Puppy Linux Discussion Forum Forum Index Puppy Linux Discussion Forum
Puppy HOME page : puppylinux.com
"THE" alternative forum : puppylinux.info
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

The time now is Wed 01 Apr 2020, 14:16
All times are UTC - 4
 Forum index » Advanced Topics » Cutting edge
Saluki, Puppy Remastered
Moderators: Flash, Ian, JohnMurga
Post new topic   Reply to topic View previous topic :: View next topic
Page 21 of 24 [351 Posts]   Goto page: Previous 1, 2, 3, ..., 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24 Next
Author Message
technosaurus


Joined: 18 May 2008
Posts: 4878
Location: Blue Springs, MO

PostPosted: Wed 24 Nov 2010, 16:32    Post subject:  

I don't want to get _too_ far out in the weeds, but as long as gtk apps are linked with --as-needed and -lgtk-x11-2.0 (without explicitly linking its direct dependencies), the linker does a good job of resolving symbols. Most distros do some version of this even though the various autotools make it somewhat difficult. (harfbuzz in pango would be an example of something that _might_ break if all symbols are resolved at compile time and there are version mismatches)

In other words if you just use the auto*... and pkgconfig defaults then some libraries will be "NEEDED" unnecessarily as demonstrated by
Code:
objdump -x <program>
Presumably this would be for static compilation, but then they fail in the other direction (by missing some dependencies on a static compile).

If you instead tell the linker to just link to gtk and let the dynamic linker load its dependencies on the fly, there is typically no problem and you counterintuitively end up with faster load times (unless you plan to recompile binaries everytime a single library changes)... and since you are worried about mixing stuff from other distros, I'd say chances are good that things will change regularly.

Now that everyone is thoroughly confused by my admittedly unintelligible rambling, I am headed home for Thanksgiving for 4 days.

_________________
Check out my github repositories. I may eventually get around to updating my blogspot.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website 
big_bass

Joined: 13 Aug 2007
Posts: 1742

PostPosted: Mon 29 Nov 2010, 14:02    Post subject:  

Quote:
I'm not trying to start something, I just want to see puppy stay at its objectives from series 1-4. Keep a small distro and a small memory/cpu footprint. I will help with packages etc, as long as I have a basic compiling environment.
ttuuxxx


this is in line with personal goals of updating glibc ,compiler and kernel and all packages without "woof" (if the current puppy devs use woof I dont blame them but they wont learn about really making a linux distro that way just running a few scripts and sorting out a few needed packages and it dosest prove they could build anything without the help of automated scripts hard but true ) then there is a pre woof step all the binaries that were compiled by T2 before they get into woof I dont see anyone addressing that issue when T2 packages will need another upgrade in the future
or just being able to do that step


maybe I am crazy after all I could just do an another update of TXZ but the future apps will need an updated glibc Confused I started the work of splitting packages for a test build this is not a rush job
I dont care how long it takes but I do care about doing it right

I'm not trying to start something either linux keeps improving either you keep up with it or you dont depends what you want to be doing in the next few years so far Im still having fun Very Happy

another main goal is removing all the smoke and mirrors so in the end
myself and others will learn something that will be more valuable than just a version number how to survive in the real linux world

Joe
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
technosaurus


Joined: 18 May 2008
Posts: 4878
Location: Blue Springs, MO

PostPosted: Mon 29 Nov 2010, 15:12    Post subject:  

big_bass wrote:
maybe I am crazy after all I could just do an another update of TXZ but the future apps will need an updated glibc Confused I started the work of splitting packages for a test build this is not a rush job
I dont care how long it takes but I do care about doing it right
... Joe
I have been using glibc-2.12.1 with a -Os patch (and a couple sed scripts to force the issue) that I derived from the commit that broke -Os, but have just been using the default values for glibc and kernel version compatibility. Should these be set to an early version to keep better compatibility with existing binaries or disabled altogether for the smallest, fastest code. (Note that including earlier versions _ADDS_ workaround code => larger,slower)

btw I prefer busybox tools and simple slackware style packages (if only busybox had squashfstools I'd be set)

... to download a list of user selected packages (using short options, but busybox wget doesn't have -B or -i options)
with wget-FULL this could be
wget -c -t 0 -B $MIRROR -i packages_selected.txt

but with busybox wget:
for package in `cat packages_selected.txt`; do wget -c $MIRROR/$package; done

The big difference is that the busybox code will require much less modification if you need to add mirrors, packages,chksum validation etc... and it works with wget-FULL as well.

but it is not always the case that busybox versions requiere the extra code
... to install a .txz, busybox will autodetect the compression type now:
tar -xf /path/to/package.txz -C /
#works for tar.gz tar.bz tar.xz tar.Z tar.lzma (regardless of file extension)
#thus saving a nest of case statements if you support multiple types

The simpler the better. I try to avoid optimization that comes at the expense of simplicity if it can be avoided.

