tahrpup 6.0.5 CE

Message

smokey01 · #466 Post by **smokey01** » Tue 13 Jan 2015, 09:26

I've discovered a weird problem in tahrpup-6.0-CE-noPAE.
When I have a single directory in a partition containing tahrpup I have no issues.
When I have a second directory containing tahrpup on the same partition the weirdness begins.
For example:
The main installation is at /mnt/sdc1/tahr6
The second installation is at /mnt/sdc1/fattahr
The savefile in main is: /mnt/sdc1/tahr6/tahrsave.4fs
The savefiles in the second are: /mnt/sdc1/fattahr/tahrsave-one.4fs and /mnt/sdc1/fattahr/tahrsave-two.4fs

When I select from the first stanza below I am given a choice to load either:
0 - no savefile
1 - tahrsave-one.4fs
2 - tahrsave-two.4fs
This of course normal behavior if more than one savefiles are found. My problem is it shouldn't even be
looking in the /mnt/sdc1/fattahr directory because the stanza is pointing at /mnt/sdc1/tahr6

This is a copy of my menu.lst:
#----------------------------------------------
timeout 10
default 0
color light-gray/blue black/light-gray
gfxmenu /boot/grub/message
#
title Tahrpup 6.0 on sdc1
rootnoverify (hd0,0)
kernel /tahr6/vmlinuz pfix=fsck pmedia=atahd pdev1=sdc1
initrd /tahr6/initrd.gz
#
title Fat-Tahrpup 6.0 on sdc1
rootnoverify (hd0,0)
kernel /fattahr/vmlinuz pfix=fsck pmedia=atahd pdev1=sdc1
initrd /fattahr/initrd.gz
#------------------------------------------------

It appears to be searching through the directories in alphabetical order and loads or offers to load the
first savefiles it finds. This is even stranger when you consider the savefiles have different names and
are in different directories.
Why would a savefile from /fattahr be loaded instead of the one from /tahr6 as defined in the first entry above.

Maybe I could fix this issue with CatDude's initrd hack. Catdude has added the psave parameter
so the savefile can be defined on the kernel line eg:
kernel /fattahr/vmlinuz pfix=fsck pmedia=atahd pdev1=sdc1 psave=one

When booting live, and at first shutdown, you have the option to save to a savefile or directory.
If you name it "one", when prompted to the savefile filename, the resulting name will be: tahrsave-one.4fs
or tahrsave-one, if a directory I assume.

The advantage of this hack provides functionality to have several savefile in the same directory
which can be loaded without intervention by simply defining them on the kernel line as above.
All you have to do is create a different stanza for each savefile.
This is a really nice feature Fatdog has.

Another benefit of Catdude's initrd hack when using it with his legacy GRUB, you can type psave=savefilename.4fs at the GRUB menu to load a different savefile.

Any ideas why it is loading the wrong savefile?

666philb · #467 Post by **666philb** » Tue 13 Jan 2015, 09:45

hi smokey01,

i have 3 tahrpup folders with saves and don't get this.
you possibly need to add psubdir to the kernel line in the menu.1st,
here's an example of mine

Code: Select all

title Puppy tahr 5.8.3 (sda2/tahr3)
  uuid 6160919b-7657-4979-9137-22782422ce9f
  kernel /tahr3/vmlinuz   psubdir=tahr3 pmedia=atahd pfix=copy
  initrd /tahr3/initrd.gz

Uten · #468 Post by **Uten** » Tue 13 Jan 2015, 10:45

smokey01 wrote:Any ideas why it is loading the wrong savefile?

I'm pretty sure this is documented, and expected behavior.

My guess is: that is how Barry wanted it to differentiate between testing, development and personal stuff. If I recall right, changing menu entries when using lilo or some of the other boot loaders at the time was not as straight forward as changing the menu entries in a file.

I normally throw in psubdir as 666philb pointed out.

Merging some of the nice and really handy features found in puppy derivatives should be on some kind of todo list for feature releases. People itching enough to do the job probably have their own todo list with favorite features. So I guess the rest of us just have to wait patiently until it is implemented

totolanio · #469 Post by **totolanio** » Tue 13 Jan 2015, 11:24

totolanio wrote:Hey !
I use LXpup actually (which is based on this version !)
ANd I installed mozilla through Quickpet (awesome quickpet ! never give it up !), then I tried to install the lastest Flash version available in quickpet (and also the previous one, 11.xx.xx bis) and when I launch a video it completely freezes the session and I must restart the computer with a reset.
I tried several times.

On my desktop which has nVidia Corporation C61 [GeForce 7025 / nForce 630a] the nouveau driver exhibits similar symptoms to those you describe but if I use xorgwizard to change to the built-in modesetting driver then this works much better and installing and loading the proprietary nvidia driver for my hardware (304.123) works better still.

Didnt try yet the nvidia driver but the modesetting one is not working neither. On youtube videos with mozilla + lastest flashplayer.

