Puppy 4.12 won't boot

[ecomoney]

Ok BruceB! Shields up....here we go!

@ drjdahman....dont be alarmed - this is how things get done around here

I was referring to the lines in the standard menu.lst that are created by grubconfig. It requires manual text file editing to enable it to correctly boot. I believe they are stored in that program somewhere...however this is not the main point I wish to make.

A bug by my definition; is when a program or routine
behaves other than how the programmer intended it
to behave.

The intentions of the "programmer" (in this case Barry Kauler) were made plain when he wrote the Mission Statement (in full here). Point 1 (the first one) reads....

Puppy will easily install to USB, Zip or hard drive media.

OK..."easily" is a subjective term......who should it be easy for? Point 5 of the Mission statement reads

Puppy will be extremely friendly for Linux newbies

and point 8 states

Puppy will just work, no hassles

Ok...According to the programmers intentions, the "Program" (Puppy Linux) should be able to be installed onto a hard drive easily by someone with no experience of Linux, without any hassles. Is this the case?

Heres what happens if you type "Puppy Linux" into google...google has a nifty little "autocomplete" feature that links to pages that contains terms which include the terms previous to it. Heres a screenshot...



Ok...would there really be that many entries in google (most of them tortuous walkthroughs) if Puppy Linux was actually "easy to install by Linux newbies with no hassles"?

I did have a whole bunch of screenshots of the Puppy Universal Installer and the Grub Config Manager....a gauntlet of linux-specific terminology, laced with double lockouts, linux-guru knowledge assumptions, config file editing, un-demountable drives, dead ends, etc etc, but I must go out now and simply dont have time to prepare them all. Mapping it all out, with the usability issues highlighted would take me a day at least, if not longer.

The fact is, Puppy Linux isnt "easy to install by Linux newbies with no hassles". If you doubt that, sit down with a "linux newbie" and watch them try. I had had 20 years of computing experience with windows, (15 of it at a professional level) when I first tried to install puppy linux (1.09ce) to a hard drive of a computer, and it took me a week of hard mental graft to figure it out the first time. The installer hasnt changed since then.

Compare puppies installation method with the Ubuntu one.

Conclusion

Its a bug because the installer doesnt work how the programmer intended...

"EASILY"!

Ok....so what to do about it?

The installer needs a complete re-work from the ground up, focused not on grubs, MBR's, partitions and menu.lst's, but on how the user wants his computer to behave, according to the level that they (the "linux newbie") understands it. This would propel Puppy Linux further away from being a useful utility disk/linux demo towards a fully fledged linux distribution more useful to its (very large) target audience.

I am happy to work designing the user interface/background processes of this project, but I would be unable to complete it on my own as I do not possess anything but the most basic level of Bash/GTK coding skills.

This will bring far more people away from Windows and into using free software than any kernel update

Who's up for it?

Woof Woof!

[Bruce B]

Ecomoney,

I'm not 100% right now. Maybe not even 90%.

However, I still want to acknowledge your reply.

I ask if we can be on the same page about the
definition of a software bug? Such as, using a
respectable authority for the definition.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_bug

Maybe we can discuss the Mission Statement
separately. It's, well like I said, just not 100% right
now. I hate it when that happens, good creative
writing is too hard to muster up at the moment.

Soon, I hope.

Regards,


Bruce

[ecomoney]

Thank you Bruce for getting back. I hope you feel better soon.

Maybe Im still a little tetchy from all the 4.2 shenanigans recently.

Yes, there is a literal "bug", and something that technically "works" which needs improvement.

At the end of the day.....

Something that doesnt work - and something that cant be worked, amount to the same thing IRL.

[Aitch]

Rob/Bruce

Rather than hijack drjdahman's problem thread, can you start a separate thread on this topic, I'm sure others will find it really interesting, if you go into some depth of the meaning of language, as in common understanding 'from different sides of the pond'

It can be a noob deterrent, IMHO, & I know you wouldn't wish that......

Aitch

[Bruce B]

Rob/Bruce

Rather than hijack drjdahman's problem thread, can you
start a separate thread on this topic, I'm sure others will
find it really interesting, if you go into some depth of the
meaning of language, as in common understanding 'from
different sides of the pond'

It can be a noob deterrent, IMHO, & I know you wouldn't
wish that...... :wink:

Aitch :)

What advice is missing which drjdahman didn't receive?

Based on the information presented, I don't think anyone
withheld advice. If what was offered didn't help, he can
update us and ask for more. Also, he didn't complain, he
thanked (many thanks).

Last he wrote was: "I will try. Many Thanks."

[Bruce B]

Ecomoney emphasized item 8 of Puppy's goals.

Will just work, no hassles

If this goal were reasonably accomplished, how is it a
newbie's install will not even boot?


Ecomoney revises the statement in a post to read, emphasis
his . . .

...the "will just work, no hassles" objective is
a work-in-progress!

Falling short of accusing Ecomoney of Polly Anna, I refute
wording in the revision. I will discuss it with Ecomoney in
another topic and forum, for benefit of Aitch, only if
Ecomoney wishes.

But not on off-topic, because this is directly related to
Puppy. Ecomoney has my PM.

