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 Tue 04 Aug 2015, 16:12
All times are UTC - 4
 Forum index » Advanced Topics » Puppy Projects » Next Puppy Development
Going forward with Standard Puppy
Post new topic   Reply to topic View previous topic :: View next topic
Page 1 of 2 [21 Posts]   Goto page: 1, 2 Next

Which Puppy or Puplet would you suggest as a standard?
Slacko
31%
 31%  [ 9 ]
Precise/Lucid (Ubuntu-based)
31%
 31%  [ 9 ]
4.x/5.x (Puppy Based)
10%
 10%  [ 3 ]
FatDog (64-bit or a possible 32-bit project like fatdog)
17%
 17%  [ 5 ]
Other (This can include Quirky if one so desires)
10%
 10%  [ 3 ]
Total Votes : 29

Author Message
NeroVance


Joined: 10 Oct 2012
Posts: 186
Location: Canada

PostPosted: Fri 28 Nov 2014, 13:31    Post subject:  Going forward with Standard Puppy
Subject description: Many puplets, seemingly lack of mainline
 

I've been following Puppy for quite a while, and while I do know of the multitude of flavors such as Fatdog64, Slacko, Lucid, Precise, Quirky (well that's more of a spinoff by Barry afaik), etc...

But what I don't see is a standard puppy like in the old days. Perhaps I'm an idiot and can't see whats in front of me, but I do kinda wonder when the last releases there were in the 4.x and 5.x branches? Is Slacko the reincarnation of the 3.x branch that never happened? Could us puppians figure out which (or which couple) main branches should be built for a strong downstream distribution?

What I propose I don't currently have a name for, but I'll say it would be like if there was a Puppy 6.x.x branch that would continue where Puppy 5.x and 4.x left off? Anyone have any suggestions?

I'll leave a poll up for people to vote on their preferred branch and puplet, just that way we can see the usage of different ones if we do wish to go forward.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website 
Evil20071


Joined: 07 Jun 2008
Posts: 490
Location: Piedmont, SC,.United States

PostPosted: Fri 28 Nov 2014, 14:01    Post subject:  

Agreed. The lack of a main trunk is depressing, in a way. There are many users who I have tried to introduce to Puppy who had little to no background experience with *nix based systems (unless you count Apple or Android) who didn't quite understand the concepts of an operating system being compatible with software from another os that is made by totally different groups of people. They didn't know if they would like Slacko for its Slackware compatibility, for example, because they didn't know what slackware is.

Having a main trunk based off of one of the last really popular base Puppy versions like 4.2, and moving on to continue that base trunk would be great. And since we now have the compatibility down for other distros, we may even be able to make some sfs files as compatibility packs for the other distros, or maybe come up with a way to get the kernel to load new modules after jts running already. I know there is a project for editing the initrd.gz files, which tells me that kernel programming is at least feasible for that. Basically, make conversion packs for a base trunk to turn it into say Slacko, of the user so desires.

_________________
TotalElectronics.us
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website AIM Address Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger 
ICQ Number 
neerajkolte


Joined: 10 Feb 2014
Posts: 517
Location: Pune, India.

PostPosted: Fri 28 Nov 2014, 14:19    Post subject:  

could you add a option of 64bit Ubuntu based puppy (Tahr, Precise or Lucid).
Or may be the standard pup should come with both ISOs 32bit and 64bit. User can choose what he wants.

- Neeraj.

_________________
"One of my most productive days was throwing away 1000 lines of code."
- Ken Thompson

“We tend to overestimate the effect of a technology in the short run and underestimate the effect in the long run.”
- Amara’s Law.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
NeroVance


Joined: 10 Oct 2012
Posts: 186
Location: Canada

PostPosted: Fri 28 Nov 2014, 14:23    Post subject:  

neerajkolte wrote:
could you add a option of 64bit Ubuntu based puppy (Tahr, Precise or Lucid).
Or may be the standard pup should come with both ISOs 32bit and 64bit. User can choose what he wants.

- Neeraj.


