i have 2 pup_412.sfs and pup_save.2fs files in my frugal?

[bugman]

i have 4.12, frugal

i just noticed that in /mnt/home i have a pup_412.sfs and pup_save.2fs

and that in /mnt/home/puppy412 i have a pup_412.sfs and pup_save.2fs

neither of the save files has a date later than january 3, which is odd as i use it every day, and have been changing a lot of stuff . . .

i'm assuming that the ones in /mnt/home/puppy412 are the REAL ones, is that the case?

or do i need the duplication?

and why did it happen?

[i just knew i should have picked the folder option in the install script ]

[rjbrewer]

Bugman

I went quite mad trying to figure this out; has to do with using universal
installer and menu lists with psub directory

PostPosted: Wed 17 Dec 2008, 08:46 Post subject:
I'm no expert, especially when mixing files on USB and hard drive, but I do know this.

It IS possible to have the pupsave in a different place from the puppy_411.sfs file. People have done it on hard drives.

The key is the psubdir parameter (and pdev1 parameter which you don't use). If you use psubdir then Puppy still searches everywhere for Puppy files (which is why you noticed it taking a long time) but then filters the results so only those files in directory /psubdir are recognised. In this case the pup_411.sfs and the pupsave file must be in the psubdir directory - although I wonder if they can be on different devices/partitions as you don't use pdev1.

If you remove the psubdir parameter then no filtering is done and it will find the pupsaves from anywhere including a different place from pup_411.sfs. If there is more than one pupsave file then it should give you a menu so you choose which to use.

There is one slight gotcha with this. If pupsave is in a different place Puppy 4.1.1 insists on making a another copy of pup_411.sfs, even if you tell it not to. This is something Barry introduced in Puppy 4.1.1 to avoid complications running retro and default versions. This was misguided in my opinion!

Looking at you menu.lst it would seem to be taking all the Puppy files, including vmlinuz and initrd.gz from sda5/puppy411. Is this the USB drive? If not, have you also got a USB drive with some/all files located in the /puppy411 driectory of the USB drive.I ask this to try and get some understanding how mixed USB/ide drives can be made to work.


rjb

[rjbrewer]

The previous message was quoted from a post by ICPUG.

If the initial pup save file is made with say, 512 mb; 412sfs is
94mb. So gparted should show a little more than 600 mb used.
Redundant file copies doubles that.

Don't have a clue if it makes any difference.

rjb

[ICPUG]

I can understand the multiple pup_412.sfs files, part of the process I talk about in the clip posted by rbrewer. I do not understand the multiple pup_save.2fs files. These are purely up to you so you must have created 2 copies somehow.

If it were me I would:

(a) make sure my menu.lst file has a psubdir=puppy412 in the kernel line. If not, put it there.
(b) rename those files in /mnt/home so they are not recognised as puppy files.
(c) check that puppy boots up and has all you expect.

If you get to (c) successfully you can delete the renamed files and I don't think they will come back again.

If you don't have success with (c) you can always change the names back on the renamed files and delete those in /mnt/home/puppy412 instead. In this case you need to remove the psubdir=puppy412 parameter in menu.lst

[rjbrewer]

I think the problem I had went like this; used universal installer to do
frugal install, added frugal to mem lst, reboot-do all default save
options, remove cd and try to boot from splash. Doesn't boot-have
to insert cd and go through save options again. Still no boot , but
have twice as many 412sfs and pup save files. (with no pup-saves)
in the sub directory.

To make it work I put the files in subdir manually and delete files
from dir. (/mnt/home)
Or switch to earlier (pre-subdir) menu list and do opposite of
former.

[bugman]

i checked menu.lst and it's all set up for the subdir

so i left that and renamed the files in mnt/home

good thing too, as i had this plan to eventually delete 1.07 from hda1

BUT THAT'S WHERE MY GRUB IS

that would been a big oops, but fixable, will reinstall grub BEFORE i do that



thanks for the help!

[ICPUG]

rjb,

Interesting. I have never used Universal Installer myself. I have a dual boot coexist with Windows system. First of all I wanted to make sure I did not bomb my Windows system so was reluctant to trust scripts that I did not know how they function.

Later, from the comments here on the forum I have never convinced myself that the Universal Installer is fully debugged. It works in most cases but I think there may be some gotchas in certain cases.

I like manual installation. I know what I am doing then and know who to blame!

[rjbrewer]

ICPUG

Apparently, not a lot of people use the installer, or are using the
latest pups yet.

I started using puppy with 3.01 and only used full installs. Installer
worked perfect, no need to edit or even know that a "boot menu
list" exits. That was and still is the type of simplicity many newbies
need. Frugal install really should be that efficient.

rjb

[ICPUG]

rjb

I think you are probably right that the Universal Installer works better and more seamless for full install rather than frugal.

I don't want to get into a discussion on the merits of frugal v. full. Each has their own merits.

The one thing that bothers me with full install when trying to coexist with Windows is the need to partition and where to put the bootloader is fraught with danger of messing up Windows. We have seen cases of this on this forum and I saw lots of cases of it on the Knoppix forum before I came here. The technically competent can sort themeselves out when things go wrong. Newbies cannot - so in this instance I think a frugal install that does not require partitioning or messing with the MBR is better, at least when starting out with Linux and you still need the comfort blanket of Windows. When more experience has been gained and the merits of a full install are confirmed as needed then full install is the way to go.

When the Universal Installer does not find a Linux formatted partition it does not install a bootloader so it is not quite as seamless for the case of a frugal install on a Windows partition.