If this goes through at woof-CE, let Puppy die.

[musher0]

Hello all.

This (click on the blue word) is of grave concern to me, and I think that
it should be for all Puppyists as well.

Which is why I am opening this thread in the "Announcements" section.

The title of that "commit" at woof CE is:
"init: refuse to load pupsave if WOOF_VERSION differs"

This means that any old pupsave you may want to incorporate to a new
Pup will be rejected. This, in my mind, is a Stalinian move. It will also
prevent devs from using a pupsave created with dd etc, to be used as an
assistant in the development of a Puppy -- like I am doing now.

This is very close to a personal attack, to me, but also to Puppyists'
freedom of using their Puppy as they see fit.

I totally agree with peebee's comment at bottom of that page:

peabee commented on 4c4e139 22 hours ago
I am unsure whether this change is in the spirit of Puppy - refusing to load
a pupsave is very draconian.............advice on how to change things if
people do want to take the risk should be provided.........

Puppyists should don their "yellow jacket", go out in the streets and block
highways and roads over this. This is the most serious and dangerous
limitation I have ever seen brought to Puppy in the 10 years I have been
a member of this forum.

In my mind, this makes wdlkmpx, the author of that commit, "Enemy #1"
in Puppyland, the foe to be taken down no matter what.

I am for structure and order in development. However, I am and will
forever be against arbitrary, "committee-driven", development.

If you want to turn people away from Puppy, imposing that limitation on
pupsaves is the way to go. If this goes through, this is the beginning of
the end of freedom in PuppyLand. Mark my words.

Shame on you, "wdlkmpx", for even thinking of such a base and limiting
idea, whoever you may be on this forum.

On the contrary, pupsaves should be made as "universal" as possible,
so they can be portable to any Puppy.

BFN.

[jamesbond]

Have mercy.

I'm not speaking for wdlkmpx, but before making such an uproar, name-calling, and wild accusations, isn't it better for clarifying with him, of the motive why such a move is taken?

I'm pretty sure that he has a reason and an objective why he does that; and once this is made clear perhaps we as a community can offer suggestions on how to achieve the same objective in a better way?

I am for structure and order in development. However, I am and will forever be against arbitrary, "committee-driven", development.

Before anyone blames him for what he's doing, please look at who did the most commits in 2019 and 2018 (and perhaps 2017 as well), here: https://github.com/puppylinux-woof-CE/w ... ts/testing.

If you're all so concerned about Puppy, my questions is "where were you when these commits are made?". Not understanding git and github isn't a good excuse. At the very least, follow the changes and raise issues in github when those changes seems wrong to you. (Or just comment on the commit, like peebee did). Note: to raise issues in github you only need to register for a github account; no "git" skill is required.

Not liking to continue to provide feedback through github isn't an excuse either; it has been agreed that github _is_ where the development happens. Nobody can be expected to scour the forum daily for any random feedbacks from the myriads of puppy variants and figure out how it applies to Woof-CE.

If this is really a community project, then please all contribute. For example, if you don't like this particular change, register a github account, and create a ticket (issue); asking for clarifications. That's how to start a discussion.

I think that's a lot more effective.

[musher0]

Hi jamesbond.

Thanks for responding.

I am a registered member of github but, for the life of me, it is so
complicated to use, I cannot leave a message to anyone, from woof-CE or
any other project.

Another thing is that the woof-CE development forum should be a section
of this forum, so that whatever the members of the development
committee do or "commit" (pun intended), is known by all Puppy users.

Finally, anytime I start developing a new Puppy, complications happen at
the woof-CE level. It's hard for me not to become paranoid or not to take
it personally. There is a known anti-Francophone segregationist on that
committee; he was kicked out of this forum because his remarks against
speakers of my language were so insulting. (I'm telling the truth, you can
track it on this forum.)

Yeah, there is a lack of communications, but whose fault is it? When the
"official" Puppy devs choose to isolate themselves from the regular Puppy
users and take decisions among themselves.

As to your haughty "Puppy users going to the devs" position, instead of
"the devs scouring this forum for new suggestions" position, if you
committee devs are so competent and experienced, it should be almost
nothing for you to invent a targeted search engine, a sort of grep, if you
will, to detect the average Puppyists' inclinations.

As a side benefit, such an adapted search engine for this forum would be
useful to all Puppyists who come here.

For starters, this forum already has a "wish list for future Puppies" thread.

I will re-read your post with a rested head tomorrow, it is getting very late
here. But being emotional is not a bad thing: it is part of being human. In
"emotion", there is "motion": if enough emotion is expressed, it tends to
get things moving.

BFN.

[perdido]

For those that wish to use the same puppy save file across multiple puppy versions.

Are there any system files in a puppy save file that will not install properly if the puppy save file is changed to an sfs file and loaded during boot?

