Puppy Linux Discussion Forum Forum Index Puppy Linux Discussion Forum
Puppy HOME page : puppylinux.com
"THE" alternative forum : puppylinux.info
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

The time now is Fri 20 Oct 2017, 14:10
All times are UTC - 4
 Forum index » Advanced Topics » Puppy Projects
Fatdog64-710 Final [4 Dec 2016]
Moderators: Flash, JohnMurga
Post new topic   Reply to topic View previous topic :: View next topic
Page 29 of 40 [586 Posts]   Goto page: Previous 1, 2, 3, ..., 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, ..., 38, 39, 40 Next
Author Message
Sage

Joined: 04 Oct 2005
Posts: 5286
Location: GB

PostPosted: Thu 18 May 2017, 13:06    Post subject: T-bird  

Quote:
Is anyone using Thunderbird Version 52.1.0 with Fatdog64_710-Final?

Try Claws instead - more of a generic program, whereas, I've found some versions of T-bird seem to depend on particular versions of Firefox loaded.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
bpuppy


Joined: 25 Apr 2017
Posts: 1

PostPosted: Fri 19 May 2017, 08:05    Post subject:  

@step:

It works great now!

Thanks
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
FanDog

Joined: 25 May 2017
Posts: 17

PostPosted: Thu 25 May 2017, 23:59    Post subject:  

Hello all, great project!

I've posted a few bugs/headaches in the following thread:

http://www.murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?t=110593

Fixed those but now trying to install a more up to date nodejs, it complains that GLIBCXX isn't 3.4.20, when I run "strings" on libstdc++.so.6 the last GLIBCXX goes only to 3.4.19

it comes from the "alien" repo, is there a way to get a quick hack of gcc there just for node? : )

Any suggestions on how should I proceed? Maybe there are other repos?

Thanks!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
step

Joined: 04 May 2012
Posts: 931

PostPosted: Fri 26 May 2017, 01:54    Post subject:  

Hello FanDog and welcome to the forum. I built Node.js 6 snd 7 packages a while ago. Here's a link to my shared folder, help yourself.
link
I prefer loading the Node 6 SFS package rather than installing the TXZ archive permanently, as I need Node only occasionally. I made Node 7 but I don't use it (incompatible with some Node packages).
To make my packages I simply downloaded and re-packaged the files on nodejs.org, i.e. https://nodejs.org/dist/v6.9.2/node-v6.9.2-linux-x64.tar.xz

_________________
Fatdog64-710|+Packages|Kodi|Findnrun|+forum|gtkmenuplus
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
FanDog

Joined: 25 May 2017
Posts: 17

PostPosted: Fri 26 May 2017, 21:20    Post subject:  

Thanks! and thanks for the packages too! : )

So the txz in your drive are unchanged from node's site and then you repackaged with some wizardry? cool! I got the node 7 there, just in case but, I guess 3 is the charm 'cause I tried now and the thing worked:

It wasn't compiling node itself that was problematic, even the "alien" repo's node6 installed ok. But some package inside which was complaining it needed 6.. then got some other errors that suggested even almost a Gig of extra space on the savefile wasn't enough! (it never reached low levels nor got the red warning.. it probably tried to create some huge file there and all the installing was silent about it!)

So I resized it and this time it went through without complaints. (except for deprecated things and, failed, an optional dep) So at least I got it working, so I'm not messing with that house of cards until I absolutely need to update it. :-/

Here's a "bug" I suggest is really dangerous.. I tried to resize the savefile back a bit (gave a lot extra, just to see if that would solve it), almost destroyed the whole thing lol.. great thing I recalled the exact number I typed and the tool managed to force the check (it wouldn't proceed with a manual check!) and didn't halt on the part that it had nothing to do. (the 4k part.. sector size I think.. probably filesystem sectors(size) versus partition size)

I suggest you check for negative numbers there ^__________^' ' ' ' (any way to reduce the size.. safely? hee hee hee)

Speaking of undoing things.. Firefox update warns it may not work from the non-fatdog specific one.. how do I get back to this working version were it not to work?

again, thank you.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
s243a

Joined: 02 Sep 2014
Posts: 649

PostPosted: Fri 26 May 2017, 22:05    Post subject:  

jamesbond wrote:
Glad that it works Very Happy
Sadly, Fatdog is still on DW's waiting list, although it was submitted over 2 years ago ...


It looks like it is on distro watch now but the site seems down so I only found a cached version:https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:YsOTF3BuxXgJ:https://distrowatch.com/fatdog+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=ca&client=seamonkey-a

rankings varying between 164 and 270.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
s243a

Joined: 02 Sep 2014
Posts: 649

PostPosted: Sat 27 May 2017, 01:06    Post subject:  

the iputils package is quite out of date. It looks like you have the 2012 release. This matters to me because I'm trying to use traceroute6 from inside a virtual box. For this to work I need the following option:
Code:

 -I      Use ICMP6 ECHO instead of UDP datagrams.

http://www.manpagez.com/man/8/traceroute6/

which isn't supported in the 2012 release.