Dealing with reality

Here is a very typical and predictiable situation.

• * Windows XP or Vista
  * One NTFS partition
  * User wants to install Puppy to co-exist with Windows on
  the only available partition.
  * naturally, it must boot

Anyone up to explaining how to do this?

Anyone (apologists included) up to explaining how to do
this in the context of - "will just work, no hassles".

[Aitch]

Bruce

Having said you aren't even 90% just now, I think you've taken me wrong

I didn't say drjdahman didn't receive advice

Nor did I say 'on off-topic', as I agree with both you & Rob 'because this is directly related to Puppy'

In my memory, Bruce, you were an early help to me, despite our having had later differences of opinion, so my post was not intended as a downer, which you appear to take it as, sadly

All I'm saying is, it just needs its own thread to do the topic 'Puppy Justice' IMHO

& I know it's a contentious issue, but I do have painful memories of not getting on the net from 2 years ago when I first discovered Puppy 2.14 as the best & friendliest Linux yet!

I too, think it's a shame we still have these issues....

both Puppy.... & apparently, you & I

& I've answered publicly here, because I don't think it right to hijack threads, especially noobie ones, as it puts the noobie in the position of complainer, as you suggest, which is neither 'healthy', nor 'desirable' in forum etiquette terms,.... IMHO!

Aitch

[Bruce B]

Aitch,

The title of the topic is Puppy 4.12 won't boot

No offense to Brian's excellent website

The Lin'N'ProjectNewB Project

Puppy is a fairly mature distribution and very
popular. It has Frugal Install options for NTFS and FAT.

Of course it can boot after the install, for this reason,
Puppy doesn't need the help of unaffiliated websites over
which it has no control.

If what I just in the above paragraph is true and it
certainly should be, you are fairly right - no discussion in
order. The reason why is Puppy just works and certainly
isn't dependent on outside help to pick itself by the
bootstraps.

If the paragraph is not correct, I think there is a horse in
the corner.

Not everyone wants to see it, but if someone talks about
the horse, reprimands single, duplicated or insanely
redundant are not appreciated, to state it lightly.

~

[Aitch]

Bruce

No offence intended on my part, and despite your 'No offense [sic] to Brian' jibe, the noobie post, drjdahman, actually starts,

Hi. I followed all the steps from icpug.org.uk

So my response is ON topic

YOUR preference that he/she doesn't use it, "as Puppy doesn't need the help of unaffiliated websites over which it has no control",

is irrelevant, in the circumstance, & unhelpful to the original noob poster

Just another opinion, not a helpful solution, don't you see?


Move over, horse, Bruce is going to join you!

Aitch

[ecomoney]

Yes, a revised installation method would be the subject of another thread...not in the Beginners Help section.

Would be better to let the newbies think were a professional company or something for a while longer SHHHH!!!!!

Re: ...the "will just work, no hassles" objective isa work-in-progress! ", those were Barrys words...perhaps he meant we were to continually work on it "Just Working".

Just a little note though IPUG has discovered a way to the XP bootloader (ntldlr) to offer a menu of puppy or XP!!!!!

This way it matters not they have hijacked the boot sector of the hard drive....we can still "head them off at the pass". Being able to "repair" an (probably broken) xp installation without having to reformat/lost data would be Puppies most popular trick yet...I hope he gets back to us soon about it.

[verynewtopuppy]

hello!

i have the same problem.

1. i boot the gparted live cd and formated the complete hdd. then i create a partition in ext3 (600mb) and another in swap linux (200mb) (yes this hdd is very small)

2. i booted the puppy cd and installed puppy and grub with the puppy installer (full install). (i used the guide from this site)
(grub was successfully installed)

but when i reboot, my pc give me a message that there is no bootable disk or something else. even when i manually choose the hdd.

is the use of gparted live cd the mistake or could something else be the mistake?

sorry for bad english

[Bruce B]

Ecomoney,

A new topic? How about the users forum?
pay-per-view on HBO, proceeds to Puppy title . . .

Ecomoney verses Bruce
a bare fisted fight to the finish

Or no pay-per-view

Polly Annas rumble
18 ounce gloves and headgear, five rounds

Or

Sweetness and Light
an honest intellectual discussion

Or

Heaven Bound
Join us in prayer circle

OR?

Bruce

~

[ecomoney]

Bring it on!

Any discourse will ultimately be constructive (apart from perhaps the last one)

[drjdahman]

I'm getting there. Everytime I fix a glitch I get a new glitch. Now it's not finding the pup sfs file despite being there! I'll keep working at it. Any suggestions will help. I love Linux, if I can get it working! MY previous experience was with linux mandrake. It was awesome. Your discussions and feedbacks are very helpful. Thanks to all you guys.

[Bruce B]

Here is what I'm presuming

Windows XP
Puppy installed on Windows partition
pup_412.sfs inside /puppy412 directory (or similar)

If true and only if true

Copy pup_412.sfs also to C:\ (two copies)

===============

If it doesn't find pup_412.sfs, consider:

Posting back with plenty of details
and / or
consider the 'retro' version

[drjdahman]

linux puppy rocks!