(old)Puppy Linux Discussion Forum

SneekyLinux reviews Tahr 6.0.5 64bit ... 5 out of 5 (but did note problems with installing nvidia and pulseaudio). Also outlines (near the end of the longer than his usual videos) a possible £100/$120 hardware shopping list that could go well with Puppy.

rufwoof wrote:SneekyLinux reviews Tahr 6.0.5 64bit ... 5 out of 5 (but did note problems with installing nvidia and pulseaudio).

I do not understand mother tongue english. I have to say that I have had success using pulseaudio in tahr64:

http://www.murga-linux.com/puppy/viewto ... 004#957004

Allthough it is only for testing purpouse.

Anyone having problems with SFS-Load unloading everything after restart?
Any fix?

jangelelcangry wrote:
> Anyone having problems with SFS-Load unloading everything after restart?

Are you using tahrpup64 6.0.6? If so, I am afraid, the problem occurs under certain conditions.

> Any fix?

Are the extra sfs's put in the psubdir?
Then how about putting them outside the psubdir?

As another fix, shinobar proposes sfs_load-3.0.3.pet
http://shinobar.server-on.net/puppy/opt ... -3.0.3.pet

It will load the sfs's which are in the psubdir.

Anyone having problems with SFS-Load unloading everything after restart?

Is restart a reboot of the computer or just a restart of SFS-Load?

thinkpadfreak wrote:
Are you using tahrpup64 6.0.6? If so, I am afraid, the problem occurs under certain conditions.

Yes.

thinkpadfreak wrote: Are the extra sfs's put in the psubdir?
Then how about putting them outside the psubdir?

I don't know what psubdir is but what I know is that the SFS Files are loaded from root directory.

bigpup wrote: Is restart a reboot of the computer or just a restart of SFS-Load?

It's a reboot after saving the session, rebooting again, running bugfix and installing DevX or other SFS from quickpet or downloading them from ibiblio.

All additional sfs packages need to be located in /mnt/home.
The programs that load and unload additional sfs packages expect them to be in that location.
So, /mnt/home is the place to put them.

Why?
/mnt/home is outside of the Puppysave.
The sfs packages are just on the partition, not inside a directory.

So, put all the additional sfs packages in /mnt/home and see if you are still having problems.

bigpup wrote:All additional sfs packages need to be located in /mnt/home.
The programs that load and unload additional sfs packages expect them to be in that location.
So, /mnt/home is the place to put them.

Why?
/mnt/home is outside of the Puppysave.
The sfs packages are just on the partition, not inside a directory.

So, put all the additional sfs packages in /mnt/home and see if you are still having problems.

They are already on /mnt/home. I always place them there in case I delete the save session ( e.g. FGLRX breaks the system)
when you install an SFS from quckpet, the SFS files are sent directly to /mnt/home and when you load them from another directory SFS-Load will ask you to move it to mnt/home.

What format is the partition Tahrpup64 6.0.6 is installed on?
Are you using a save file or save folder?
How much memory in computer?

Anything you may have done just before having this sfs load problem?

SFS Load is working OK for me.

Note:
I am using a different kernel source, because I changed kernel to one different than what comes in Tahrpup64 6.0.6
I have it using kernel 4.9.15.

bigpup wrote:What format is the partition Tahrpup64 6.0.6 is installed on?
Are you using a save file or save folder?
How much memory in computer?

Anything you may have done just before having this sfs load problem?

EXT4
Save folder
HDD: 50.5/55.9GB
RAM 8GB 7.75GB according to htop
other than format the partition and start over again nothing.

If you are willing to do it.

Reformat to EXT3.
Install Tahrpup.

EXT4 has had issues recently in some Puppies.
Depending on what program you used to do the format.
There is now a 64bit EXT4.
Puppy can only 100% handle 32bit EXT4.

EXT3 has never been a problem.

bigpup wrote:If you are willing to do it.

Reformat to EXT3.
Install Tahrpup.

EXT4 has had issues recently in some Puppies.
Depending on what program you used to do the format.
There is now a 64bit EXT4.
Puppy can only 100% handle 32bit EXT4.

EXT3 has never been a problem.

So, gparted's uses the 64-bit ext4. I'll try it and post what happens soon.

Hi jangelelcangry,

I think you've misunderstood bigpup. Puppies can read drives formatted as 64-bit Ext4. However, grub4dos can not boot from them. IIRC, if you use gparted under Tahrpup to format a drive as Linux Ext4, gparted will format it as 64-bit Ext4. Puppies can read it, but not boot from it. Which is why bigpup suggested that you format it as Linux Ext3.

If I've understood these, Linux Ext3 is "limited" in that it can not support a drive exceeding 4 Terabytes, https://www.redhat.com/archives/ext3-us ... 00001.html, while 32-bit Linux Ext4 can support drives up to 16 Terabytes and 64-bit Ext4 can support drives up to 1024 Petabytes. One Petabyte equals 1000 Terabytes. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petabyte.

Also, bear in mind that the above 16 Terabyte limit applies only if it is managed as an entirety. Although I'm not aware of any, there may be partitioning applications which can divide a 32 Terabyte drive into two 16 Terabyte partitions, four 8 Terabyte partitions, etc.

Considering how many Linux users not running an internet server will have a need to access a drive exceeding 16 Terabytes, I have to wonder why the creation of the 64-bit Ext4 format is the result when Ext4 formatting is chosen? Maybe it's not? Maybe gparted run from other operating systems provides a choice? But gparted under Puppies doesn't.

mikesLr

mikeslr wrote:I have to wonder why the creation of the 64-bit Ext4 format is the result when Ext4 formatting is chosen? Maybe it's not?

