Should I (and How to) Convert from Full to Frugal install?

[222fbj]

I did a full install of lupu525 on a 16gb SSD (dell inspiron - mini laptop w/1gb Ram). It works but as I try to customize a few things (I am a noob so this means following posts/instructions) I find myself getting lost in the 'full install' files/dirs.

I am now thinking a Frugal install would be better - and would like advice. I would like to boot from the internal SSD without a usb stick or cd. And use all of the 16 gb for Puppy/user data. My SSD is now partitioned with a 250mb swap drive (that never seems to be used) and the rest is ext3 for puppy. I have already installed many apps, a few themes, made a few desktop mods, etc. and want the new/frugal install to use them.

• Can I backup /mnt/home/lupusave.3fs and lupu_525.sfs; wipe the disk and do a frugal install; then restore to convert from full to frugal?
  Can the Frugal install to the SSD? Which install option for Frugal/SSD install?

thanks

[Béèm]

If you have a lupusave.3fs, you already have a FRUGAL install.

[mill0001]

222fb, If you have a lupu_save file on there you already have a frugal install. Just use gparted to set boot flag on it and install grub4dos.

@Beem, Sorry about that you posted while i was writing my post. lol

[darkcity]

....(I am a noob so this means following posts/instructions) I find myself getting lost in the 'full install' files/dirs.

You will see the same file and directory structure on frugal/full in the filer windows.


The difference is on frugal these files are actually stored and compressed within the files:-

puppy_version.sfs (os files)

and

pup_save.Xfs (modifications, additions and personal files)

plus other .sfs file you install.



where as on a full install the files are not compressed and are as you see them in the filer windows.

[ronron29]

I am thinking of the same thing (also did a full install).

Are there any advantages in a full install?

[rhadon]

Asking about full install vs. frugal install is like asking which browser is the best?

Both have advantages and disadvantages. I for myself prefer frugal ( used full only one time, a long time ago). I think, more people are using frugal than full (but that's not proofed).

The concept of a save file is not so common in the linux world and you have to learn, what fills up your save file (it's not a good idea, trying to save a 2GB video in your smaller save file) and how to save something outside. It's not so complicated but you need to know. At this stage ( at last in general) it's a good idea to have a actual backup of your save file. If something goes wrong, you restore just this file and everything is fine again.

With a full install you don't have this problem because you don't have a save file.

With a full install you can only install one puppy on one partition.

With frugal you can install as much puppies in one partition as you have space. Each puppy in another folder.

A frugal install uses much less space because the files are compressed.

Other advantages, it's easier to install/deinstall pets and using sfs files. Also it's easier to make backups.

Maybe one steps in who prefers full installs?

HTH

Rolf

[ronron29]

I have used puppy before (4.something or earlier) and I understand the advantages of the save file.

I used to boot puppy on my flash drive back then (because I had a hard time making a full install).

So aside from not having corrupted save files & running out of space in the save file, are there any other advantages in a full install?

Calling all full install fans!