The newer puppy versions implement a save folder, is that going to be affected by the mentioned change?
And if so how, perhaps by only needing to change the name of the save folder?

.

[bigpup]

On the contrary, pupsaves should be made as "universal" as possible,
so they can be portable to any Puppy.

Have you actually been able to do this????

I have never been able to use a save, I made for one named version of Puppy, with another named version of Puppy.
Example:
Save for Slacko 5.7 and use it for the save in Tahrpup 6.0.5.

In fact I made a save for Bionicpup64 7.9.5
I tried to use it in Bionicpup64 7.9.8.
That is normally possible in the same named Puppy.
However not this time.
I could not get it to boot to a desktop using the save.

Why.
The Linux kernel had changed to a different one in Bionicpup64 7.9.8.
All the stuff in the save, that is kernel specific, would not work in this different kernel.
One Example:
The graphics driver was compiled for the wrong kernel.
The save was trying to use the wrong driver, so no graphics.

If you know something about making a save work on many different Puppy versions.
Please provide this information??

I have posted on Woof-CE at Github.
No different than posting on this forum.
Make a personal account.
https://github.com/join
Sign in.
Post where you can in the Woof-CE area at Github.
Here is the comments section:
https://github.com/puppylinux-woof-CE/w ... ts/testing

[Marv]

peebees comment on Github pretty much speaks for me. I do not use savefiles cross-pup, but I do use them over long enough periods of time in the same pup so I probably would run afoul of this. I run a 'scrub' script when I update a save file or swap kernels so I can see a couple of fairly simple workarounds for this there or just run a custom init which I have done in the past, but WHY? Just giving us a nag and a choice to procede if we wish seems adequate to me. I'm no fan of flames but if not for this thread I might have been quite puzzled when I had a savefile update bork because of the commit.

[Smithy]

Might be nice to see some reasoning for commits, maybe something like "Extensive tests have shown that trying to load a pupsave file from another version can potentially bugger up your video resolution" or something.

Outgoing data gui could be a handy addition. There are better tools than Network Information now. Especially if one is using an Alphabet INC Centric browser.

[musher0]

@mfb:
Thank you so much for your archival work. When I start suffering from
Alzheimer's, I'll know who to turn to!

~~~~~~~~~~~~
@perdido:
As you mention, the user can use the technique of converting a pupsave
to say, an adrv. There are scripts to do that lying around in this forum.

Sometimes, though, a Puppy is already taking all the "positions" (adrv,
fdrv and ydrv). Plus, that technique is not "direct". The user has to take
the additional conversion step.

~~~~~~~~~~~~
@bigpup
Thanks for providing examples.

Indeed the pupsave's de facto strong linkage to one pup has been limiting
users' migration to other pups.

