Auto-build a Puppy iso; single script with optional gui

[wiak]

Hi phil

Thank you for the information/situation about the old unmaintained version of rox_config; that I didn't know about.

I do know that the rootfs-packages.conf currently generated by makepup (assuming no other provided) does not produce correct file - but that's because the code it uses is in fact pretty much straight from woof-CE but from the time makepup was first created around two years ago. The issue I raised on woof-CE github concerned the change in woof-CE to that part of the code (pop-up gui for selecting rootfs-packages). As I said in the issue I raised, I do not think the current code is correct because it forcibly over-writes all no|pkg_name entries in DISTRO_PKGS_SPECS with a 'yes'. I understand from what you say, yes is not good for root_config, but that otherwise does not change my point about that pop-up code in 3builddistro-Z. My plan was to fix the similar code in makepup function with the more recent woof-CE code, but since I do not agree with that codes logic I won't be changing makepup with it. Alas, yes, that does mean makepup cannot get that rootfs-packages.conf autogenerated correctly in this situation, but I leave that problem now for others to deal with, should they so care.

Many thanks anyway for your comments and guidance.

wiak

[666philb]

hi wiak ,

even though wdlkmpx's commit for bionicpup has fixed that build for your script. both xenialpup and tahrpup do not have an entry for rox_config in their DISTRO_PKG_SPECS and so your script will fail until it writes a correct rootfs-packages.conf. rox_config is a non issue as that it easy to set to yes as default in your script for all pups.

your real issue is whether jwmconfig & ptheme are set to yes or no and for that you can blame me
if it's one of my pups they need to be set to no and other pups set to yes.
everything else can safely be set to YES

[wiak]

Yes I agree with what you say, but there shouldn't be such a problem at all if whatever the distro builder arranges to be yes or no in DISTRO_PKGS_SPECS was correctly honoured by woof-CE code (and in that situation yes I would be updating the relevant function in makeup itself to do the same job). Yes I was tempted to use current woof-CE logic for generation of rootfs-packages.conf in makeup function, but not when that code overwrites no entries in DISTRO_P_S file. Up to someone else now.

If DISTRO_P_S had no for jwmtheme or whatever, then that shouldn't be overwritten by 3builddistro-Z code. Sorry, tricky typing cos on small android tab just now. Thanks again

[666philb]

woofce does detect if options is set to yes in DISTRO_PKG_SPECS pburn,jwmconfig etc and then unchecks it in the popup & everything not in DISTRO_PKG_SPECS is set to yes.

[wiak]

woofce does detect if options is set to yes in DISTRO_PKG_SPECS pburn,jwmconfig etc and then unchecks it in the popup & everything not in DISTRO_PKG_SPECS is set to yes.

Oh well, I must have got that bit wrong. The builds/testing took so much time on my limited hardware/wifi. I was also particularly aggravated after these days by what I considered condescension of the respondes I received when posting issues on woof-CE github. I've been working with this and pups more generally and Linux in general long enough not to appreciate condescension in any shape or form. Anyway, doesn't matter now since I'm not involving myself with makeup or woof-CE any more. I have tons of other interests and demands that I need to get on with and wish to do.

Thanks for the post though.

wiak