Lxpup 14 final 7-20-2012
Thank you!
http://www.jeuxvideo.com/jeux/pc/000023 ... liance.htm
Was (always) my favourite game xD, Star wars fan...
Yes I am , I had my period Gameboy color like everyone else, but I prefer the IT rather than video games now. The really good games are gone ...Are you sure you are only 18? That's amazing. At 18, all I was doing was playing Super Nintendo...lol.
http://www.jeuxvideo.com/jeux/pc/000023 ... liance.htm
Was (always) my favourite game xD, Star wars fan...
Hi Jejy69
I thought Precise-Mate was great - but I am having a couple of problems with the Mate 1.4 version of Slacko Lxpup.
The first is the networking - this worked great in Precise-Mate but in Slacko-lxpup-mate1.4 there seems to be far fewer options in the Connect to Server menu (e.g. ftp is missing) and I've failed so far to establish a Windows Share samba connection - just doesn't do anything, not even an error message.
The 2nd problem is that Chromium still crashes - in a strange way this time but reproducible - basically whenever I try to attach a 2nd file to a forum post. Both Chromium v18 and v19 show the same behaviour.
Sorry these are just error reports - I like to provide some clues as to what might be the cause but in both these cases I haven't worked out how to give you more info.
Cheers
peebee
I thought Precise-Mate was great - but I am having a couple of problems with the Mate 1.4 version of Slacko Lxpup.
The first is the networking - this worked great in Precise-Mate but in Slacko-lxpup-mate1.4 there seems to be far fewer options in the Connect to Server menu (e.g. ftp is missing) and I've failed so far to establish a Windows Share samba connection - just doesn't do anything, not even an error message.
The 2nd problem is that Chromium still crashes - in a strange way this time but reproducible - basically whenever I try to attach a 2nd file to a forum post. Both Chromium v18 and v19 show the same behaviour.
Sorry these are just error reports - I like to provide some clues as to what might be the cause but in both these cases I haven't worked out how to give you more info.
Cheers
peebee
LxPup = Puppy + LXDE
Main version used daily: LxPupSc; Assembler of UPups, ScPup & ScPup64, LxPup, LxPupSc & LxPupSc64
Main version used daily: LxPupSc; Assembler of UPups, ScPup & ScPup64, LxPup, LxPupSc & LxPupSc64
Another frugal install, this time on an old P4 test box. No problems yet.
-Computer-
Processor : Intel(R) Pentium(R) 4 CPU 2.80GHz
Memory : 512MB (144MB used)
Operating System : Unknown distribution
User Name : root (root)
Date/Time : Sat 15 Sep 2012 12:41:25 AM CDT
-Display-
Resolution : 1024x768 pixels
OpenGL Renderer : Unknown
X11 Vendor : The X.Org Foundation
-Multimedia-
Audio Adapter : ICH4 - Intel ICH5
# report-video
intel
Slacko Puppy, version 5.3.3 on Sat 15 Sep 2012
Chip description:
2.0 VGA compatible controller
Intel Corporation 82865G Integrated Graphics Controller (rev 02)
oem: Intel(r)865G Graphics Chip Accelerated VGA BIOS
product: Intel(r)865G Graphics Controller Hardware Version 0.0
X Server: Xorg
Driver used: intel
X.Org version: 1.9.5
dimensions: 1024x768 pixels (270x203 millimeters)
depth of root window: 24 planes
...the above also recorded in /tmp/root/ as report-video,
and archived with xorg.conf and Xorg.0.log as report-video-full.gz
#
Looking good so far.
-Computer-
Processor : Intel(R) Pentium(R) 4 CPU 2.80GHz
Memory : 512MB (144MB used)
Operating System : Unknown distribution
User Name : root (root)
Date/Time : Sat 15 Sep 2012 12:41:25 AM CDT
-Display-
Resolution : 1024x768 pixels
OpenGL Renderer : Unknown
X11 Vendor : The X.Org Foundation
-Multimedia-
Audio Adapter : ICH4 - Intel ICH5
# report-video
intel
Slacko Puppy, version 5.3.3 on Sat 15 Sep 2012
Chip description:
2.0 VGA compatible controller
Intel Corporation 82865G Integrated Graphics Controller (rev 02)
oem: Intel(r)865G Graphics Chip Accelerated VGA BIOS
product: Intel(r)865G Graphics Controller Hardware Version 0.0
X Server: Xorg
Driver used: intel
X.Org version: 1.9.5
dimensions: 1024x768 pixels (270x203 millimeters)
depth of root window: 24 planes
...the above also recorded in /tmp/root/ as report-video,
and archived with xorg.conf and Xorg.0.log as report-video-full.gz
#
Looking good so far.
