corepup

A home for all kinds of Puppy related projects
Post Reply
Message
Author
wanderer
Posts: 1098
Joined: Sat 20 Oct 2007, 23:17

corepup

#1 Post by wanderer »

http://smokey01.com/wanderer/


hi all

this is just a reminder that i am still working on corepup

in fact corepup is a part of the alternate puppy build system
since i am using components from corepup
in my modular puppy build system

since fredx has solved the firefox issue for corepup
it is a pretty complete system
i am working on tc 9 at this time
and will eventually post a corepup 9 iso
until then if you are interested
just download the tc 9 plus iso from either the link on this thread
or the tinycore site
since it is functionally identical

also i will do what was suggested in the alternative system thread
which is to put all important stuff in the first post
so it is easy to keep updated on the project
by just reading the first post


wanderer
before we begin I would like to thank Mr Murga who's generosity
over a great many years has provided the forum without which
this project and indeed most of puppy itself would not exist


This thread is a proposal to start a project that serves the puppy community in 2 ways

1. have a minimalist modular system to use as a base for a new version of puppy

2. have a puppy community development project that everyone who wants to can participate in


you can participate in this project at least 2 ways

1. read the thread
and post your comments/ideas/suggestions/flames

2. go to the tinycore site and download the
coreplus 9 iso

or use the link above to download
either a copy of the official tinycore iso
or an iso of corepup

and set it up and play with it
and post your comments/ideas/suggestions/flames

once you become familiar with this iso or the newer ones
the entire tinycore system becomes clear

the overall idea is to become familiar
with both the tinycore and puppy systems
so that we can merge them
and create a project that has the strengths of both

corepup is a tinycore base
with modifications and puppy and other stuff added to it
hopefully combining the advantages of both

the reason is that tinycore
is a minimal and modular system
that allows modifications to be snapped in and out like leggos

puppy is great
but its system is difficult and time consuming to modify

corepup is for people that want a
simple and fast alternative to building a puppy like distro

components can be added and removed in seconds
rather than hours
and stay modular so they can be removed
worked on independently
and reinserted later

thats why i started this project
so that the puppy community can be made aware
that there is an alternative system to build "puppies"
or whatever you want to call them

remember
to keep up with this project
you only need to read this first post
all the important stuff will be here

both the overview
and all the news


wanderer

.
Last edited by wanderer on Sun 05 May 2019, 16:44, edited 76 times in total.

jlst

#2 Post by jlst »

That is a good idea actually.

The problem with woofce and basically all puppy-related projects.. is that there are too many projects and too few users to test. The gap between developers and users is huge, and the advanced users..., almost all of them create and mantain their derivatives... and are busy minding their own bussiness

I proposed tuxx something smaller (140mb,gzip compressed) based on woofce, but i was unable to fulfill my part as i'm very busy coding for woofce, fixing bugs, etc. The first step was to compile a retro kernel, starting from k3.2.82... overall woofce offers you an automated build (kernel-kit), but you have to properly configure the kernel first... and then choose appropiate set of firmwares.. this in itself is a huge a work.

Tiny core is one and only, only one iso.. for everyone to try. slitaz is another micro distro, provides weekly alphas, so people should understand that the puppy diversity is what will cause its demise, but fortunately development is happening hehehe, but hardly everyone will get to see it unless they try the latest alphas from woofce projects.

wanderer
Posts: 1098
Joined: Sat 20 Oct 2007, 23:17

#3 Post by wanderer »

thanks jlst

i didnt expect one of the geniuses to reply

wanderer

dancytron
Posts: 1519
Joined: Wed 18 Jul 2012, 19:20

#4 Post by dancytron »

For years, I've thought a more logical way to structure Puppy would be to have the main *.sfs package contain only the "core". That meaning everything Puppy contains now, except the browser, gnumeric, abiword, paint, inkscape, the chat app, vlc or gmplayer etc.

Then have an "adrv" sfs file that contained all the things that were left out of the main ISO that loaded on top.

That would provide a Puppy that functions exactly like the one we have now and also a "thin" Puppy that people could easily add to either by installing software and remastering or by creating alternate adrv.sfs files.

That would give people of lower skill level (like me) a very powerful ability to create very thin custom distributions without dealing with woof or even remastering. People who want Chrome wouldn't need to have Firefox too. Serious office type users who want libre office wouldn't need to also have abiword, etc hanging around.

It seems like this is a very simple change and the ability already exists, all it would take would be for the lead official distributions to adopt this structure as standard.

jlst

#5 Post by jlst »

yes dancytron, that has already been discussed by the woofce team.. this is what i think:

puppy.sfs - core
zdrv.sfs - kernel modules
fdrv.sfs - firmware
adrv.sfs - default bulk (gui apps)
ydrv.sfs - something else

this way you can replace any *drv with something bigger or smaller if you wish.

all these sfs's can also be specified via boot params... the new init is powerful.

all these sfs's are properly supported by woofce, but changing the structure requires cooperation from everyone involved and major changes here and there..

backi
Posts: 1922
Joined: Sun 27 Feb 2011, 22:00
Location: GERMANY

#6 Post by backi »

Hi you all !

