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 Fri 28 Nov 2014, 18:03
All times are UTC - 4
 Forum index » Advanced Topics » Puppy Projects
Lucid Puppy 5.2.8 - Updated ISO Version 005 - APR 05 2012
Moderators: Flash, JohnMurga
Post new topic   Reply to topic View previous topic :: View next topic
Page 151 of 190 [2845 Posts]   Goto page: Previous 1, 2, 3, ..., 149, 150, 151, 152, 153, ..., 188, 189, 190 Next
Author Message
ICPUG

Joined: 24 Jul 2005
Posts: 1290
Location: UK

PostPosted: Mon 07 Jan 2013, 14:34    Post subject:  

You might like to read this post and those around it:

http://www.murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?p=652119#652119

The discussion spreads over pages 9-11 of the thread and sorta peters out without a definitive answer after rcrsn51 found a solution to his particular problem.

Shinobar makes an interesting contribution in his post of Wed 12 Sep 2012, 22:02.

I think you are being a bit draconian in your last post in suggesting pdev1 or psubdir are not doing the job. I think in certain circumstances you may be right but not in all circumstances. I have a multitude of pups on my PC each in their own (hard drive) subdirectory. I do have sfs files and associated save files in the same subdirectory though. I use pmedia, pdev1 and psubdir for each pup in its own section of the boot config file (I use grub4dos and menu.lst). I don't like putting any pup in the root folder of a partition. So far I have not experienced the conflict you are reporting. I must run some tests and see if I can replicate your problems.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
ICPUG

Joined: 24 Jul 2005
Posts: 1290
Location: UK

PostPosted: Tue 08 Jan 2013, 14:20    Post subject:  

I've run a couple of tests. My current set up has Lupupluslibre and standard Lupu in 2 subfolders of my sda5 partition. Booting each separately I create a file in the home directory to identify which lupu I was in. This was done to be sure I had the correct save file loaded in subsequent tests.

Test 1
I moved lupupluslibre and its save file into the root of sda5 and used the following menu.lst with grub4dos:

##############################################
# GvR Sept 30th 2004
color black/cyan yellow/cyan
timeout=5
default=0

title Default Boot on HD 0
rootnoverify (hd0,0)
chainloader +1
boot

title Lucid Puppy Linux 5.2.8.005 from NTFS sda5
kernel (hd0,4)/lupu5285/vmlinuz PMEDIA=idehd PDEV1=sda5 psubdir=lupu5285 video=640x480
initrd (hd0,4)/lupu5285/initrd.gz
boot

title LupuPlusLibre Linux 5.2.8.005-2 from NTFS sda5
kernel (hd0,4)/vmlinuz PMEDIA=idehd PDEV1=sda5 video=640x480
initrd (hd0,4)/initrd.gz
boot
##########################################

I first booted to Lupupluslibre and because I had not specified psubdir since it was in the root of sda5 it offered me a choice of save files. I chose the lupupluslibre file and it booted fine. I checked for the file in home and I did indeed have the lupupluslibre save file.

I now rebooted and chose to boot standard lupu. According to point 4 of Otropogo's post, Lupupluslibre was going to boot anyway. It didn't. Standard Lupu booted without offering a choice of save files. I checked the file in the home directory and it was indeed the standard lupu save file.

Test 2
I now copied standard lupu to a similar folder on my sda1 partition. Using the following menu.lst:

##############################################
# GvR Sept 30th 2004
color black/cyan yellow/cyan
timeout=5
default=0

title Default Boot on HD 0
rootnoverify (hd0,0)
chainloader +1
boot

title Lucid Puppy Linux 5.2.8.005 from NTFS sda5
kernel (hd0,4)/lupu5285/vmlinuz PMEDIA=idehd PDEV1=sda5 psubdir=lupu5285 video=640x480
initrd (hd0,4)/lupu5285/initrd.gz
boot

title Lucid Puppy Linux 5.2.8.005 from NTFS sda1
kernel (hd0,0)/lupu5285/vmlinuz PMEDIA=idehd PDEV1=sda1 psubdir=lupu5285 video=640x480
initrd (hd0,0)/lupu5285/initrd.gz
boot

I first booted to the Lupu on sda1 and changed the file in the home directory to uniquely identify it with this partition.

I then booted Lupu from sda5 again. It worked and the file in the home directory hadn't been changed so I know I had the right save file.