Hi Jejy69
Your latest LXDE Puppy with SeaMonkey 2.12 and with links to your LXDE-Pup website is absolutely brilliant.
The overall presentation is truly outstanding and the fact that it works so well on my ram challenged 10yr old Acer laptop, is astonishing.
You are to be wholeheartedly congratulated on your work here - the combination of an excellent puppy, linked to an incredibly well designed website, that gives direct links to JM’s Puppy forum, is simply superb.
Truly stunning - many thanks and very best regards - Ray.
Your latest LXDE Puppy with SeaMonkey 2.12 and with links to your LXDE-Pup website is absolutely brilliant.
The overall presentation is truly outstanding and the fact that it works so well on my ram challenged 10yr old Acer laptop, is astonishing.
You are to be wholeheartedly congratulated on your work here - the combination of an excellent puppy, linked to an incredibly well designed website, that gives direct links to JM’s Puppy forum, is simply superb.
Truly stunning - many thanks and very best regards - Ray.
[b]Asus[/b] 701SD. 2gig ram. 8gb SSD. [b]IBM A21m[/b] laptop. 192mb ram. PIII Coppermine proc. [b]X60[/b] T2400 1.8Ghz proc. 2gig ram. 80gb hdd. [b]T41[/b] Pentium M 1400Mhz. 512mb ram.
- rg66
- Posts: 1158
- Joined: Mon 23 Jul 2012, 05:53
- Location: Vancouver, BC Canada / Entebbe, Uganda Africa!?!
Have been playing with LXpup today and so far so good except Firefox keeps crashing. It's strange because it was working fine for a few hours.
Oh, and you can't make a new shortcut on the desktop because lxshortcut is missing. I found an lxshortcut.pet so no big deal.
Other than that It seems pretty good, I'll test some more tomorrow.
Oh, and you can't make a new shortcut on the desktop because lxshortcut is missing. I found an lxshortcut.pet so no big deal.
Other than that It seems pretty good, I'll test some more tomorrow.
On Distrowatch:
http://distrowatch.com/weekly.php?issue ... 17#waiting
" Lxpup. Lxpup is a lightweight Linux distribution based on Puppy Linux
and featuring the LXDE desktop environment. "
Congrats....Chris.
http://distrowatch.com/weekly.php?issue ... 17#waiting
" Lxpup. Lxpup is a lightweight Linux distribution based on Puppy Linux
and featuring the LXDE desktop environment. "
Congrats....Chris.
I did a frugal install on NTFS both of them.
They are a bit different. LXPrecise have SeaMonkey
while LXSlacko has Firefox. Seamonkey has Flash built in
while Firefox one have to use the flash installer which is easy to do.
But to my surprise the LXSlacko version seems to have
some built in update or something. Suddenly the savefile
went too small. I had only installed Flash and nothing else.
So does that mean that the flash is bigger than 200MB?
How else to explain it? Read warning can not download
not enough memory. Delete files or increase storage.
I hope somebody can explain what is most likely explanation.
I had only assigned a 256MB savefile but Flash is at most 50MB
so what what was all the other big download about?
They are a bit different. LXPrecise have SeaMonkey
while LXSlacko has Firefox. Seamonkey has Flash built in
while Firefox one have to use the flash installer which is easy to do.
But to my surprise the LXSlacko version seems to have
some built in update or something. Suddenly the savefile
went too small. I had only installed Flash and nothing else.
So does that mean that the flash is bigger than 200MB?
How else to explain it? Read warning can not download
not enough memory. Delete files or increase storage.
I hope somebody can explain what is most likely explanation.
I had only assigned a 256MB savefile but Flash is at most 50MB
so what what was all the other big download about?
I use Google Search on Puppy Forum
not an ideal solution though
not an ideal solution though
Hi nooby!
You said LXSlacko has got Firefox, which hasn't got an easy option to handle all the caché. I think that can have to do with the space taken in your savefile. Try setting Firefox to clear the cache on exit.
You said LXSlacko has got Firefox, which hasn't got an easy option to handle all the caché. I think that can have to do with the space taken in your savefile. Try setting Firefox to clear the cache on exit.
[url=http://murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?t=76948]Puppy Linux en español[/url]
I started all over without any savefile
and now I have two new frugal installs
and they do work but I feel totally spoiled.
As a child with too many new toys looking very similar
I have gotten used to Lupu528-005 so
to have two additional Puppy OS to boot into
seems overkill unless them are different enough
to do things better than what Lupu528-005 does?
What is it about LX that you love that makes it
worthy of replacing old faithful Lupu528-005 ?
Does the newer kernel an LX do things more safely
or faster or look more cool or what? Easier to set up
to your own taste or what is that different that I should change?
Sorry if I am too spoiled to get it. What is in it for you and me then
and now I have two new frugal installs
and they do work but I feel totally spoiled.