Puppies create 32-bit Ext4, command line and GParted. It's usually other newer distros like Ubuntu 17 or Debian 9 that create 64-bit Ext4.(unless that is overridden with -O ^64bit)

mikeslr wrote:Hi jangelelcangry,

I think you've misunderstood bigpup. Puppies can read drives formatted as 64-bit Ext4. However, grub4dos can not boot from them. IIRC, if you use gparted under Tahrpup to format a drive as Linux Ext4, gparted will format it as 64-bit Ext4. Puppies can read it, but not boot from it. Which is why bigpup suggested that you format it as Linux Ext3.

If I've understood these, Linux Ext3 is "limited" in that it can not support a drive exceeding 4 Terabytes, https://www.redhat.com/archives/ext3-us ... 00001.html, while 32-bit Linux Ext4 can support drives up to 16 Terabytes and 64-bit Ext4 can support drives up to 1024 Petabytes. One Petabyte equals 1000 Terabytes. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petabyte.

Also, bear in mind that the above 16 Terabyte limit applies only if it is managed as an entirety. Although I'm not aware of any, there may be partitioning applications which can divide a 32 Terabyte drive into two 16 Terabyte partitions, four 8 Terabyte partitions, etc.

Considering how many Linux users not running an internet server will have a need to access a drive exceeding 16 Terabytes, I have to wonder why the creation of the 64-bit Ext4 format is the result when Ext4 formatting is chosen? Maybe it's not? Maybe gparted run from other operating systems provides a choice? But gparted under Puppies doesn't.

mikesLr

Oh. Sorry for the typo. I understood that bigpup said that Tahr works with ext3 rather than ext4, It was just a typo. When I said I'll try that I meant To format to EXT 3 and re-install. Sorry for the confusion that this caused.

I have been running this version for some time with no problems until recently I was forced to kill a page and when I rebooted the screen resolution had changed. With my monitor the resolution has been 1600+900 and it has now changed to 1152+864 and only lower resolutions available on the Xorg video wizard. This resolution is very unsatisfactory as everything is elongated .
Any help would be appreciated.
Regards Dennis.

dalderton wrote:I have been running this version for some time with no problems until recently I was forced to kill a page and when I rebooted the screen resolution had changed. With my monitor the resolution has been 1600+900 and it has now changed to 1152+864 and only lower resolutions available on the Xorg video wizard. This resolution is very unsatisfactory as everything is elongated .
Any help would be appreciated.
Regards Dennis.

Try going to setup/graphics,screen/screen resolution (xrandr)
when you see the resolutions overwrite the one highlighted for your desired resolution.

In my previous post I suggested that running gparted on Puppies and formatting a partition as Ext4 would create a 64-bit Linux Ext4 partition from which Puppies couldn't boot. jd7654 corrected me. My comment was based on the problem Woodlark reported, http://murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic. ... 862#964862. Woodlark: "I am trying to do a frugal install of Tahrpup 6.0.5 to a Dell Precision 690. I reformatted the partitions (ext4) and wiped the previous boot record (there are no other OS's). I used the Universal Installer and the Grub4Dos wizard (chose all defaults)." From which I assumed Woodlark had done that running Tarhpup from a DVD or USB-Key. Woodlark never responded to my question as to whether the partition had previously been formatted using a different Linux; and I would have assumed that reformatting it and removing the mbr under Tahrpup would have eliminated any problem which could have been caused by a different Linux's formatting.

jd7654 appears to be correct. To find out if I could duplicate the problem Woodlark's experienced, I did the following:

Booted into LinuxMint Sara (64-bit) and formatted a USB-Key to Linux Ext4. Rebooted into Tahrpup 6.0.5. Used its gparted to reformat the Key to Ext4. Copied the following from tahrpup 6.0.5 onto the USB-Key: initrd.gz, vmlinuz, puppy_tahr_6.0.5.sfs and zdrv_tahr_6.0.5.sfs. Installed grub4dos to the USB-Key allowing it to create a menu.lst there.

Rebooted the computer with the key plugged in; USB-ports having boot priority. Tahrpup booted to desktop without incident.

I'm not sure why Woodlark had a problem -- what he didn't do, or didn't do correctly. Note, I didn't think of installing Linux Mint's grub to the Key until I wrote this, and I hadn't "wiped the previous boot record", other than that which might have occurred by gparted's reformatting and grub4dos's over-riding of any prior boot record. But Tahrpup seems to be able to format partitions as Ext4 and use them as its boot partition.

mikesLr

[/quote] I tried that but the Xorg wizard is not showing "xrandr" for whatever reason and it doesnt work.
Regards Dennis
It appears on further research that xrandr is present but when I opened it in the terminal it quoted 1152*864 0.0* as the maximum available. This is not the case as I have been using this program for many months at 1600*900 without problems intil the previously mentioned page kill after which it reverted to 1152*864 Very odd.
Thanks anyway Regards Dennis..

dalderton wrote:I have been running this version for some time with no problems until recently I was forced to kill a page and when I rebooted the screen resolution had changed. With my monitor the resolution has been 1600+900 and it has now changed to 1152+864 and only lower resolutions available on the Xorg video wizard. This resolution is very unsatisfactory as everything is elongated .
Any help would be appreciated.
Regards Dennis.

I am going to guess how Tahrpup is installed.
Frugal using a save file or folder.

Resolution setting 1152+864 is not any kind of normal setting.

What have you been using for graphics driver?
What is the graphics hardware?
Tahrpup is installed on what storage device?
Formatted to what format?

I was forced to kill a page

Details???
This could be a big clue as to what happened.

You could be dealing with failing graphics hardware.
Corrupted format (file system)
Corrupted save file or folder.