In that case I'd suggest selecting Ubuntu-based. Me personally I'd suggest making both 32bit and 64bit available, though packages would be incompatible between these, except for arch-independent packages.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website 
NeroVance


Joined: 10 Oct 2012
Posts: 186
Location: Canada

PostPosted: Fri 28 Nov 2014, 14:27    Post subject:  

Evil20071 wrote:
Agreed. The lack of a main trunk is depressing, in a way. There are many users who I have tried to introduce to Puppy who had little to no background experience with *nix based systems (unless you count Apple or Android) who didn't quite understand the concepts of an operating system being compatible with software from another os that is made by totally different groups of people. They didn't know if they would like Slacko for its Slackware compatibility, for example, because they didn't know what slackware is.

Having a main trunk based off of one of the last really popular base Puppy versions like 4.2, and moving on to continue that base trunk would be great. And since we now have the compatibility down for other distros, we may even be able to make some sfs files as compatibility packs for the other distros, or maybe come up with a way to get the kernel to load new modules after jts running already. I know there is a project for editing the initrd.gz files, which tells me that kernel programming is at least feasible for that. Basically, make conversion packs for a base trunk to turn it into say Slacko, of the user so desires.


I like where you are going with this. Personally, I kinda like what FatDog has done, but that's just personal taste. Multiuser as an easy option in a mainline puppy could be useful for people who might transition from not just windows and such, but other distros. With the direction many have gone (systemd, etc.) I think Puppy could be where the stronghold for the Old *nix-like ways.

I do think JWM should stay, it's tradition, maybe even see if we could have an option to use the old non-rounded corners version.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website 
neerajkolte


Joined: 10 Feb 2014
Posts: 517
Location: Pune, India.

PostPosted: Fri 28 Nov 2014, 15:01    Post subject:  

I came to puppy this Feb. Been using Fatdog since.
I do occasionally check out other pups. Mainly precise and the latest Tahr.
I do not know any thing technical, I just love the way Fatdog works.
I recommended Fatdog to some friends. They settled on Precise for it having Ubuntu repo in it's PPM.

_________________
"One of my most productive days was throwing away 1000 lines of code."
- Ken Thompson

“We tend to overestimate the effect of a technology in the short run and underestimate the effect in the long run.”
- Amara’s Law.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
wboz

Joined: 20 Nov 2013
Posts: 222

PostPosted: Fri 28 Nov 2014, 20:25    Post subject:  

I'm feeling free to weigh in despite not being an experienced gent in this subject. Hope in some way it's helpful. Smile

First of all, good luck! I think it's said in these pages that Puppy is a do-ocracy, meaning, you want something done, you go do it. I am very curious if there will be a consensus on what a good "go-forward" puppy line looks like.

An observation: one of Puppy's strengths is its great flexibility. Depending on what is important to your target user, you might set up your distro very differently. Old computers? Graphic designers? Linux noobs looking for big selection of free software? Experienced developers looking to keep their Atom server on line for 320 days at a stretch? I think I am right in saying there is a Puppy to fit most people. Puppy is a family of distributions, not one; what they share is their architecture and mode of operation that makes them unique.

It seems that most of the variants are the work of one or slightly more developers who wanted something that was different from other puppies in development, so they constructed it. Made much easier by Woof!

Now, I know there is plenty of collaboration already. As a beginner it's not always clear to me what goes on behind the scenes before someone posts: "Announcing! Slacko 5.8!" Smile But it seems like most are the product of someone going, "I know what I'd like to see and no one is producing it, so I'm gonna have to go build that myself." ... and that seems to work well. I do think there is one potential customer you don't want to target, and that's relatively unsophisticated consumers looking for a android-level-of-dummy-proofing-to-replace-their-windows-XP. That customer is way, way too hard to please (impossible?) given how Puppy is produced, ie ad hoc and unpaid.

I personally like the variety available. I am a big fan of Lucid because of the simplicity if not looks, and Tahrpup is probably the best for beginners looking for a nice-looking distribution. But I also find that Slacko is the current leader in sophistication, plus there is the upcoming spectre of systemd to try and figure out how to deal with ... a problem I need to leave to people in this community far smarter than myself! But could I say that Slacko should be a "Standard" Puppy? If so only in name, because, maybe another user really wants access to the Ubuntu repositories and so that's important as an alternative. And maybe a third user (etc, etc) ...