So Otropogo's point 1 that pdev1 will not determine the partition from which the sfs file is loaded is clearly not true in my setup.

I have also extracted the init file of standard lupu 5.2.8-005 for review. I am going to try to flowchart the 'Finding Puppy Files' routine but as it consists of 8 A4 pages of Barry's bash scripting I may be a little while!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
bigpup


Joined: 11 Oct 2009
Posts: 5396
Location: Charleston S.C. USA

PostPosted: Sat 12 Jan 2013, 16:14    Post subject:  

Seems to me placement of these entries are important. There is a logical order to what they are telling the boot process.
Basically where to look in this order:
PMEDIA (What device).
PDEV1 (What partition).
PSUBDIR (What directory or sub-directory).

I think all three have to be used, in a boot entry, to get the desired results.

This post is a little old, but it basically holds true to how it works.
http://www.murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?t=35003

ICPUG,
You may want to look over this very well written info post.
Thanks for this, Helped me understand in my early days with Puppy.

_________________
I have found, in trying to help people, that the things they do not tell you, are usually the clue to solving the problem.
When I was a kid I wanted to be older.... This is not what I expected Shocked
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
otropogo


Joined: 24 Oct 2009
Posts: 702
Location: Southern Rocky Mt. Trench

PostPosted: Sat 12 Jan 2013, 18:09    Post subject:  

bigpup wrote:
...
This post is a little old, but it basically holds true to how it works.
http://www.murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?t=35003



Thanks for the link. I believe the processes are a bit more complicated then shown, but the post makes a good basis for further testing.

BTW - I've discovered an error in my methodology for determining which sfs was actually loaded (which provided three different desktops, one of which was not what it seemed - lupupluslibre).

It would help if I knew of a quick, simple, and certain way of determining which sfs is loaded (the two I'm using exclusively ant 582_005(standard -129MB) and lupupluslibre (353MB). All I can say for certain now is that when only one partition is automounted (red dot on icon), it means that both 2fs and sfs files were loaded from that partition, and when two are autoloaded, the one that isn't shown as /mnt/home is the one from which the sfs file was loaded.

I have come across at least two more anomalies in my testing - one is that pmedia=atahd , without further arguments, can sometimes result in a boot from sdb1 instead of sda1, even when both have intrd.gz and the sfs file.

I'll try to replicate and further define this later (my scribbled notes have proven inadequate).

The other is that when the sfs file is loaded from a different partition than the 2fs file, both are mounted, the latter as mnt/home, and writable, the former as dev_ro2 and write protected. This makes no sense to me at all, since /mnt/home is always writable when the sfs file is loaded from the same partition.

I have also discovered that pmedia=usbflash psubdir=pupsave results in a failure to find lupu_528.sfs, lockup of the system, even though pusave exists on the flash medium and both sfs and 2fs files are in it.

When pmedia=atahd psubdir=pupsave, OTOH, all pupsave directories on all partitions are shown with their 2fs files, and 528 is found and loaded successfully.

_________________
otropogo@gmail.com facebook.com/otropogo
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website 
otropogo


Joined: 24 Oct 2009
Posts: 702
Location: Southern Rocky Mt. Trench

PostPosted: Sun 13 Jan 2013, 04:14    Post subject:  

Since my testbed seems to behave differently from that of the only other tester reporting, I'll try to limit myself to simply reporting my results, and let the readers draw their own conclusions.

All the tests below were conducted with the standard (129MB) and the(353MB) lupupluslibre Lupu_528.sfs.present. In every test, lupu was booted from a USBflash installation to an SD card inserted in an external card reader on a USB2.0 port.

The test PC has two SATA hard drives, with one partition on each drive, sda1 and sdb1. In this instance, the flash card was also partitioned (unlike the card in the previously reported tests) as sdd1. The last change made no apparent difference to response to the boot commands

The USBflash card had lupu standard and a couple of 2fs files in a folder named pupsave. And the final line of the syslinux.cfg file was edited for the test to read
Code:
pmedia=atahd
. The card was not edited throughout the series of tests, and I put it in write protected. But I forgot unreliability of the locking tab, and didn't check its write protect status. So it is possible that automatic processes were able to write to the card.