I'll try compiling a newer version.

On another note, I've installed the miredo package which gives me IPv6 connectivity when using virtualbox, with networking set to NAT. However, if I put in an internet hostname into the traceroute6 command it tells me the host is unknown. I resume this is because I'm not connecting to any IPv6 name server. I did find a function on fatdog64 called udhcp6. Maybe this tool can connect me to the name server. I wonder if this is similar to dhcpd.

edit: so I looked, at both the official fork, and the unofficial fork as noted on the linux foundations website. In the official fork traceroute6 hasn't been updated since 2012. In the unofficial fork traceroute6 has been updated as recently as one moth ago.

However, the offical fork has something called tracepath6 which has been updated as recently as Jully 2016. Perhaps this is a replacement for traceroute6 in the official fork.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
s243a

Joined: 02 Sep 2014
Posts: 649

PostPosted: Sun 28 May 2017, 01:04    Post subject:  

s243a wrote:


edit: so I looked, at both the official fork, and the unofficial fork as noted on the linux foundations website. In the official fork traceroute6 hasn't been updated since 2012. In the unofficial fork traceroute6 has been updated as recently as one moth ago.

However, the offical fork has something called tracepath6 which has been updated as recently as Jully 2016. Perhaps this is a replacement for traceroute6 in the official fork.


I tried compiling the unofficial fork at it didn't support the -I option either. However, I noticed that the BSD version does:
https://github.com/freebsd/freebsd/blob/master/usr.sbin/traceroute6/traceroute6.c

I tried replacing the BSD version of traceroute6 in the unofficial for in iputils. I didn't have the header as.h

https://www.gnu.org/software/binutils/
https://github.com/freebsd/freebsd/tree/master/contrib/binutils/gas
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_Assembler
https://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/X86_Assembly/GAS_Syntax

fatdog actually has the program "as" it is just missing the c header.

I'm not actually sure that there is anything wrong with the traceroute6 that comes with fatdog64 because it worked for google.com. However, the -I syntax was helpful for the IPv4 version of traceroute, so I think I'll continue with my mutant BSD fatdog experiment.

Some more notes:
I coppied the following two files into user/include:
/gas/as.h
/include/alloca-conf.h

alloca-conf.h is asksing for config.h

AA bit of research tells me that config.h was removed from the linux kernal.

So I'll try commenting out that statment in alloca-conf.h and see what happens.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
step

Joined: 04 May 2012
Posts: 931

PostPosted: Mon 29 May 2017, 12:34    Post subject:  

FanDog wrote:

I suggest you check for negative numbers there ^__________^' ' ' '

Thank you, noted.
Quote:

(any way to reduce the size.. safely? hee hee hee)

I've never done this, but I guess you could use file copy, simply drag-and-drop files from a larger savefile to a smaller one. Let's call them old-large.ext4 and new-small.ext4. old-large.ext4 exists by definition in some folder. Reboot with savefile=none as a kernel boot line option. Open a rox window in the folder where old-large.ext4 is located, usually /mnt/home - you'll need to dig around your discs until you find it. Click the old-large.ext4 icon. It should open in a new rox window and reveal its contents. Select the new rox window and press ` (backtick), which opens a terminal window in that folder. Type "df -hs ." and note the size you get. Don't do anything else in this window nor in the rox window. The number you noted is an estimate of the minimum size the new-large.ext4 savefile will need to be. Close the terminal and click again the old-large.ext4 icon, which closes its corresponding rox window. Close the initial rox window then shutdown. When Fatdog prompts you for savefile options create the new-small.ext4 savefile. Now reboot with savefile=none again, open a ROX-Filer window in the folder where you saved the two savefiles and click the two savefile folder icons, which opens their contents in two new rox windows. You can copy files between the two windows. When you're done don't forget to click the savefile icons to unmount the savefiles. Again, I've never done this, but conceivably it should work. I have no experience with encrypted savefiles. I don't know if this procedure would work in that case.
Quote:

Speaking of undoing things.. Firefox update warns it may not work from the non-fatdog specific one.. how do I get back to this working version were it not to work?

If you want to experiment with different programs and be able to go back to a known state you could either boot with different throw-away savefiles, one for each experiment, or you could use a single savefile but run your experiments in sandboxes. Try sandbox.sh or rw-sandbox.sh in a terminal window. I think sandboxes are also discussed in the Fatdog64 FAQ (included in the Help system).

