(old)Puppy Linux Discussion Forum

I made an extra 50 gig partition on my SSHD laptop. I have Tahrpup 64 and Windows 10 but I would like to add another pup. I used xenial the last year or so but Id like to try something different. Very minimalistic. Needs to surf the net, get pics off my camera and save a word document on a rare occasion. Anything else is not needed.
So pick me a puppy if you would and I will take it for a test drive.

If Xenialpup worked OK.
I suggest Bionicpup64 8.0
Any of the newer Puppies, listed in the Projects section of the forum.

the computers specs will help.

8 gigs of RAM, 250 gig solid state hard drive, Intec core i7 processor. Dell Latitude E6510

Hi J_D.

As for me, I'm a big fan of josejp2424's work: I find his DPupBuster-7.9 fabulous. Very
polished; the most recent in a long line of Pups he has published. It's a true Debian Pup,
so it's extremely stable. With a touch of originality! It's here.

Enjoy!

@ J_D_:-

I'll agree with bigpup about Bionicpup64 8.0. I've just set up a new install of this on the big old Compaq desktop (circa 2004), and it is running as sweet as a nut, yessirree.

I'd tried the 'beta' of 7.9.3 last year, but deleted it in favour of Xenialpup64 7.5. I thought I'd give it another look, now that it's reached full 'stable' release status, and I'm suitably impressed with it. I like to run several items as AppImages; last year's 'beta' had 'issues' with some of them, but those issues now seem to have been resolved. Nice.

Not really surprising, in view of the combined efforts of Phil Broughton and our usual, dedicated crew of enthusiastic 'testers'!

I would hazard a guess that if your hardware can run Whinedoze 10, then you'll have no issues with Bionic64.....and the LTS-based Pups just do seem to be more stable, once 'sorted'.

Just my 2¢, FWIW.....


Mike.

The thing, J_D_, is that nobody build " Very minimalistic" Puppies for powerful computers. Kind of like putting a small foot into a big shoe.

But if that's what you want, maybe precise-lite, http://www.murga-linux.com/puppy/viewto ... 58#1024458.

musher0 wrote:As for me, I'm a big fan of josejp2424's work: I find his DPupBuster-7.9 fabulous [...] a true Debian Pup, so it's extremely stable. With a touch of originality!

I couldn't agree more I began using it 'cause I needed a good 64bit Pup and it didn't disappointed. Now it's my only OS. 100% recommended.

OK guys, thanks for all the ideas. I got a deal on this laptop. A lot of good stuff for not much money. I think in the next couple days I will loads some ISOs on a flash drive and test them out. I will report back.

With your specs, you could upgrade to Bionic if you like but it won't be any better than the Tahr you have now, just heavier.

nic007 wrote:With your specs, you could upgrade to Bionic if you like but it won't be any better than the Tahr you have now, just heavier.

Totally wrong!
Bionicpup64 8.0 has very much in it that is not in Tahrpup64.
There has been improvements made!!!
Plus a lot of newer updated programs, newer support files/programs, improvements to how Puppy operates, etc......

bigpup wrote:

nic007 wrote:With your specs, you could upgrade to Bionic if you like but it won't be any better than the Tahr you have now, just heavier.

Totally wrong!
Bionicpup64 8.0 has very much in it that is not in Tahrpup64.
There has been improvements made!!!
Plus a lot of newer updated programs, newer support files/programs, improvements to how Puppy operates, etc......

Improvements like what to make it better? Newer versions of older applications are not necessarily better either, it often is not. Besides, if you have an older machine, Bionic is too heavy.

J_D_ wrote:OK guys, thanks for all the ideas. I got a deal on this laptop. A lot of good stuff for not much money. I think in the next couple days I will loads some ISOs on a flash drive and test them out. I will report back.

@ J_D_:-

TBH, with any kind of query like this, you're going to get a whole heap of different opinions.

"How long's a piece of string, then?"

Bigpup appears to like, and always recommends, the very newest Puppy (regardless of how 'heavy' it might have become). Nowt wrong with that. To a lot of people, newer is ALWAYS better; better for being newer, for having improvements, better security, better implementations of things.....

Nic007, on the other hand, has, I think, always been a fan of Puppy's original principle;"Keep it small, keep it light". Keep it as tiny as you possibly can while still retaining full functionality. Plenty of people here would also agree with him.Diff'rent strokes for diff'rent folks...

