version number so it must be the latest! I'd rather we moved away from 3.x and 4.x and dealt with the Dingo fork and whatever you want to call the mainstream 3.x series fork ... as long as it isn't Slacko!

Consistency will save Puppy, in more ways than one IMHO!

#28 Post by MU » Thu 07 Aug 2008, 23:04

I currently run Gnome 2.22.1 , though it was just upgraded to 2.22.3.
I may have a look on saturday, if my buildscript is able to use 2.22.3 without further changes.
Then I'll upload the Beta, and the buildsystem on sunday (it will take a whole day to upload all).

Muppy-build now is structured better, as I created subfolders for all the basic libraries I used from Slackware.
Before, I had used the complete pup_301.sfs.
This packaging allows others to reproduce, what I added, and single packages can be easier updated or taken to update other puplets.

Not everything is from Slackware, e.g. the whole compiz I took from "wow", as they work fine, and he updates them regularly.

Also some like Pidgin I took from the forum, as they just worked, and fit great into Muppy.

Mark

raffy · #29 Post by **raffy** » Fri 08 Aug 2008, 02:10

WhoDo wrote:I'd rather we moved away from 3.x and 4.x and dealt with the Dingo fork and whatever you want to call the mainstream 3.x series fork...

Probably call it Muppy, or if not, Bingo.

I've already downloaded Muppy mini and found its many new features amazing.

#30 Post by **ttuuxxx** » Fri 08 Aug 2008, 03:36

Puppy 3 series with slackware was really nice, I enjoyed it a lot. So did many other users, You could tell by the amount of times Gslapt was downloaded, 449 times it was downloaded so far, Almost 50% of the people who viewed the post downloaded it. The numbers are on the forum post below

http://www.murga-linux.com/puppy/viewto ... 71&t=28994

Now if that doesn't show what users like, I don't know?
If the Puppy community ever decides to grasp another "Big Brother distro" to be compatible with, I think thats alright, I don't believe that it takes out Uniqueness away, it just expands whats out there to other users. I said it before, the best distro to be compatible with is Ubuntu. Just for the software library, nothing else. They can keep there bland look and feel. Its just a well organized library compiled perfectly for older pc's i386. Doesn't mean that we would use any of it as default, Just let the new users have fun, If they can't find what the need here, they can browse over there, what matters is that they keep puppy running on their pc's

Well thats just my personal opinion
ttuuxxx

gerry · #31 Post by **gerry** » Mon 18 Aug 2008, 11:38

I'm just a user too- but what I think Puppy needs is a period of consolidation, where the developers get out of the "too busy writing new bugs to fix old ones" mentality. Test everything that Puppy should do, and fix it if it doesn't work.

Here's one to get your teeth into: my printer is not supported by Gutenprint, so I import a driver from the manufacturer. Abiword won't print. But some apps do: Ted, Gimp 2.4, and one or two more print with no problem. But Ted is not in the Puppy 4 repo... so I'm stuck on Puppy 301.

Debian works fine, so there's obviously something wrong with the way Abiword is integrated into Puppy- but did any developer test this situation?

Long live Puppy Linux!

Gerry

gerry · #32 Post by **gerry** » Mon 18 Aug 2008, 11:44

And another one- why have a Puppy repository, with a few apps packaged as pets? If Puppy could as standard use the Debian or Slackware repos, you wouldn't have to re-invent the wheel for every app.

Gerry

starlyte · #33 Post by **starlyte** » Fri 19 Sep 2008, 06:18

I don't find a lot of talk about 64 bytes & x2 cores which are slowly but surely taking over from 32 as 32 did from 16bytes. I don't have an awful lot of time but i've been looking into it a little bit & soon i hope to look a big bit more.
it IS t-he futre & we mustn't forget it.
by the way, the guy who talked about Puppy for the blind or half blind like me has a super idea.
why not make an SFS?
sorry Barry not dictator anymore, sad news, but tje progress goes on... &on...

Ciao amigos, see you soon...

Ray MK · #34 Post by **Ray MK** » Sat 04 Oct 2008, 10:37

Hi

That might be why BK was considering compatibility with Intrepid
recently - it would allow puppy users access to app's in much the same
way that 3.01 does with slackware.

The latest Muppy is an outstanding example of what can be achieved.

So why not?

We will have to see if we can get Barry sufficiently fired up
to want to do it all again for us.

Or at least to give us a starter in the appropriate direction.

We might then be in a position to finish it here as we do with
existing Puppies.

As always - best regards - Ray

cb88 · #35 Post by **cb88** » Sat 04 Oct 2008, 14:36

raffy I set up this sourceforge account not diciple... so if anyone wanted access they would need to PM me

(old)Puppy Linux Discussion Forum

(old)Puppy Linux Discussion Forum

Puppy's Future

name for 3.x

progess progress