Also, either in palemoon or mozilla, if I make a new profile located in the USB stick which also contains my savefile but outside the savefile in /sdb1/Mozilla for example, Mozilla freezes and you have to kill the process/daemon and then you can never start this profile again because it says it's in use, even if there is no more any firefox instance running ! Weird?

Nobody tried it ? It should work normally, right?

PS : if someone knows how to solve the wrong hour setting in skype, tell me plz

smokey01 · #470 Post by **smokey01** » Tue 13 Jan 2015, 11:32

I previously removed the psubdir=tahr6 parameter because it was booting tahrpup from a different drive with the same directory name. By including pdev1=sdc1 before the psubdir=tahr6 seems to have fixed the problem.
#----------------------------------------
title Tahrpup 6.0 on sdc1
rootnoverify (hd0,0)
kernel /tahr6/vmlinuz pfix=fsck pmedia=atahd pdev1=sdc1 psubdir=tahr6
initrd /tahr6/initrd.gz
#------------------------------------------------------
Catdude's hacked initrd works nicely too.

Thanks for the psubdir reminder.

gcmartin · #471 Post by **gcmartin** » Tue 13 Jan 2015, 11:40

Hello everyone

TahrPUP is running well thus far for me.

Has anyone noticed the advanced work that's been accomplished by @Ted Dog. He has demonstrated how to package PUPs, any PUP, such that the package media will boot on any PC without regard to whether its a BIOS/UEFI PC.

I wonder what it would take to implement in TahrPUP ISO releases such that machine-neural PUPs could be created.

There is a catch for developers, as he requires the developer to make a simple choice (that the catch). The current 2 choices (which could be just one if ...):

Make a traditional ISO and bundle the front end onto the packaging which boots the contained PUP ISO.
Take the traditional ISO and unpackage it OUT OF THE ISO format into a folder of kernel, initrd, zdrv ...; and, bundle the front end onto the packaging as an ISO which boots the unbundled folder(s) items

It seems very simple. NO?

Would/could this reduce packaging efforts for the developer as he would no longer need concern him/her self with neither new/old x86 machines?

The appeal is to reduce concern and reduce workload on the developers in building deliverable distros which work everywhere.

That effort could be a simple PUP universal approach to presenting distros which have common behavior after system POST to booting.

This does NOT change the strides that developers currently take. It just removes a consideration from specialized to a common, simpler approach.

Thoughts.

666philb · #472 Post by **666philb** » Tue 13 Jan 2015, 12:11

mikeslr wrote:Hi 666philb & All,

First, if I haven't already thanked you for Tahrpup 6.0, I guess it's too late . Tahrpup is the default OS on my desktop – first on Grub4dos' Menu so I only have to think if I want something else. That also means that it gets used the most often. Currently, I'm exploring an idea which requires a lot of editing of files and copying them to and from a USB-Key for testing on my Laptop. [One of these days I'll have to figure out how to network. ] Which may also explain why the condition came to my attention in Tahrpup. I haven't noticed or checked if it exists under other Puppies.

If it matters, my Tahrpup uses Kernel Release: 3.14.13. I haven't made any structural changes other than installing vicmz' Openbox for Tahrpup, which window manager is my default. Rox remains my only file manager.

What I've noticed is that when I copy or move --drag and drop using rox-- a file to another location which already has a file with that name, I'm not asked if I want to overwrite the file already there. It just automatically overwrites the older file.

Overwriting is almost always what I want. But there being thousands of files on various drives I would prefer to be warned, just in case I've chosen a name whose prior use I had forgotten, and the older file contained some information or served some purpose other than the newer file.

mikesLr

this is to do with the updated ROX-filer, it fixed quiet option allowing to copy without having to confirm every file. it still doesn't work perfectly as it really should prompt and then only overwrite if you pick the quiet option.

you can get a prompt back in the rox options 'action windows' Auto-start quiet' tick boxes

gyro · #473 Post by **gyro** » Tue 13 Jan 2015, 16:40

666philb wrote:you can get a prompt back in the rox options 'action windows' Auto-start quiet' tick boxes

But your only choice is to always prompt, or never prompt.
gyro

666philb · #474 Post by **666philb** » Tue 13 Jan 2015, 16:47

yes it is a bit annoying ..... mind you, attempting to copy and overwrite a large number of items with the old ROX was pretty annoying. click click click click ...etc

bigpup · #475 Post by **bigpup** » Tue 13 Jan 2015, 19:39

smokey01,

kernel /tahr6/vmlinuz pfix=fsck pmedia=atahd pdev1=sdc1 psubdir=tahr6

You need to place "pfix=fsck" at the end.