Sda1 contained one folder with the lupu standard sfs, and another with lupupluslibre version, and sdb1 contained one folder with lupu standard. Each folder had an initrd.gz file and was capable of loading lupu into RAM.

In the course of the testing, commands were entered at the boot command line and/or the names of the save folders modified, to assess the effects.

It was assumed at the outset that the 528 boot loader would look for and use sfs or 2fs files in priority order of drives (ie. sda1before sdb1) and folders within drives in alphabetical order (ie.sda1\ before sda1\a\ before sda1\b\), but the tests cast doubt on all of those assumptions.

Unexpected results are underlined.

Test 1. lupu std. in sda1/pupsav lupu+libre in sds1/pupsavr lupu std. in sdb1/pupsaveC
booted with
Code:
pmedia=atahd
alone

result: 2fs files in sdb1/pupsaveC offered for loading, on loading, sdb1 automounted, lupu standard loaded

Test 2. repeat of Test 1. no change

Test 3. entered
Code:
puppy pdev1=sda1


at boot command line

result: sda1/pupsav offered for loading, lupu standard loaded, sda1 automounted

Test 4. entered
Code:
puppy psubdir=pupsavr
at command line

result: sda1/pupsaver offered for loading, lupu+libre loaded

Test 5. renamed sda1/pupsavr to sda1/pupsave, booted with
Code:
pmedia=atahd
alone

result: sdb1/pupsaveC offered for boot, lupu std loaded from sdb1

Test 6. repeat of Test 5. Same result\

Test 7. entered
Code:
puppy  pdev1=sda1


at boot command line

result: sda1/pupsav offered for loading, lupu std loaded

Test 8. renamed sda1/pupsave > sda1/pusave528L, sda1/pupsav >sda1/528s and booted with
Code:
pmedia=atahd
only

result: sda1/pupsave528s offered for loading, lupu std loaded

Test 9. reboot with command line entry
Code:
puppy pdev1=pupsave528L


result: sda1/pupsave528L offered for loading, lupu+libre loaded

Test 10. reboot with only
Code:
 pmedia=atahd


result: sda1/pupsave528s offered for loading, lupu std. loaded

NB: this was tried with the two folders renamed variously, always placing the folder with the standard sfs in descending boot order from the lupu+libre one, but the folder with the standard sfs was always selected by the bootloader.

Test 11. renamed the two sda1 folders to sda1/528_1(2) and rebooted with
Code:
pmedia=atahd
alone

result: sdb1/pupsaveC offered for loading, lupu std loaded, sdb1 automounted.

Test 12 rebooted with command line entry
Code:
puppy pdev1=sda1


result: sda1/528_2 offered for loading, lupu std loaded

Test 13. renamed sda1/528_1 > sda1/pupsave, sda1/528_2 . sda/pupsave_2, sdb1/pupsaveC > sdb1/pupsave; copied lupu+libre sfs, 2fs, and initrd.gz to root directory of sda1 and rebooted with
Code:
pmedia=atahd
only

result: sdb1/pupsave offered for loading, lupu std loaded, both sda1 and sdb1automounted, sda1 read-only as /intitrd/mnt/dev_ro2, sdb1 as /mnt/home

Test 14. renamed sdb1/pupsave > sdb1/pupsaveC; deleted initrd.gz and lupu+libre sfs file from sda1\; copied lupu standard sfs and intird.gz from sdd1 to sda1\; booted with only pmedia=atahd

result: sdb1/pupsaveC offered for loading, loaded lupu std from sdb1

Test 15. booted with commandline entry
Code:
puppy pdev1=sda1


result: sda1/pupsave_b offered for loading, loaded lupu std from sda1

Test 16. rebooted with
Code:
pmedia=atahd
alone

result: sda1/pupsave_b offered for loading, loaded lupu std from sda1

Test 17. booted with commandline entry
Code:
puppy psubdir=pupsave


result: both sdd1/pupsave and sda1/pupsave offered for loading, chose 2fs from sda1, loaded lupu+libre from sda1

Test 18. booted with commandline entry puppy
Code:
psubdir=pupsave
again, but chose 2fs file from sdd1, sdd1 automounted as /mnt/home, sda1 automounted as
initrd/mnt/dev_ro_2, both writeable. Not sure which sfs version is loaded, as libre office suite is only shown as a download link in the menu, but when a libreoffice write file is left clicked, it opens in libreoffice writer...