_________________
Fatdog64-710|+Packages|Kodi|Findnrun|+forum|gtkmenuplus
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
FanDog

Joined: 25 May 2017
Posts: 17

PostPosted: Mon 29 May 2017, 19:43    Post subject:  

Thanks. It should work.. I'll take a rest from the risk for the moment tho Smile

> sandbox

cool! okay, it asked me which sfs to load.. It can't find node though. I loaded your .sfs (version 7), it can't find outside of the sandbox either (where does it go?)

soo.. assuming something writes to a system directory, only the sandbox would see it?

I uninstalled node version 4.3 (by gslapt) btw. If I could find v7 I could symlink to it...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
step

Joined: 04 May 2012
Posts: 931

PostPosted: Tue 30 May 2017, 01:12    Post subject:  

It asks which of the currently loaded SFS files you want to be able to access from within the sandbox. Untick the ones you don't want. Pre-load the ones you want and leave them ticked.
This kind of sandboxing is based on the chroot command: man chroot.
GUI isn't available from within the sandbox. There's another kind of sanbox, {rw-}sandbox-lxc.sh which allows for GUI interaction (in a sandboxed display).

_________________
Fatdog64-710|+Packages|Kodi|Findnrun|+forum|gtkmenuplus
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
smokey01


Joined: 30 Dec 2006
Posts: 2649
Location: South Australia

PostPosted: Tue 30 May 2017, 03:01    Post subject:  

step wrote:
It asks which of the currently loaded SFS files you want to be able to access from within the sandbox. Untick the ones you don't want. Pre-load the ones you want and leave them ticked.
This kind of sandboxing is based on the chroot command: man chroot.
GUI isn't available from within the sandbox. There's another kind of sanbox, {rw-}sandbox-lxc.sh which allows for GUI interaction (in a sandboxed display).


@step, I usually just type xwin in the sandbox terminal and get the full x window environment, or is this something different.

_________________
Software <-> Distros <-> Tips <-> Newsletters
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website 
s243a

Joined: 02 Sep 2014
Posts: 649

PostPosted: Tue 30 May 2017, 09:07    Post subject:  

smokey01 wrote:
step wrote:
It asks which of the currently loaded SFS files you want to be able to access from within the sandbox. Untick the ones you don't want. Pre-load the ones you want and leave them ticked.
This kind of sandboxing is based on the chroot command: man chroot.
GUI isn't available from within the sandbox. There's another kind of sanbox, {rw-}sandbox-lxc.sh which allows for GUI interaction (in a sandboxed display).


@step, I usually just type xwin in the sandbox terminal and get the full x window environment, or is this something different.


Well....if you try to use this procedure to build a package you might end up with a bunch of files that you don't need for the pet....although I haven't tried this so perhaps I'm wrong. Maybe the trimfat toll will remove the junk.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
FanDog

Joined: 25 May 2017
Posts: 17

PostPosted: Tue 30 May 2017, 20:56    Post subject:  

Yes but I can't seem to find node 7. Neither in or outside the sandbox.

Once it's loaded, shouldn't it be added to /usr/bin or somewhere in the path?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
step

Joined: 04 May 2012
Posts: 931

PostPosted: Wed 31 May 2017, 01:23    Post subject:  

@FanDog, it works for me, see the transcript below, which also exemplifies a potential pitfall, links. The symlink "inspect-process" is broken, because it points outside the sandbox. That's by design. From within the sandbox you're seeing the link name file "inspect-process", but you're forbidden to see its target, "/mnt/D/usr/..." because the mount doesn't transfer into the sandbox.

Something like that could be the cause for a sandboxed shell not to find a command, like typing "node" and getting a "node isn't a valid command" in response. Try "readlink -f /usr/bin/node" and you should get "/usr/bin/node" back.

Code:

# load_sfs.sh --load node-7.3.0-x86_64-1.sfs
# sandbox.sh  # accept all ticked SFS items

Starting sandbox now.
sandbox# which node
/usr/bin/node

sandbox# ls -l /usr/lib/node_modules/
total 0
lrwxrwxrwx  1 root root  48 Dec 24 00:38 inspect-process -> /mnt/D/usr/lib/node_modules/inspect-process
drwxrwxr-x 11 root root 421 Dec 20 20:34 npm

sandbox# exit
exit
Leaving sandbox.

_________________
Fatdog64-710|+Packages|Kodi|Findnrun|+forum|gtkmenuplus
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
Display posts from previous:   Sort by:   
Page 29 of 40 [586 Posts]   Goto page: Previous 1, 2, 3, ..., 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, ..., 38, 39, 40 Next
Post new topic   Reply to topic View previous topic :: View next topic
 Forum index » Advanced Topics » Puppy Projects
Jump to:  

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
[ Time: 0.0678s ][ Queries: 14 (0.0083s) ][ GZIP on ]