The more complexity that gets added, the harder it is to maintain/fix (such as supporting 10+ different install methods that you don't personally use ... or 100 languages that you don't speak, or 1000s of hardware that you don't have)

_________________
Check out my github repositories. I may eventually get around to updating my blogspot.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website 
jemimah


Joined: 26 Aug 2009
Posts: 4309
Location: Tampa, FL

PostPosted: Mon 29 Nov 2010, 16:56    Post subject:  

I say we go for fast and small and not worry about binary compatibility. We've got enough people interested in compiling packages, I don't think it'll be a huge problem.

I also strongly agree with "the simpler, the better".
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website 
Iguleder


Joined: 11 Aug 2009
Posts: 2031
Location: Israel, somewhere in the beautiful desert

PostPosted: Wed 01 Dec 2010, 05:31    Post subject:  

jemimah wrote:
I say we go for fast and small and not worry about binary compatibility.


You're my hero Laughing

Puppy is a top-ten distro, it doesn't need binary compatibility. It's a nice bonus feature, though.

_________________
My homepage
My GitHub profile
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website 
big_bass

Joined: 13 Aug 2007
Posts: 1742

PostPosted: Wed 01 Dec 2010, 20:35    Post subject:  

Quote:

Puppy is a top-ten distro, it doesn't need binary compatibility. It's a nice bonus feature, though.


reading your link reference from here
http://murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?p=471825

Quote:

It consist of around 90% Debian package, in contrast with other Woof-built puppies. Just for comparison - Lucid Puppy 5.1 consists of around 65% Ubuntu packages. This means its development more is much more future-proof.



hmmm I am some what confussed by these statements use 90% debiain packages and 10 % other packages
then decide it was a nice bonus feature to have binary compatibilty you didnt plan on ?

was binary compatibily an accident in the design process that some how became a nice bonus ?

I agree in what you did and said the second quote
I disagree in what you said in the first quote about not needing binary compatibility

Joe
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
Aitch


Joined: 04 Apr 2007
Posts: 6815
Location: Chatham, Kent, UK

PostPosted: Wed 01 Dec 2010, 22:44    Post subject:  

Techno...

http://lists.busybox.net/pipermail/buildroot/2010-June/035459.html

http://old.nabble.com/-git-commit-master-1-1--squashfs%3A-bump-4.x%2C-add-lzo-support-tt29759963.html#a29759963

Dev: Peter Korsgaard

Any use?

Failing that, maybe contact dev: Philip Lougher for SFS

http://sourceforge.net/projects/squashfs/

http://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=63835&atid=505344

Also, this..

http://lwn.net/Articles/386375/

or this?

http://imrannazar.com/Booting-Linux-from-Flash

TCL seem to be looking at the same path

http://tinycorelinux.com/forum/index.php?topic=6931.0

Let me know if anything is useful...I'm searching blind Wink

Maybe time for some magic?

http://www.sourcemage.org/SourceMage_Wiki

Aitch Smile
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
big_bass

Joined: 13 Aug 2007
Posts: 1742

PostPosted: Thu 02 Dec 2010, 20:52    Post subject:  

Quote:
btw I prefer busybox tools and simple slackware style packages



having slackware package format just makes a "standard"
any linux adminstator would understand

unraveling pets is even a job for us around here that do understand pets for all the different versions of puppy and how many more times could the format change ?


there is a lot of room to strip packages down and separate them too
to build a custom devx

busy box can be customized and features added no problem
only requirerment their is stability being the number one
if it can be added and no loss to stabilty go for it


saying that glibc is compatible with a major distro in no way confines you
any packages could be complied that were needed

as far as cutting down the kernel that depends on what "extra" could be cut out of the kernel simply a lite kernel a generic kernel and a full kernel
all being the same kernel version and install them as packages

for those that have problems with not having enough ram the lite kernel
or the generic kernel dosent have the needed drivers you could just install
the full kernel without rebuilding everything again

Joe
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
ttuuxxx


Joined: 05 May 2007
Posts: 11245
Location: Ontario Canada,Sydney Australia

PostPosted: Thu 02 Dec 2010, 21:40    Post subject:  

