What about multi-user support in HD install?

[Bancobusto]

Look here, I don't mean to upset anyone by making this observation.

Because the real " i d e a " behind Puppy, as far as I can tell, is to be an awsomely fast, just frickin'wicked live-cd (and more), I understand that there isn't a whole lot of interest in creating a regular user account that one could log into. I get it. In most cases, the worst that could happen is that one would have to delete their pup001 file, reboot, and reinstall any apps that they couldn't do without. Not an incredibly horrible ordeal for most, as the installation takes - what? - 3 minutes?

In no way to detract from the philosophy that I percieve behind this, I am really excited about the idea of having Puppy be my #1 OS. The only things that are lacking for me at this point are:

1; The ability to play movies full-screen

2; The ability to have a small child slam the keyboard like a little monkey without fear of them messing up any important config files (I'll be honest, I'm talking about myself haha).

The last time that I used DSL (about 2 months ago, right around the time that I found Puppy!) I tried a hard-drive install. Even though It didn't meat my needs anywhere as well as Puppy at this point in it's development does, I really liked the fact that in it's install to hard drive script, it asked if I wanted to enable multiuser support.

Couldn't this be reasonably easy to do with the Puppy install script?

Just an idea,

Cheers

[GuestToo]

1) the mplayer dotpup plays movies full screen on my machine

2) X runs ok as user spot, except rxvt won't run ... rxvt might run if it were setuid root, i haven't tried it yet

most of the problems running as spot (or any user name) would be permissions ... permission to mount/unmount drives ... permissions to write to mounted drives ... permissions to write to my-documents ... PupGet and dotpups would probably need to run as root, to be able to write to /usr