As a child with too many new toys looking very similar
I have gotten used to Lupu528-005 so
to have two additional Puppy OS to boot into
seems overkill unless them are different enough
to do things better than what Lupu528-005 does?
What is it about LX that you love that makes it
worthy of replacing old faithful Lupu528-005 ?
Does the newer kernel an LX do things more safely
or faster or look more cool or what? Easier to set up
to your own taste or what is that different that I should change?
Sorry if I am too spoiled to get it. What is in it for you and me then
I use Google Search on Puppy Forum
not an ideal solution though
not an ideal solution though
Okay, okay enough of this speech style, I quite understand, what I do is useless for many, that's for sure, after all, you've already said (yes, already, you remember anything?). I did not come here to challenge your supremacy or to competition, I just offers a small bonus for Puppy, you are not obliged to try, to watch it.
I understand that you want to do like dogs, you pee on your territory, it's your, it's okay. Do not come by denigrating the work of others ESPECIALLY when you have already served. I 'am tired.
If you're really spoiled, do at least an effort to respect others. I respect your opinion and you, so I will not say anything more.
It is a pity that we should shoot themselves in the feet, anyway ...
I'm not saying that what I've done is great, but when writing :
We haven't got the same PC.
It's your life man.
I come in peace.
I understand that you want to do like dogs, you pee on your territory, it's your, it's okay. Do not come by denigrating the work of others ESPECIALLY when you have already served. I 'am tired.
If you're really spoiled, do at least an effort to respect others. I respect your opinion and you, so I will not say anything more.
It is a pity that we should shoot themselves in the feet, anyway ...
I'm not saying that what I've done is great, but when writing :
We will have to justify and say "Yeah that's better because gnagnah"I have gotten used to Lupu528-005 so
to have two additional Puppy OS to boot into
seems overkill unless them are different enough
to do things better than what Lupu528-005 does?
What is it about LX that you love that makes it
worthy of replacing old faithful Lupu528-005 ?
Does the newer kernel an LX do things more safely
or faster or look more cool or what? Easier to set up
to your own taste or what is that different that I should change?
We haven't got the same PC.
It's your life man.
I come in peace.
So sorry my poor English misled you to take it this way.
As I remember a lot of the posters told you they love it.
Remember I am more like the village fool in this forum.
Read my signature. Trust the others and ignore my text okay!
I think you should be happy over the encouraging responses
and realize that my confusing text where just one voice among many.
So trust the others and ignore me please. They want you to share
your take on it here so that is what you should be happy about.
Don't let an old grumpy guy from the backwaters of Europe
take you down at all. I am not good at expressing myself I do apology!
As I remember a lot of the posters told you they love it.
Remember I am more like the village fool in this forum.
Read my signature. Trust the others and ignore my text okay!
I think you should be happy over the encouraging responses
and realize that my confusing text where just one voice among many.
So trust the others and ignore me please. They want you to share
your take on it here so that is what you should be happy about.
Don't let an old grumpy guy from the backwaters of Europe
take you down at all. I am not good at expressing myself I do apology!
I use Google Search on Puppy Forum
not an ideal solution though
not an ideal solution though
hi Jejy69,
just tested this pup in virtualbox ... very nice!!!
aragon
just tested this pup in virtualbox ... very nice!!!
aragon
PUPPY SEARCH: http://wellminded.com/puppy/pupsearch.html
-
- Posts: 20
- Joined: Tue 07 Dec 2010, 15:18
LXDE vs. JWM
Jejy69:
How much heavier is LXDE than the JWM + ROX combo of the parent distro? I see that your LXDE derivative has an ISO size of just 137 MB, which is nearly the same as that of Wary Puppy. I was under the impression that LXDE is substantially heavier than JWM + ROX, just as Xfce is substantially heavier than LXDE, and GNOME/KDE is substantially heavier than Xfce.
I am the founder and lead developer of a Linux distro called Swift Linux. It was originally based on antiX Linux, but I have switched it to a Linux Mint Debian Edition base.
Although I haven't tried Lxpup yet (which I will do soon), you have made me consider changing the desktop of Swift Linux from IceWM + ROX pinboard to LXDE. You said that you chose LXDE because it's more user-friendly and more complete out-of-the-box than JWM is. I've been sticking to IceWM + ROX pinboard for Swift Linux simply because it's what antiX Linux uses.
The reason I never considered using LXDE until now is that I perceived it as being substantially heavier than IceWM + ROX pinboard. The biggest challenge for developing Swift Linux isn't RAM but the size of the ISO. One of the main selling points of Swift Linux is that it fits onto a CD. (LMDE is sized around 1.2 GB, so I have a LOT of chopping to do.) If switching to LXDE saves me much of the effort needed to polish IceWM + ROX pinboard while only adding a few MB to the size of the ISO file, the change would be well worth it. (I'm sure I can use the time I save to figure out what other packages I can safely cut.)