I agree with big_bass on the GlibC version matching with a mainstream Linux 100%, As long as we match the GlibC version then user can expand in the future, Look at series 3 when they made k3b work using slackware packages, If there is a will there is a way. But not using the same glibC is just plain dumb. Why take the fun out of it? We aren't talking about the whole backend just the GlibC. Gtk matched version would be nice but really that important. I do know one thing. The latest Gtk that isn't Gtk3 would have to be used, because many of the latest gnome apps, require the latest gtk2 and you can't downgrade the version numbers, I think they added new features in the final gtk2 that isn't found in earlier versions and you get compiling errors when you downgrade version numbers, The latest puppy 5.2 has this issue also, Its gtk2 backend can't compile many of the latest gnome apps, I had to use one or two previous versions before it would compile.
So basically a large distro matching Glibc and latest Gtk2 would give us the largest room to grow.
ttuuxxx

_________________
http://audio.online-convert.com/ <-- excellent site
http://samples.mplayerhq.hu/A-codecs/ <-- Codec Test Files
http://html5games.com/ <-- excellent HTML5 games Smile
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website 
Lobster
Official Crustacean


Joined: 04 May 2005
Posts: 15587
Location: Paradox Realm

PostPosted: Sat 04 Dec 2010, 06:29    Post subject:  

Smile

Programming and system development is about focus.
For a moment let us think wide (a game I play
with my imaginary psychiatric team)

In the future Puppy will be running
on mass market tablet devices
Designing for this eventuality is not easy
as the ARM powered devices are still being
developed.

There are several directions from which this is possible
1. with high debian compatibility in post Lucid 5.2
2. with an intent at this stage of Saluki
3. with the slackware compatibility suggested by Bigbass

We can not develop for what is not yet there
but a puppy nook or similar?

Me want Cool

_________________
Puppy Raspup 8.2 Final Cool
Puppy Links Page http://www.smokey01.com/bruceb/puppy.html Very Happy
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website 
big_bass

Joined: 13 Aug 2007
Posts: 1742

PostPosted: Sun 05 Dec 2010, 16:50    Post subject:  

hey lobster
Quote:

There are several directions from which this is possible
1. with high debian compatibility in post Lucid 5.2
2. with an intent at this stage of Saluki
3. with the slackware compatibility suggested by Bigbass


really what is needed we are doing
and that is trying to find some common ground
this is a process where conflicts do occur


I dont dislike someone for disagreeing with me
or having another point of view

just be clear
make your point and why you think that it is a better option


at least I know where they stand on an issue

but to get any real support or a team going you will have
differences of opinions

the object is to find out on what areas people do agree to
to a step forward

basically its like ok up to here we are working on the same goal
lets try and take another step

you would be surprised to find
some ideas are shared between us all
the hard part is finding out what they are

and communicating them correctly

Joe
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
technosaurus


Joined: 18 May 2008
Posts: 4878
Location: Blue Springs, MO

PostPosted: Wed 08 Dec 2010, 17:59    Post subject:  

so I built the gtk code base and started compiling the "core" apps...

First app = Rox

I thought I did something wrong because Rox was misbehaving even with all available patches, so I started over and tested in quirky/wary - same problems with all versions >2.16.6 (the higher the version the more problems)

Can we all decide to kill Rox as the default and transition to the more actively developed PCManFM in the base?

_________________
Check out my github repositories. I may eventually get around to updating my blogspot.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website 
jemimah


Joined: 26 Aug 2009
Posts: 4309
Location: Tampa, FL

PostPosted: Wed 08 Dec 2010, 18:17    Post subject:  

I definitely think we should try PCManFM as the default.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website 
gcmartin

Joined: 14 Oct 2005
Posts: 6730
Location: Earth

PostPosted: Wed 08 Dec 2010, 18:29    Post subject: PCManFM  

jemimah wrote:
I definitely think we should try PCManFM as the default.
2nd that. Leave ROX as an option for those who want to download it. PC is so far ahead of ROX. If I understand it, it also has simple interface to have installing system apps to extend drop-downs accordingly.

Just my observation.

_________________
Get ACTIVE Create Circles; Do those good things which benefit people's needs!
We are all related ... Its time to show that we know this!
3 Different Puppy Search Engines or use DogPile
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
Aitch


Joined: 04 Apr 2007
Posts: 6815
Location: Chatham, Kent, UK

PostPosted: Thu 09 Dec 2010, 11:07    Post subject:  

A possible option to PCmanFM, maybe because I like tree view/Explorer type view



sorry about the size

http://roland65.free.fr/xfe/

or Double Commander?

http://doublecmd.sourceforge.net/

Aitch Smile
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
Display posts from previous:   Sort by:   
Page 21 of 24 [351 Posts]   Goto page: Previous 1, 2, 3, ..., 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24 Next
Post new topic   Reply to topic View previous topic :: View next topic
 Forum index » Advanced Topics » Cutting edge
Jump to:  

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
[ Time: 0.1051s ][ Queries: 12 (0.0432s) ][ GZIP on ]