Sounds incredibly good !

wanderer
Posts: 1098
Joined: Sat 20 Oct 2007, 23:17

#7 Post by wanderer »

yes but

still the problem with union filesystem

and the problem with the build system
too big complex and hidden from view

i think puppy stuff should be merged into tinycore
not puppy restructured to look like tinycore

the puppy init file is really the tc-config file in tinycore
so puppy innovations can be added there

wanderer

jlst

#8 Post by jlst »

i agree that t's better to create a puppy-like tiny core... the way puppy works is complex but allows unlimited extensions... it's just that there is not enough people working to make the big changes happen

and because it has been tailored to use the packages from the big distros now it also properly supports the full util-linux and coreutils... making use of busybox only with the most simple apps... so basically it can also be used to bootstrap and install arch linux for example. Puppy is in the major leagues.

dancytron
Posts: 1519
Joined: Wed 18 Jul 2012, 19:20

#9 Post by dancytron »

To me, the union file system (if I understand that correctly to mean the sfs files and layering etc) is what makes Puppy into Puppy.

Creating a minimal distro that is Puppy like that is structured like Tiny Core wouldn't be Puppy. It would be "Tiny Dog" like Debian Dog is a Puppy like Debian Distribution. Maybe a great idea, like Debian Dog is a great idea, but not really Puppy anymore.

Sailor Enceladus
Posts: 1543
Joined: Mon 22 Feb 2016, 19:43

#10 Post by Sailor Enceladus »

All I understood by wanderer's proposal was "bla bla tinycore this tinycore that", but I like where dancytron went with the adrv.

wanderer
Posts: 1098
Joined: Sat 20 Oct 2007, 23:17

#11 Post by wanderer »

the power and beauty of puppy and for that matter tinycore
is in its creators users functions and applications
whether or not it is connected
by a union file system with sfs files
or a symlinked system with tcz extensions
is irrelevant
puppy has changed many times
and assumed many forms
puppy 1 2 3 4 underdog huge-intrd micropup pupngo etc
in fact the union file system itself has varied between different models
the union file system doesn't define puppy

its the people and the ideas
open your mind man

wanderer

jlst

#12 Post by jlst »

tiny core uses modern kernels and it's tiny, so if there is debian dog, there should be tiny dog indeed.

puppy still supports underdog, and there's a gui (to create underdog.lnx) and boot param to set it..

as for woofce it will take time before small things come back... in the end it will probably never happen................. but for the big distros puppy uses as its pkg base .. only slackware and ubuntu make sense nowadays (debian=ubuntu=trisquel=devuan=mint=etc), but devuan is interesting as it follows the puppy philosophy....

User avatar
greengeek
Posts: 5789
Joined: Tue 20 Jul 2010, 09:34
Location: Republic of Novo Zelande

#13 Post by greengeek »

wanderer wrote: still the problem with union filesystem
The benefit of the union system is the ease with which you can graft new functionality onto existing functionality - and then "disconnect" it and go back to original.

One of the things that made Puppy work for me was the fact that the wizards made it possible for me (without any real Linux understanding) to change the setup of my system - and then save those changes in a savefile (which could then be removed if I wanted to get back to original).

Every time I have tried Tinycore i got stuck - and didn't understand how to go any further. Only Puppy and it's inbuilt wizards got me past that point.

So if there was a change to Puppy's structure i would want to see some way that the "core" that boots to desktop could be EASILY extended to expand functionality or cosmetic appearance. And then those extensions be EASILY deleted/removed if it was unsuitable or I wanted to replace it with something different.

The core functionality I need in any operating system is in this order:
1) Boot to desktop reliably, quickly and without fuss (on every machine! and from any boot device!)
2) Help me get on the network/internet
3) Help me install the operating system to some media
4) Help me add new programs
5) Help me set up printing.
6) ...
.
99) Help me make it look good.
(I really don't care too much about how it looks...)

All of these functions i want done with the least processing power and storage space possible (Regardless of the fact that memory is now cheap and easily available).

I don't know how the symlink method could be tidier or easier or more reliable than the union system but I'm open to finding out.

One other thing I REALLY REALLY want is a system that works forever - without having to constantly consider upgrading libraries etc to keep up with the big distros unless i want to.

I'm not suggesting backporting everything to GTK1 or similar - but I really do wish it was possible to do that. I don't like change.

Surely there is some way to build Linux with standard size bricks - instead of constantly having to look for bigger and bigger bricks of different incompatible shapes and sizes??

EDIT : - maybe what I really want is a super lean puppy that boots and installs reliably - but also contains a QEMU or VM within which I could run a fat puppy (or bigger distro) if I need to run a newer program.
Tiny Puppy for 99% of my work + VM Overdog for the 1% fancy stuff that needs the newer libs or toolchains. So the fancy modern parts of puppy would reside in a separate VM sfs or symlinked VM blob.(Just spitballin' here...)
.

