We have two installers and very good they are too (Dotpups and Pupget)
(the long term aim is for them to merge)
Am I right that the slackware depository of programs might be eventually available to Puppy?
Would something like this work now that the usr directory is writable?
http://autopackage.org/download-tools.html
My first experience of Linux was downloading Netscape and then finding I needed extra libraries (which I had to put in the correct place)
It put me off for a few years. Yuk I say - yuk.
Things are better now.
We have in Pupget a comprehensive list (too many Distros allow the installation of everything - much of which is not worth the time for ordinary users)
So this is a tentative suggestion - do we actually want to become more able or tied in with another distros download depository?
Which package management/depository to use?
Re: What to download?
It seems to me that the free software community is based on cooperation, not competition. While a little friendly rivalry and competition is probably a good thing, wouldn't it become counterprductive if it turns into rejecting a good idea just because someone else thought of it first?Lobster wrote:We have two installers and very good they are too (Dotpups and Pupget)
(the long term aim is for them to merge)
Am I right that the slackware depository of programs might be eventually available to Puppy?
Would something like this work now that the usr directory is writable?
http://autopackage.org/download-tools.html
<>
So this is a tentative suggestion - do we actually want to become more able or tied in with another distros download depository?
(Pardon me if I sound like I think I know what I'm talking about. It is just my general opinion, and not meant as an endorsement of the depository Lobster mentions.)
an autopackage is an executable file with a compressed archive attached
it does not execute properly in Puppy for 2 reasons: 1) you need bash, not ash 2) you need the real gnu-utils, not busybox's substitutes
so having bash will not make autopackages work
it would be possible to write your own autopackage handler to basically duplicate the autopackage program (it would be a lot of work)
many autopackages still would not work, because the package would expect that certain library files and utilities and programs that most distros have would be installed ... and Puppy would not have them
package management usually requires an archive of packages specificially made for that particular distro
an alternative to package management is ZeroInstall (sort of automatic package management on a file by file basis ... if you need a particular file like an executable or a library file, that file is automatically downloaded to your hard drive, where it will be available next time you need it)
it does not execute properly in Puppy for 2 reasons: 1) you need bash, not ash 2) you need the real gnu-utils, not busybox's substitutes
so having bash will not make autopackages work
it would be possible to write your own autopackage handler to basically duplicate the autopackage program (it would be a lot of work)
many autopackages still would not work, because the package would expect that certain library files and utilities and programs that most distros have would be installed ... and Puppy would not have them
package management usually requires an archive of packages specificially made for that particular distro
an alternative to package management is ZeroInstall (sort of automatic package management on a file by file basis ... if you need a particular file like an executable or a library file, that file is automatically downloaded to your hard drive, where it will be available next time you need it)
- Lobster
- Official Crustacean
- Posts: 15522
- Joined: Wed 04 May 2005, 06:06
- Location: Paradox Realm
- Contact:
Party animal
I fully approve of the slackware direction. It is said that a slackware Linux users can use other distros, because they become command line gurus. Mark Tyler is a smart cooky and so is G2 (GuestToo) I like to hang out with smart people (it might rub off)BarryK wrote:Yep, we should cooperate wherever possible!
How can we develop this element of cooperation? Partly I feel it is in recognizing the strengths and achievements of other distros and applying their lessons.
There are a lot of easy installers arriving for Linux (we have two of our own) but I wonder if one area of cooperation amongst the smaller distros might be a common depository?
For this we need . . . a party . . .
Hey maybe Puppy Power should send out some invites? Who is a party animal?
I am just an animal . . .