It seems to me that these results differ significantly from the behaviour described in bigpup's link. The 528 loader seems to have a distinct preference for booting the standard sfs, an aversion to sfs in the root directory, and a preference for folders named "pup..." or "save".

There also seems to be some sort of dynamic in which having been forced once to boot in proper drive sequence by
Code:
puppy pdev1=sda1
, it will then do it on reboot without the command.

I trust these notes are detailed enough that anyone with a usb-enabled PC and two hard drives will be able to replicate my tests. My notes got a little messy toward the end, so it is possible that some errors have crept in. I'd be happy to retest any results that cannot be replicated by others on a similarly configured machine.

_________________
otropogo@gmail.com facebook.com/otropogo
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website 
ICPUG

Joined: 24 Jul 2005
Posts: 1290
Location: UK

PostPosted: Mon 14 Jan 2013, 08:56    Post subject:  

Thanks for the info Otropogo and the kind comments on my previous post bigpup.

I must emphasise that the post I wrote before was written after I had flowcharted the init in series 3 pups. Hopefully, all the comments about search not being faster are negated by the init in use today. I think that was one of the reasons Barry undertook to rewrite the search routines.

I can confirm Otropogo's comment that things may well be more complicated now - the init script certainly is - 8 A4 pages of script for finding files and 12 more for loading them!

One significant difference betwen my system and Otropogo's is that I don't use usb installs. Maybe there is something in the current init scripts that is not quite right when usb is used.

I have not read Otropogo's detailed notes fully, yet, but I will make a couple of comments:

Quote:
It would help if I knew of a quick, simple, and certain way of determining which sfs is loaded (the two I'm using exclusively ant 582_005(standard -129MB) and lupupluslibre (353MB).


When I was testing I simply fired up the Word Processor from the desktop icon. If I got Abiword it was standard Lupu. If I got LibreOffice Write it was Lupupluslibre. Also you can have a look at the file:
/etc/rc.d/PUPSTATE

Quote:
The other is that when the sfs file is loaded from a different partition than the 2fs file, both are mounted, the latter as mnt/home, and writable, the former as dev_ro2 and write protected. This makes no sense to me at all, since /mnt/home is always writable when the sfs file is loaded from the same partition.


The only thing that has to be written to is the save file. It makes sense to me that the partition with the save file has to writeable. If the sfs is on a different partition then it seems reasonable from a security viewpoint that this is not writeable.

As you can see from my comment above I have printed the init from Standard Lupu and made a start at deciphering it (with the side effect of finding some debugging boot codes I never knew/forgot about!). if I ever decipher the search scripts we can go through Otropogo's test notes to confirm them. I need to complete the decyphering in order to update that previous post of mine ...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
otropogo


Joined: 24 Oct 2009
Posts: 702
Location: Southern Rocky Mt. Trench

PostPosted: Tue 15 Jan 2013, 16:40    Post subject:  

ICPUG wrote:
..

One significant difference betwen my system and Otropogo's is that I don't use usb installs. Maybe there is something in the current init scripts that is not quite right when usb is used.

...

I have not read Otropogo's detailed notes fully, yet, but I will make a couple of comments:


When I was testing I simply fired up the Word Processor from the desktop icon. If I got Abiword it was standard Lupu. If I got LibreOffice Write it was Lupupluslibre. Also you can have a look at the file:
/etc/rc.d/PUPSTATE


Thanks. My method of simply looking at the start menu for libre office wasn't effective, as when booting with the 2fs file located on the flash card sdd1/pupsave, only the entry "download libreoffice" appeared. But when I opened an rtf file, it used libreoffice writer.

/etc.rc.d/PUPSTATE confirmed that the sfs file in sda1/pupsave was in use.

Quote:
The other is that when the sfs file is loaded from a different partition than the 2fs file, both are mounted, the latter as mnt/home, and writable, the former as dev_ro2 and write protected. This makes no sense to me at all, since /mnt/home is always writable when the sfs file is loaded from the same partition.


I have since discovered that the automounted /intrd/mnt/dev_ro2 file is not always write protected, perhaps even not usually. Unfortunately, my notes don't shed any light on the peculiarities, if any, of the two instances when it was write protected.



Quote:

The only thing that has to be written to is the save file. It makes sense to me that the partition with the save file has to writeable. If the sfs is on a different partition then it seems reasonable from a security viewpoint that this is not writeable..