I never was completely clear what the break is between the 4-series "old puppies" and the newer ones. I thought it was simply that the newer ones are constructed with automated scripts for building (woof), but is there something else structurally different? I'd love to learn (feel free to point to another resource if that's easier).
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
NeroVance


Joined: 10 Oct 2012
Posts: 186
Location: Canada

PostPosted: Fri 28 Nov 2014, 20:30    Post subject:  

neerajkolte wrote:
I came to puppy this Feb. Been using Fatdog since.
I do occasionally check out other pups. Mainly precise and the latest Tahr.
I do not know any thing technical, I just love the way Fatdog works.
I recommended Fatdog to some friends. They settled on Precise for it having Ubuntu repo in it's PPM.


I got a 64bit laptop, hence Fatdog on a USB stick could be a good idea to have.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website 
chiron²

Joined: 21 Jan 2014
Posts: 37

PostPosted: Sat 29 Nov 2014, 01:29    Post subject:  

I use FatDog most of the time for it's speed, but sometimes find it hard to come by the programs I need/want (eg I can't get my Philips based Astrocam to work in FD, works in LuPu, Slacko64 ...) and the recent FD700 again has issues with my meanwhile quite ancient radeon. That keeps me from updating, so I am still with 630. The 32bit machines use either lupu or slacko, and I like slacko better. Tried Slacko64, but it appeared sluggish compared to FD. Best for me would be FD with a 'compatibility pack' and package management -including dependencies- for any major distro, preferrably debian/slackware.

Voted for Slacko above, 'cause it's a very noob-friendly experience and thus better suited as a mainstream puppy.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
Illutorium

Joined: 06 Aug 2014
Posts: 71

PostPosted: Sat 29 Nov 2014, 06:35    Post subject:  

Only 64bit's developments... (as a be One-Day-Updated...)
But if it now... FatDog64 or with Newest 64bit kernel...
Tahr are be nicest too for a 4GB RAM's...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
BarryK
Puppy Master


Joined: 09 May 2005
Posts: 7446
Location: Perth, Western Australia

PostPosted: Sat 29 Nov 2014, 07:25    Post subject:  

Hi,
There *is* a "mainline" Puppy!

Puppies built from woof-CE are following the "mainline".

woof-CE is the community-maintained woof, forked after I retired from Puppy development.

woof-CE github:
https://github.com/puppylinux-woof-CE/woof-CE

woof-CE mail-list:
http://woof-ce.26403.n7.nabble.com/

Discussing woof-CE in this Puppy Forum:
http://www.murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?t=90202

The latest "official" Puppy, built from woof-CE, is Tahrpup 6.0, which was released recently, and is announced on distrowatch.

My blog announcement for Tahrpup:
http://bkhome.org/news/?viewDetailed=00097

before Tahrpup 6.0, there was also the "official" Puppy, Slacko 5,7, created by 01micko, also built with woof-CE (in fact, the first official release to do so):
http://bkhome.org/news/?viewDetailed=00073

I understand the confusion. It really is not at all obvious these days that there is still a "mainline" pup forging ahead.

Tahrpup is built from Debian DEBs, Slacko from Slackware pkgs. It is in the nature of Puppy to be able to build from the packages of any distro, so future puppies will continue this diversity, including the official releases.

_________________
http://bkhome.org/news/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website 
rcrsn51


Joined: 05 Sep 2006
Posts: 10076
Location: Stratford, Ontario

PostPosted: Sat 29 Nov 2014, 09:26    Post subject:  

BarryK wrote:
The latest "official" Puppy, built from woof-CE, is Tahrpup 6.0, which was released recently, and is announced on distrowatch.