How much heavier is LXDE than the JWM + ROX combo of the parent distro? I see that your LXDE derivative has an ISO size of just 137 MB, which is nearly the same as that of Wary Puppy. I was under the impression that LXDE is substantially heavier than JWM + ROX, just as Xfce is substantially heavier than LXDE, and GNOME/KDE is substantially heavier than Xfce.
I am the founder and lead developer of a Linux distro called Swift Linux. It was originally based on antiX Linux, but I have switched it to a Linux Mint Debian Edition base.
Although I haven't tried Lxpup yet (which I will do soon), you have made me consider changing the desktop of Swift Linux from IceWM + ROX pinboard to LXDE. You said that you chose LXDE because it's more user-friendly and more complete out-of-the-box than JWM is. I've been sticking to IceWM + ROX pinboard for Swift Linux simply because it's what antiX Linux uses.
The reason I never considered using LXDE until now is that I perceived it as being substantially heavier than IceWM + ROX pinboard. The biggest challenge for developing Swift Linux isn't RAM but the size of the ISO. One of the main selling points of Swift Linux is that it fits onto a CD. (LMDE is sized around 1.2 GB, so I have a LOT of chopping to do.) If switching to LXDE saves me much of the effort needed to polish IceWM + ROX pinboard while only adding a few MB to the size of the ISO file, the change would be well worth it. (I'm sure I can use the time I save to figure out what other packages I can safely cut.)
Hi Swiftlinuxcreator,
I did try out one of your versions before, when I was distro-hopping .. it was nice, but I prefer good-old puppy
From my experience, you would only notice the difference in performance between LXDE and icewm in really old machines or modern-under-powered ones. When I say, really old, I mean low-end Pentium 3's or under.
If you're talking about "heavy" size-wise, Icewm starts off pretty light, but can get pretty big once you start adding on themes. Openbox themes, in contrast are usually smaller.
I did try out one of your versions before, when I was distro-hopping .. it was nice, but I prefer good-old puppy
From my experience, you would only notice the difference in performance between LXDE and icewm in really old machines or modern-under-powered ones. When I say, really old, I mean low-end Pentium 3's or under.
If you're talking about "heavy" size-wise, Icewm starts off pretty light, but can get pretty big once you start adding on themes. Openbox themes, in contrast are usually smaller.
Aragon, thanks to try it, but above all thank 01Micko for the excellent Slacko base.
swiftlinuxcreator, ISO base (Slacko by 01Micko) is about 115mo. The desktop environment LXDE themes, including libs therefore add about 50MB in ram, either 22mo in compressed ISO. LXDE is obviously heavier than JWM. This is incontestable.
At first, I was under windows, Ubuntu and then Antix Mepis , so I kept habits like right click on the desktop to change the wallpaper, copy and paste inter-windows, avoiding going through a lot of third party software to change the appearance.
The question really keeping with this kind of topic is: "What habits do I have?"
Many people like to have the menu by right-clicking on the desktop, so I can not really tell you what is best. I put only highlight its specificities. In fact, none is better than the other. They do what they must do to each of us according to our tastes, which is the strength of linux and uniqueness of the human race, all different, and it's great.
Well after I go into a frenzy philosophical ....
There is also a notion of update, Icewm for example is not developed to this day it seems.
I wish you good luck, may the force be with you.
Habits, choice, freedom...
swiftlinuxcreator, ISO base (Slacko by 01Micko) is about 115mo. The desktop environment LXDE themes, including libs therefore add about 50MB in ram, either 22mo in compressed ISO. LXDE is obviously heavier than JWM. This is incontestable.
I do not carry the word of the gospel, LXDE meets my expectations, I find it aesthetically pleasing, openbox themes are many, the bar is easily customizable, several plugins available.You said that you chose LXDE because it's more user-friendly and more complete out-of-the-box than JWM is.
At first, I was under windows, Ubuntu and then Antix Mepis , so I kept habits like right click on the desktop to change the wallpaper, copy and paste inter-windows, avoiding going through a lot of third party software to change the appearance.
The question really keeping with this kind of topic is: "What habits do I have?"
Many people like to have the menu by right-clicking on the desktop, so I can not really tell you what is best. I put only highlight its specificities. In fact, none is better than the other. They do what they must do to each of us according to our tastes, which is the strength of linux and uniqueness of the human race, all different, and it's great.
Well after I go into a frenzy philosophical ....
There is also a notion of update, Icewm for example is not developed to this day it seems.
I wish you good luck, may the force be with you.
Habits, choice, freedom...