For some reason it just works better or at all, when placed at the end.

smokey01 · #476 Post by **smokey01** » Tue 13 Jan 2015, 20:23

Bigpup I have moved pfix=fsck to the end.
Thanks

mikeslr · #477 Post by **mikeslr** » Wed 14 Jan 2015, 03:57

666philb wrote: you can get a prompt back in the rox options 'action windows' Auto-start quiet' tick boxes

Thanks, I guess, 666philb. But unfortunately, in my case

your advice has as much meaning as that of Lewis Carroll's:

"’Twas brillig, and the slithy toves
Did gyre and gimble in the wabe:
All mimsy were the borogoves,
And the mome raths outgrabe..."

Attached is a photo of my Rox's interface. None of the icons, when clicked, displays a link to 'options' or 'action windows'. Not even the "Help" icon. I thought perhaps some manually editing of rox's config file might be required. But opening that in geany left me as bemused as the Jabberwocky.

Could you provide some further instructions. Please assume, rightly, that at least in this instance I am a total noob.

Thanks,

mikesLr

Moat · #478 Post by **Moat** » Wed 14 Jan 2015, 05:05

mikeslr wrote: None of the icons, when clicked, displays a link to 'options' or 'action windows'.

Hey Mike - right clicking in the un-occupied, white area of an open rox directory (or even right on a tiny area between files in the dir) will provide a pop-up context menu, with the desired 'options' selection (amongst others). A little wonky that it's not available via the icon toolbar... but that's rox!

Bob

mikeslr · #479 Post by **mikeslr** » Wed 14 Jan 2015, 13:56

See title.

bigpup · #480 Post by **bigpup** » Thu 15 Jan 2015, 06:52

How to abort a download initiated from Quickpet?

The only way to see how big is the file is after I click on it but I don't see any confirmations dialogue after it and I don't see any way of aborting it, even if I close the console it continues to download in the back.

From this topic:
http://www.murga-linux.com/puppy/viewto ... 646#820646

666philb · #481 Post by **666philb** » Thu 15 Jan 2015, 17:44

i'm putting together a new iso of all fixes so far. This is just a bug-fix build, chiefly for new users so that they get a more complete iso.
it will basically be as similar as possible to tahrpup 6.0 with the service pack, fixed kernel and all bug-fixes so far.

it needs to be the same because tahrpup 6.0 and the new iso will be using the same updates from quickpet.

testing iso (not final)
http://distro.ibiblio.org/puppylinux/pu ... sting2.iso
b80d49be9b18b8cda350aed0b6a7a50d
http://distro.ibiblio.org/puppylinux/pu ... _6.0.1.sfs
61e193fa9e05fab21a0ff1c03c724ed4

augras · #482 Post by **augras** » Thu 15 Jan 2015, 19:46

Hi,
Tas doesn't work because ffmpeg and some libraries lack.
I put together ffmpeg_2.5.2, libass5, libfdk-aac, libx265 in a pet and a sfs and it works fine.
ffmpeg is needed by pmusic and it's ok also for pmusic and a lot of other things.
Pet (32 MB)
SFS
Philippe

SFR · #483 Post by **SFR** » Thu 15 Jan 2015, 20:17

augras wrote:Tas doesn't work because ffmpeg and some libraries lake.

Hi Philippe

You mean "Take a Shot!", right? If so, did you try v1.9?

Changelog wrote:Version 1.9:
- compatibility with avconv

I just checked in VBox with TahrPup-6.0.1 and it's still fine here...

Greetings!

peebee · #484 Post by **peebee** » Thu 15 Jan 2015, 20:40

666philb wrote:i'm putting together a new iso of all fixes so far. This is just a bug-fix build, chiefly for new users so that they get a more complete iso.
it will basically be as similar as possible to tahrpup 6.0 with the service pack, fixed kernel and all bug-fixes so far.

it needs to be the same because tahrpup 6.0 and the new iso will be using the same updates from quickpet.

testing iso (not final)
http://distro.ibiblio.org/puppylinux/pu ... -6.0.1.iso
3cf39d490b725eeaf9a56067b605d95
http://distro.ibiblio.org/puppylinux/pu ... _6.0.1.sfs
21b7a6ff8e392a4e31d8974391485f37

Hi 666philb

Is the new iso pae or no-pae? I'm not aware that there is any way to tell is there? Never seen this aspect in any system reports......

Thanks
peebee

666philb · #485 Post by **666philb** » Thu 15 Jan 2015, 22:01

hi peebee,

it's noPAE... pupsys-info can show PAE, noPAE.... on the kernel info section

(old)Puppy Linux Discussion Forum

(old)Puppy Linux Discussion Forum

tahrpup 6.0.5 CE

Universal TahrPUP booting on ANY PC old (BIOS) or new (UEFI)

Re: Drag & Drop copies overwriting existing file w/o question

Re: Drag & Drop copies overwriting existing file w/o question

Re: Drag & Drop copies overwriting existing file w/o question

Re: Drag & Drop copies overwriting existing file w/o question

Thanks Moat