(old)Puppy Linux Discussion Forum

What is it?

5.x Alpha 7
Upup Alpha 7, Upupto Alpha7, Kennel Alpha7, Woof Alpha 7, Jaunty Alpha 7

Barry and Tronkel have both called it Woof Alpha 7 and Technosaurus too - even though that is the Build system

If 5.x Alpha 7= Woof Alpha 7
we can change logos etc - not going to set up a committee or have a poll - if there are no objections

5.x = 'Woof'

Puppy Evolves (see next post for Bugmans 'creationist inspired' comments)

when a dog evolves, it becomes a cat, right?

jaunty meow!

Thanks Bugman

When I was a kid I believed cats and dogs were the same species
(a sort of generic pet) with cats being female and dogs male . . .

Lobster wrote:Thanks Bugman

When I was a kid I believed cats and dogs were the same species
(a sort of generic pet) with cats being female and dogs male . . .

They are they same thing.

Dogs have 4 legs. My cat has 4 legs; therefore my cat is a dog.

In Formal Logic classes it's a frequently quoted example of spurious logic.

While I can see the attractions of continuing the Puppy name - continuity principally - what about a different animal that's also small, fast and fearless. How about "Mongoose"?

roVer

chi chi wa wa

[don't ask]

Lobster wrote:Barry and Tronkel have both called it Woof Alpha 7 and Technosaurus too - even though that is the Build system

This is confusing. We had most people understanding that Woof was the build system to replace Unleashed. Barry et al now calling upup-Alpha by the Woof designation is a misnomer IMHO.

Kennel was also a bit misleading, since it alluded to the flexibility of Woof in building many puppy versions; but we were trying to identify the single version designated Puppy-5.0 (upup).

Maybe we should get more innovative and call the 5.x series "PUG" - Puppy Ubuntu Generic - to distinguish it from other Woof-bred puppies in the new Kennel? Small, pugnacious and ready to take on the big dogs but really a lapdog at heart? A bit like the original Puppy really... and the Puppy logo is pretty Pug-looking, don't you think?

"PUG" - Puppy Ubuntu Generic

That works well.

Does that make the open Suse one Puppy on open Suse - POOS?

Yes - it is confusing.

Personally I have long wished that people would always use the 3-digit code, e.g. "4.2.0" as a bulletproof way of identifying versions. (Hmm, herding cats?).

'PUG' has immediate appeal - at first sight - but really I'm not sure anything is gained by adding names to the numbers, except perhaps to extend the scope for confusion in the future. Just f'rinstance, the 'Ubuntu generic' tag might be ok right now .... but in due course Jaunty => Karmic, could the result be one name for two versions? Please, not that!

This has had me confused just lately. Any further builds will rapidly escalate the numbers.

My own opinion is we stick with something easy to glance at and gather info.

So, Woof would be the build system, currently Woof 7.

An iso build identified as this :-

example: apup-272

This would break down as follows:-

apup = arch puppy build

2 = second option in Woof for the kernel build. (3 options in Woof 7)
7 = Woof 7 version build
2 = apup version 2 (i.e. updated from first apup build)

At a glance it is easy to see how the iso is composed and upon what it is based.

If Barry were to publish with Woof the option numbers, then it's easy to see on what it is based.

Currently Woof 7 has 3 options for kernels.

(From hazy memory, info not to hand)

1 = 4.1.2 kernel
2 = woof 1 kernel
3 = ticks, uni-processor kernel

Should Barry decide on smp kernel then this is given it's own option number, say (4) in Woof 7.


Seems logical. It's what I thought Barry had already proposed.

If I'm wrong, "I'll get me coat"

Rob

dogle wrote:'PUG' has immediate appeal - at first sight - but really I'm not sure anything is gained by adding names to the numbers, except perhaps to extend the scope for confusion in the future. Just f'rinstance, the 'Ubuntu generic' tag might be ok right now .... but in due course Jaunty => Karmic, could the result be one name for two versions? Please, not that!

The only thing to be gained by adding names is to make it easier to promote to refugees. It does nothing for devs or regular users. We don't call 4.x "Dingo" in regular usage either, but it served to convey the "wild and free" ethos around 4.x series when it was created alongside 3.01 Slackware compatible.

The thing with Woof builds is they aren't based on the core of Ubuntu but are made compatible with the packages AFAIK. That means to me that regardless of how often Ubuntu upgrades its core and renames the release, the packages will still be available to Puppy upup. I'm sure Barry will correct me if I'm wrong about that. There would be little point in gaining binary compatibility with a single Ubuntu release, IMHO. Those are guaranteed to change every 6 months!

Why not K9 (canine)...

It denotes a well trained dog that is very capable...
and expected to perform and function even in stressful situations...

Also, there are several breeds that are used in the role!...
(the breeds could relate to...Arch,Slack,Deb,Ubuntu,etc.)

The K could refer to Kennel...if you like...

SouthPaws wrote:Why not K9 (canine)...

YES, Yes, yes! Great name. And you'd get the attention of all Dr Who? fans around the world.

Why not K9

I'm sure Lobster would like it...

Seriously though, Barry only called woof "woof" for the sake of a name, and yes, originally it was the name for the build system. Looks as though Barry will have to rename his build system, .."crossbreed"???

The build system has taken a back seat while Barry is focussed on 5.

Cheers

The latest Xbuntu is called "Jaunty Jackalope".

We need a "Jaunty Puppalope" to chase down that rabbit.

Hello,

Mixed Unbutu / Puppy Package Enhancement Technology
A M.U.P.P.E.T.....(I vote for Animal..)...Oh,...Wait...
We`d get sued over that one huh??.......Darn...

OK, well, I like the numbering / lettering system, and the K-9 thing...so,
Puppy Linux K-9 ?

K-9-A....Archpup
K-9-D...Debianpup
K-9-S...Slackwarepup
K-9-U...Unbutupup
K-9-P...Puppy.....

OK, so the last one might not work... , But then again....

"What are you running on your computer?"
"K-9-P".....

If not, that might be my next Puplet...

puppyluvr wrote: Hello,

Mixed Unbutu / Puppy Package Enhancement Technology
A M.U.P.P.E.T.....(I vote for Animal..)...Oh,...Wait...
We`d get sued over that one huh??.......Darn...

OK, well, I like the numbering / lettering system, and the K-9 thing...so,
Puppy Linux K-9 ?

K-9-A....Archpup
K-9-D...Debianpup
K-9-S...Slackwarepup
K-9-U...Unbutupup
K-9-P...Puppy.....

OK, so the last one might not work... , But then again....

"What are you running on your computer?"
"K-9-P".....

If not, that might be my next Puplet...

Lol!

I like K9 more than PUG. Pug is like, lacking something.

IMHO.

i like this from tasmod

An iso build identified as this :-

example: apup-272

This would break down as follows:-

apup = arch puppy build

2 = second option in Woof for the kernel build. (3 options in Woof 7)
7 = Woof 7 version build
2 = apup version 2 (i.e. updated from first apup build)

At a glance it is easy to see how the iso is composed and upon what it is based.

although, now we are past alpha9 and the last few releases had dates in the title to differentiate the version.
i really like incorporating the kernel version into the number scheme. as for the letters at the front.....apup spup and dpup are pretty straight forward.

"What are you running on your computer?"
"K-9-P".....

No, it's what Operating System are you running your computer on?



scsijon