It would be nice if Tahrpup was also listed on puppylinux.com as a Latest Version.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
BarryK
Puppy Master


Joined: 09 May 2005
Posts: 7446
Location: Perth, Western Australia

PostPosted: Sat 29 Nov 2014, 10:05    Post subject:  

rcrsn51 wrote:
BarryK wrote:
The latest "official" Puppy, built from woof-CE, is Tahrpup 6.0, which was released recently, and is announced on distrowatch.

It would be nice if Tahrpup was also listed on puppylinux.com as a Latest Version.


Sorry, I forgot about that, will update very soon.

There are some other updates for puppylinux.com that I have been intending to do.

_________________
http://bkhome.org/news/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website 
NeroVance


Joined: 10 Oct 2012
Posts: 186
Location: Canada

PostPosted: Sat 29 Nov 2014, 21:23    Post subject:  

BarryK wrote:
Hi,
There *is* a "mainline" Puppy!

Puppies built from woof-CE are following the "mainline".

woof-CE is the community-maintained woof, forked after I retired from Puppy development.

woof-CE github:
https://github.com/puppylinux-woof-CE/woof-CE

woof-CE mail-list:
http://woof-ce.26403.n7.nabble.com/

Discussing woof-CE in this Puppy Forum:
http://www.murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?t=90202

The latest "official" Puppy, built from woof-CE, is Tahrpup 6.0, which was released recently, and is announced on distrowatch.

My blog announcement for Tahrpup:
http://bkhome.org/news/?viewDetailed=00097

before Tahrpup 6.0, there was also the "official" Puppy, Slacko 5,7, created by 01micko, also built with woof-CE (in fact, the first official release to do so):
http://bkhome.org/news/?viewDetailed=00073

I understand the confusion. It really is not at all obvious these days that there is still a "mainline" pup forging ahead.

Tahrpup is built from Debian DEBs, Slacko from Slackware pkgs. It is in the nature of Puppy to be able to build from the packages of any distro, so future puppies will continue this diversity, including the official releases.


Thank you Barry, I am quite happy to hear it Very Happy

Though I will admit having multiple official puppies can get kinda confusing , even for me Confused, but I do think there is value in having such. TahrPup sounds like what could be a good Puppy going ahead, though I do need to try it out first to make that kind of judgement.

Cheers Barry, and I am glad you still have an active role with this distro.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website 
vicmz

Joined: 15 Jan 2012
Posts: 1199

PostPosted: Sun 30 Nov 2014, 23:14    Post subject:  

BarryK wrote:
Hi,
There *is* a "mainline" Puppy!

Puppies built from woof-CE are following the "mainline".

woof-CE is the community-maintained woof, forked after I retired from Puppy development.

woof-CE github:
https://github.com/puppylinux-woof-CE/woof-CE

woof-CE mail-list:
http://woof-ce.26403.n7.nabble.com/

Discussing woof-CE in this Puppy Forum:
http://www.murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?t=90202

The latest "official" Puppy, built from woof-CE, is Tahrpup 6.0, which was released recently, and is announced on distrowatch.

My blog announcement for Tahrpup:
http://bkhome.org/news/?viewDetailed=00097

before Tahrpup 6.0, there was also the "official" Puppy, Slacko 5,7, created by 01micko, also built with woof-CE (in fact, the first official release to do so):
http://bkhome.org/news/?viewDetailed=00073

I understand the confusion. It really is not at all obvious these days that there is still a "mainline" pup forging ahead.

Tahrpup is built from Debian DEBs, Slacko from Slackware pkgs. It is in the nature of Puppy to be able to build from the packages of any distro, so future puppies will continue this diversity, including the official releases.


That's actually what I thought. Thanks for clarifying.

As a simple note, 666philb's Tahrpup is from Ubuntu DEBs. Pemasu's Dpup Wheezy is from Debian DEBs.

_________________
OB Precise 15.01 kernel 3.17.7|Puppy Linux en español
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
Display posts from previous:   Sort by:   
Page 1 of 2 [21 Posts]   Goto page: 1, 2 Next
Post new topic   Reply to topic View previous topic :: View next topic
 Forum index » Advanced Topics » Puppy Projects » Next Puppy Development
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: 0.1691s ][ Queries: 13 (0.0115s) ][ GZIP on ]