I don't think it's sensible to write protect an entire partition just because the 2fs file is on it. In fact, it seems to me that the system will not let one edit the copy of the sfs file in memory in any case.

OTOH, this issue prompted me to try as an experiment booting using the 2fs file on the USB flash card with the write protect tab set to lock. Puppy loaded and shut down unremarkably, EXCEPT that the usual message line saying that the 2fs file was already saved didn't appear.

I would suggest that some modidication of the shut-down process would be very helpful for those using usbflash to boot - namely, that the writability of the medium should be checked, and if locked, an option should be given to the user to unlock it and save the 2fs before shutting down.

Conversely, it would be a handy option, especially for testing purposes, to be able to set the system to ask before saving the 2fs file (since not all flash media have physical write protection tabs). This is considerably more convenient than waiting for the system to back up a 1GB+ 2fs file (especially via usb2), and makes recovery from an installation disaster or running out of personal storage much easier.

Remember also that when booting from USBflash, the loader relies on the syslinux.cfg file on the flash medium, regardless of the location of the 2fs file used. If the flash card were autolocked by a given configuration, it would require booting via another means to change the boot parameters.

I have just run a few more tests and checked the results with PUPSTATE:

Test 1 with
Code:
pmedia=atahd psubdir=pupsave


result: contents of sda1/pupsave and sdd1/pupsave offered for loading, loaded from sdd1

sdd1 automounted as /mnt/home
sda1 automounted as /initrd/mnt/dev_ro2

both writable, lupu+libre loaded from sda1/pupsave

Test 2. removed
Code:
psubdir=pupsave
from syslinux.cfg and rebooted.

Result: only the content of sdb1/pupsaveC was presented for loading, and 528 standard was loaded into RAM from that directory

Test 3. rebooted and added the argument
Code:
pdev1=sda1
to
Code:
pmedia=atahd


result: only the content of sda1/pupsave_b was offered for loading, and 528 standard was loaded from sda1/pupsave_b

So, why does the loader choose to use sda1/pupsave over sb1/pupsave when the boot command is
Code:
pmedia=atahd psubdir=pupsave
, but

chooses to use sb1/pupsave over both sda1/pupsave and sda1/pupsave_b, when the psubdir argument is left out?

_________________
otropogo@gmail.com facebook.com/otropogo
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website 
sheldonisaac

Joined: 21 Jun 2009
Posts: 434
Location: Philadelphia, PA

PostPosted: Wed 16 Jan 2013, 16:33    Post subject: gtkdialog 0.8.3  

The newest Pmusic requires gtkdialog 0.8.3

Where is a version of gtkdialog 0.8.3 which works under Lucid puppy? My primary Puppy is Lucid 5.2.8-005

Thanks,
Sheldon
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
don570


Joined: 10 Mar 2010
Posts: 3385
Location: Ontario

PostPosted: Wed 16 Jan 2013, 21:31    Post subject:  

Quote:
Where is a version of gtkdialog 0.8.3


I put together a package for Barrry' Kauler's Precise distro.
It should work for Lucid.

Try it and report back...


http://www.murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?p=677831#677831

_______________________________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
sheldonisaac

Joined: 21 Jun 2009
Posts: 434
Location: Philadelphia, PA

PostPosted: Wed 16 Jan 2013, 22:48    Post subject: gtkdialog 0.8.3 etc  

don570 wrote:
Quote:
Where is a version of gtkdialog 0.8.3

I put together a package for Barrry' Kauler's Precise distro.
It should work for Lucid.

Try it and report back...

http://www.murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?p=677831#677831

Thank you very much, don570; it does indeed work.
I copied the gtkdialog4 file:
Quote:
~> which gtkdialog
/usr/bin/gtkdialog
~>

Quote:
~> gtkdialog -v
gtkdialog version 0.8.4 r503M (C) 2003-2007 Laszlo Pere, 2011-2012 Thunor
Built with additional support for: Glade.
~>
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
RSH


Joined: 05 Sep 2011
Posts: 2420
Location: Germany

PostPosted: Wed 16 Jan 2013, 23:08    Post subject:  

Hi.