User avatar
Flash
Official Dog Handler
Posts: 13071
Joined: Wed 04 May 2005, 16:04
Location: Arizona USA

#14 Post by Flash »

Would multisession Puppy work without the union fs?

wanderer
Posts: 1098
Joined: Sat 20 Oct 2007, 23:17

#15 Post by wanderer »

hi greengeek

the systems are really very (conceptually) similar

puppys wizard wizard is
tinycore apps function

everything you are asking is very doable
in fact in my system its already done
you just have to learn to use a different named tool

i also want to keep a system forever
and i want it to be kept up to date

that is why I started this thread
so that everyone can work together
to take the best from both systems
and make it into something we all want
and can use long term

wanderer

wanderer
Posts: 1098
Joined: Sat 20 Oct 2007, 23:17

#16 Post by wanderer »

hi flash

yes

the union file system is really trivial (as well as flawed)

wanderer

jlst

#17 Post by jlst »

greengeek wrote:One other thing I REALLY REALLY want is a system that works forever - without having to constantly consider upgrading libraries etc to keep up with the big distros unless i want to.

I'm not suggesting backporting everything to GTK1 or similar - but I really do wish it was possible to do that. I don't like change.
This is possible with puppy up to some extent.. but the developers move on to next target... you need to duplicate a micko to keep slacko for slackware 13.13 (2011) up to date with current code and essential apps...

You need two more philb6666 to take care of xenial and 4 more for tahrpup, and other 4 more for precise and so on... this community relies on only person to do everything and expects wonders.

It's possible to support them all with people working for their target distro-version, updating the code base... that has never happened before and it's not likely to happen anyway.

wanderer
Posts: 1098
Joined: Sat 20 Oct 2007, 23:17

#18 Post by wanderer »

that's one of the many advantages of this system

the core stays relatively unchanged
its default fltk rather than gtk1
but i use gtk1
the libraries are loaded independently
and are kept up to date by the tinycore guys
so all you have to do is choose which ones you want
in fact you can choose different ones each time you boot

i did this with a mod of puppy
but it was too much work to pull everything apart
i actually got down to a complete gtk1 system
but didn't have the expertise to pull apart firefox
everything here is already packaged
so it saves a ton of time and work
but you can modify it any way you want
the basics are pretty straightforward

wanderer
Last edited by wanderer on Tue 13 Sep 2016, 21:23, edited 1 time in total.

belham2
Posts: 1715
Joined: Mon 15 Aug 2016, 22:47

#19 Post by belham2 »

Been a puppy user (Barry’s Precise) for about 6-7 years only for special purposes. Been a full time Linux user for about 3-4 years, ever since XP was getting near EOL. I’ve tried (and still use) a lot of Linux distros, from crazy hard Gentoo to somewhat easier Arch to grandmamas Ubuntu/Debian/Fedora all the way to the unbelievably simple, beautiful (but restrictive) Elementary OS. And, I’ve also been a Tinycore user, a few years running now (will come back to Tinycore in a minute).

10-12 months ago, I came here, looking to upgrade Barry’s Precise 5.7, and was floored at the wild diversity of puppies and pup-related distros. I thought: this is messed up?! Of course it immediately attracted me, lol. So I dove right in. I’ve now tried like 12-15 of these things, and they are just wild, unruly, beastie animals….but each is a beauty in its own way. What I mean is, every one of these things has something wrong with it. And I love ‘em for it. Why? I never knew how little I actually know about Linux overall until I got hit in the face with all these puppies.

With pups, there are always problems. Stuff never boots correctly, so had to learn about boot codes, grub, parameters, etc. When one does load, the desktop is sometimes quite screwed up, so had to learn about configuring display & desktop managers & how they interact with everything. Or, icons go missing or were never installed or linked to nothing, so had to learn about how to create links, .desktop files, etc. Wireless? Nooo way, it never works correctly, so had to learn about compiling. What's that program?? It crashes the pup when I start it. So, trying to get rid of crap programs causing problems, I had to learn about remastering. And on and on……..the nuts & bolts falling off these puppies is endless. In 10-12 months, I’ve gotten an education I would never have otherwise ever encountered.

But Tinycore? 10-12 months ago, I still loved it. Now? Today?? I hate Tinycore. Why? Everything always works with it. Nothing ever breaks down. No matter what I do to it, I cannot crash Tinycore (I proudly note every puppy and/or pup-related distro I’ve tried, I have crashed it---just fantastic!). But not Tinycore. The dam# thing is stable, so i hate it. Breakdown you Tiny piece of crap! Give me something to do!! In resignation, I usually shut it down, and grab one of the many pup SD cards I’ve lying around, boot that up, and go in, and something is usually happening (wrongly) right away with it....and at that moment, everything is right with the world once again. I feel calm, like an old friend, a drunkard, but still a friend, is sitting beside me.

I hope this all makes sense. If I wanted to drive a Honda all the time, I would use something like Tinycore forever. But I've now experienced what it is like to own and drive a Jaguar, albeit “used
Last edited by belham2 on Tue 13 Sep 2016, 21:01, edited 1 time in total.

wanderer
Posts: 1098
Joined: Sat 20 Oct 2007, 23:17

#20 Post by wanderer »

hey belham2

do what i do
think of something you want to change
then modify it until it breaks
and you have to try to fix it
great way to learn and have fun

wanderer

Post Reply