Many will recommend their personal favourites. It's a case of 'chasing your tail' with Puppy, because there's so many different spins, variations, re-masters, re-hashes, etc. Almost every other week, there's a new 'Puplet' showing up on the Forum.

What do you do?

All you really can do is to follow your own statement, above; download a bunch, and try 'em out. It's down to you, at the end of the day; nobody else really knows just what will 'float your boat', do they?

(*shrug*)


Mike.

bigpup wrote:Totally wrong!
Bionicpup64 8.0 has very much in it that is not in Tahrpup64.
There has been improvements made!!!
Plus a lot of newer updated programs, newer support files/programs, improvements to how Puppy operates, etc......

Aye, I'll not deny it 's the culmination of a long line of steady improvemenets over the last several years. But bigpup; let's be real about this. It's an operating system, for God's sakes. It's not a matter of life & death, now, is it?

Full credit must go to Phil and all our Puppy 'testers', of course, yet it's not exactly the 'be all & the end all'.... I'm as big a fan of Puppy as you are, mate, but it's hardly the centre of my universe (even though I do spend quite a bit of time helping out on the Forum).

Ah, don't mind my 'rambling'. I'm turning into an old fogey, I reckon.....


Mike.

Mike Walsh wrote:

bigpup wrote:Totally wrong!
Bionicpup64 8.0 has very much in it that is not in Tahrpup64.
There has been improvements made!!!
Plus a lot of newer updated programs, newer support files/programs, improvements to how Puppy operates, etc......

Aye, I'll not deny it 's the culmination of a long line of steady improvemenets over the last several years. But bigpup; let's be real about this. It's an operating system, for God's sakes. It's not a matter of life & death, now, is it?

Full credit must go to Phil and all our Puppy 'testers', of course, yet it's not exactly the 'be all & the end all'.... I'm as big a fan of Puppy as you are, mate, but it's hardly the centre of my universe (even though I do spend quite a bit of time helping out on the Forum).

Ah, don't mind my 'rambling'. I'm turning into an old fogey, I reckon.....


Mike.

All I can say is that I also have Bionic on my machine. Not using it as it does not add anything extra to my Puppy experience in terms of functionality for my specific personal needs. I can say that it runs slower on my machine than older Puppies and in my case I also experience some graphics issues. So no, in my case not better. But, people with new machines will probably want to try the latest Puppy and I don't have a problem with that.

@ Nic:-

In all honesty, I only have a couple of the newest Pups on this 15-yr old Compaq to 'keep a weather eye' on developments. Yes, it's 64-bit, but it's extremely early, first-gen silicon. Despite being a 64-bit dual-core, your average Atom would, IMHO, run rings round it and trip it up at every opportunity.....

Even so, it's built like a brick outhouse, and is as reliable as they come. And many of the older 5- & 6-series Pups absolutely fly on here, in addition to doing everything I want from them. Which is why I run so many of them.

However, you know I'm not concerned about space & size.....and you know all about the size of my save-files!


Mike.

One specific version of Puppy Linux will not support every possible computer
Never has and never will!!

That has always been why there are several Puppy versions to choose from.

Mike Walsh wrote:@ Nic:-

In all honesty, I only have a couple of the newest Pups on this 15-yr old Compaq to 'keep a weather eye' on developments. Yes, it's 64-bit, but it's extremely early, first-gen silicon. Despite being a 64-bit dual-core, your average Atom would, IMHO, run rings round it and trip it up at every opportunity.....

Even so, it's built like a brick outhouse, and is as reliable as they come. And many of the older 5- & 6-series Pups absolutely fly on here, in addition to doing everything I want from them. Which is why I run so many of them.

However, you know I'm not concerned about space & size.....and you know all about the size of my save-files!


Mike.

My laptop is 13 years old. There is a notable deterioration in performance using Puppies newer than Puppy 6 series. It's not bad but one notice the "heaviness". As for size - why should I use an operating system on my machine which is twice as big, does not offer more functionality and has worse performance? Does not make sense to me.

bigpup wrote:One specific version of Puppy Linux will not support every possible computer
Never has and never will!!

That has always been why there are several Puppy versions to choose from.

Does the latest Puppy support the very latest machines, hardware and software?

BTW, Mike. I know you have experimented quite a bit with regards to upgrading glibc in older Puppy's. What is the impact of these upgrades in terms of performance?

I guess another option is the fact Puppies allow kernel swapping so using an older kernel can be an option if you want the newer glibc and programs. This worked for me.