Here is my output on gtkdialog:

GtkDialog, which is a link to gtkdialog3
Code:
sh-4.1# gtkdialog -v
gtkdialog version 0.7.21 (C) 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007 by Laszlo Pere


GtkDialog4
Code:
sh-4.1# gtkdialog4 -v
gtkdialog version 0.8.0 (C) 2003-2007 Laszlo Pere, 2011 Thunor


GtkDialog5
Code:
sh-4.1# gtkdialog5 -v
gtkdialog version 0.8.2 release (C) 2003-2007 Laszlo Pere, 2011-2012 Thunor


I have downloaded the above linked .pet and found a binary named gtkdialog4.

So, how did you get this output from a gtkdialog4 binary?

Code:
~> gtkdialog -v
gtkdialog version 0.8.4 r503M (C) 2003-2007 Laszlo Pere, 2011-2012 Thunor
Built with additional support for: Glade.
~>


Is gtkdialog4 the right name for this binary?

Please explain...

Thanks

RSH

_________________
LazY Puppy
RSH's DNA
SARA B.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
sheldonisaac

Joined: 21 Jun 2009
Posts: 434
Location: Philadelphia, PA

PostPosted: Wed 16 Jan 2013, 23:25    Post subject:
Subject description: re gtkdialog
 

(portions snipped)
RSH wrote:

I have downloaded the above linked .pet and
found a binary named gtkdialog4.

So, how did you get this output from a gtkdialog4 binary?

Code:
~> gtkdialog -v
gtkdialog version 0.8.4 r503M (C) 2003-2007 Laszlo Pere, 2011-2012 Thunor
Built with additional support for: Glade.
~>

Is gtkdialog4 the right name for this binary?

RSH, please excuse any unclearness.
Clicking the pet resulted in the binary gtkdialog4 being placed into
/usr/sbin
I copied that file into /usr/bin and renamed it to gtkdialog

It was one approach to dealing with the way gtkdialog is used by Pmusic.

Thanks,
Sheldon
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
RSH


Joined: 05 Sep 2011
Posts: 2420
Location: Germany

PostPosted: Thu 17 Jan 2013, 01:15    Post subject:  

I think you did not really understand my question the right way.

As you can see in my gtkdialog output, the gtkdialog4 binary version is 0.8.0

You posted a gtkdialog version 0.8.4 - also from a gtkdialog4 binary.

I want to know:

- is this file wrong renamed to gtkdialog4 after compiling?
- or is every new gtkdialog binary 0.8.0 and above renamed after compiling to gtkdialog4 - from now on

Thanks

RSH

Edit:

Or will this confusing all users/developers of Puppy Linux in the future and therefor adding a big minus to the related big list of minuses on installing and using applications? Wink

_________________
LazY Puppy
RSH's DNA
SARA B.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
don570


Joined: 10 Mar 2010
Posts: 3385
Location: Ontario

PostPosted: Thu 17 Jan 2013, 21:21    Post subject:  

Shouldn't you guys stick to the same naming convention that
Barry Kauler uses. He hasn't advanced to gtkdialog5.

I try to stick to his methods as close as possible.

Barry likes to make gtkdialog4 the application and gtkdialog the link.

This is an image of Exprimo which does it differently.



__________________________________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
pemasu


Joined: 08 Jul 2009
Posts: 5465
Location: Finland

PostPosted: Fri 18 Jan 2013, 02:18    Post subject:  

I follow the logic explained by 01micko at some time when the debate about gtkdialog naming was hot. Due to incompatilities of improved version at that time. I wont go to the details. They can be found from the gtkdialog thread.

But 01micko posted this idea, to use one improved gtkdialog binary only...and the others are symlinks. If there is incompatibility the idea was that those gtkdialog apps should be updated by the developer.

I have gone with this logic since then...as 01micko.

So....there is diversity...Barry Kauler do the naming his way....some others other way. But there has not been much problems with it,

Also....01micko and I use the latest gtkdialog version at the time. Barry updates woof slower.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
Display posts from previous:   Sort by:   
Page 151 of 190 [2845 Posts]   Goto page: Previous 1, 2, 3, ..., 149, 150, 151, 152, 153, ..., 188, 189, 190 Next
Post new topic   Reply to topic View previous topic :: View next topic
 Forum index » Advanced Topics » Puppy Projects
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: 0.1921s ][ Queries: 12 (0.0341s) ][ GZIP on ]