We should try to make pupsaves more portable, not more constrained (as
woof-CE developer "whatchamacallit" is presently suggesting).

~~~~~~~~~~~~

BFN.

[rockedge]

I work on the cutting edge
I do use save files across different puppys
I think an explanation is in order from wdlkmpx as to why this is a good idea.

I am against it.

It is limiting and another hurdle thrown in the mix of what is aready a huge collection of Distros that dont do what we need them to do.

So wdlkmpx come out and explain.....or should I track you down?

[musher0]

Thanks for your support, rockedge.
When I want to track a dev down, I put a < tail -1 > on him.

[bigpup]

I work on the cutting edge
I do use save files across different puppys

I would like to know how you are doing this and not having problems??????
Are you saying you have used a save from say Slacko 5.7 and used it in say Xenialpup 7.5?????

[rockedge]

I will run an experiment and see if I can load a slackosave into a Tahr 6.0.6

It works...


I took from a Slacko 5.7.0 that runs well a copy of the slackosave.4fs and copied it to a running tahr 6.0.6 and named in tahrsave2.4fs

I rebooted and at the choice of save file selection I choose the slackosave file
which then will bring a warning that this save file is version something and do I want to upgrade? or boot into RAM. I chose upgrade which after 1 minute finished and the boot sequence completed

I am typing this from the Tahr 6.0.6 with the slackosave.4fs loaded

[foxpup]

I was hesitating at first to post in this topic because it was rather getting emotional at first.
@jamesbond: I certainly hope you did not mean to say that woofCE should not be discussed in this forum.
Most of us do not contribute there because we do not feel apt to. But that does not mean we do not read and try to understand woofCE.
Luckily there are people like peebee who go between.
And I do know and appreciate the work that wdlkmpx does in woofCE. He is by far the leading dev. And I think he is open for discussion too.
Anyway ...

I totally agree with peebee - you could already guess.

I do not think this is a dev's issue, but it is clearly a user's issue.

I've occasionally used a pupsave from one flavor in another.
There are Puppy-users who use the same pupsave for a very long time and are quite good at solving/getting around the obstacles.
For the problem bigpup mentioned, with the graphic driver, I first set vesa before copying the pupsave.


@perdido
A sfs is not a proper replacement for a pupsave. Everything in the pupsave is in the top layer, an sfs is underneath/shines through.

[jamesbond]

@jamesbond: I certainly hope you did not mean to say that woofCE should not be discussed in this forum.
Most of us do not contribute there because we do not feel apt to. But that does not mean we do not read and try to understand woofCE.

It's of course okay to discuss Woof-CE here. But the question is, will it have the impact that you expect? Some devs don't read the forum. Well even Barry, when he was active, didn't scour all of the forum for feedback and bug reports. Somebody needed to bring the news to him. And that is still true today for our Woof-CE devs.

So in this case, isn't it better to alert the devs directly in their lair?

Another thing I want to say: decisions are not made in vaccuum. To understand why things are done in a certain way, we need context. Only after we understand the context then we are properly prepared to make a judgement call whether it is right or wrong; or even better: provide a counter suggestion.

Again I'm not speaking on behalf of wdlkmpx, or for him or against him (or for this particular decision, or against it). But I'm in the Woof-CE mailing list and although most of the time I'm only a passive observer (I have my own Fatdog bugs to worry about), I can definitely say that this decision wasn't made for some sinister reasons; in fact it was made as a response for a certain problem which is very hard to fix properly. So if you think that this is not the best way to do things, please, understand the problem that they face, and then offer something that you think would work better. Eventually a better Woof-CE means better Puppies, for all of us.

[fredx181]

But being emotional is not a bad thing: it is part of being human. In
"emotion", there is "motion": if enough emotion is expressed, it tends to
get things moving.

Just my opinion:
I think being emotional is indeed not a bad thing in general if you share with a person nearby and face to face, but in this context it's not useful at all (the contrary, I'd say).
Calling the person that's doing most of the hard work for Puppy "Enemy #1" is just ridiculous.
How would you feel reading that if you were in wdlkmpx's shoes ?

[musher0]

Hi Fred.

Personally, I'd laugh. It is indeed ridiculous that I have to do this to bring
some devs to their senses.

What you have to understand is that those people are like bosses isolated
in their corner office. They think they are working for the common good,
but they are in fact piling up problems for ordinary users.

They will not pay attention and react unless you do something almost
extreme, like this. Because they are generally water-proof to comments
by us common users.

Best regards.

[tlchost]

They will not pay attention and react unless you do something almost
extreme, like this. Because they are generally water-proof to comments
by us common users.

I have memories of discussions about the isolation of devs....someone even defended them by telling us(paraphased) the devs developed for themselves not the users, and it was not our place as users to request or suggest things of the devs.

I think you've brought up a very important specific issue and by extension a crucial general one.

Thom

[jamesbond]

Wow. Such animosity.

What you have to understand is that those people are like bosses isolated
in their corner office. They think they are working for the common good,
but they are in fact piling up problems for ordinary users.

They will not pay attention and react unless you do something almost
extreme, like this. Because they are generally water-proof to comments
by us common users.

Who are "those people"?
Who are "they"?
Why not just call "them" out by names? There are so many Puppy devs here, we have 666philb, peebee, mistfire, 01micko, gyrog, Geoffrey, wdlkmpx, and so many others. Which ones of these are part of "them", instead of "us"?
What are the "problems" that "they" "pile up"?
How do you know that "they" "will not pay attention"? Examples?
"Something extreme" means insulting them? Calling them names? How do you think "they" would respond?

[bigpup]

Any comments made about anything posted to Woof-CE at Github, will be considered by whoever posted the issue and any others working on the issue.

I have done it and so have others.
There work needs tested, just like a new Puppy version does.

If you think Woof-CE is doing something wrong or something is wrong.
The only way the people actively working to improve the core processes, of Puppy and woof-CE, are going to know about it, is to tell them.

Again register on Github so you can post in the Woof-CE section.
https://github.com/puppylinux-woof-CE/woof-CE

[musher0]

Being labeled "Enemy #1 in Puppy Land at the moment" is certainly not
pleasant, but your personal reputation is not under attack. There is a
nuance there.

It is an opinion made public. That's all it is. That person, in private, may
be the nicest person you'll ever meet.

But the software solutions he is proposing may make your life really
miserable. Was it he who introduced the horrific duplicate vs copy
confusion in the new version of ROX-Filer?

@jamesbond: groups have different personalities and behaviors than
the group members as individuals. Hence the use of the words "they",
"them", and similar.

@all: I'm rattling a cage that needs to be rattled.

@bigpup: I'll repeat: for the life of me, I cannot get to the github forum
and leave a message there, it is too darn complicated. There is no
understandable doc about it to speak of anywhere on that github site.
Sailor Enceladus helped me once to leave a message there, but I never
got an answer. (It wasn't for the woof-CE project.)

Plus: this here is the real Puppy forum. The devs should have antennas
here, not only among themselves.

BFN.