Hi,
Before it gets buried by newer posts, or never read because its in the Utilities Section of the Additional Software Forum, just a note with link for those who ran into problems trying to use Lazy Puppy's excellent PaDS pet (which combines pets, debs & other packages to create SFSes) under 64-bit or 32-bit Operating Systems, Detailed explanation and pet here: http://www.murga-linux.com/puppy/viewto ... 751#940751
mikesLr
How to Build Apps with PaDS under both 64 & 32-bit Puppies
How to Build Apps with PaDS under both 64 & 32-bit Puppies
Last edited by mikeslr on Thu 02 Feb 2017, 18:22, edited 1 time in total.
Don't know if it works in FatDog, Slacko > Non-Ubuntu Based
Hi Flash,
My post above was solely for the purpose of alerting potential users of the post in the Utilities Section. On the linked thread I explained that my experience was only building SFSes under Puppies woofed from Ubuntu binaries and that regarding its handling of Slackware packages & rpms "your guess was better than mine." I asked for feedback.
The problem with PaDS under "Ubuntu64-bit" Puppies was its dependency on a application, unrpm.pet, which utilized a binary, dpkg-deb2, compiled in 2008, for "unpacking" debs. Xenialpup64 and Tahrpup64 include a binary, /usr/lib/depkg-deb, for that purpose.
LazyPuppy is highly skilled in writing Bash-applications. I'm not. PaDS and unrpm are his creations that, with few exceptions such as the dpkg-deb2 binary, consist of Bash-scripts. The best I can do is follow their logic: figure out their work flow. As I haven't tried to build applications under Fatdog64s or Slacko64s (a) I haven't tried to follow the logic of LazyPuppy's pets to figure out how they unpack tgzs, txzs, nor rpms for that matter and; (b) don't know if they also unsuccessfully attempt to employ an old binary on such packages.
I'm not sure how often someone working under FatDog64 or Slacko64 will want to unpack a deb. I thought about including a binary but decided that binaries might differ somewhat between Ubuntu-based Puppies and that a symlink to an existent binary would be less likely to fail. Edit, I just checked Slacko64-6.3.2. It does include /usr/bin/dpkg-deb, so unrpm64 should be able to decompress debs under that Slacko for whatever that is worth.
The explanation of the problem and my solution should enable reasonably skilled users of FatDog64 and other Slacko64s, if they need to, to obtain a dpkg-deb binary and modify unrpm64. And, if and when feedback is provided, I'll be happy to generate and publish different versions if needed.
mikesLr
p.s. The logical place to post about unrpm64 was the Utilities section where LazyPuppy also published about his originals. But I rarely have occasion to view that section and wondered how often other users did. Before the above post, there had only been 5 downloads of unrpm64. In the last day there has been 10 more. "If you build a better mousetrap the world will beat a path to your door" isn't true. Which is why people in advertising make the big bucks.
My post above was solely for the purpose of alerting potential users of the post in the Utilities Section. On the linked thread I explained that my experience was only building SFSes under Puppies woofed from Ubuntu binaries and that regarding its handling of Slackware packages & rpms "your guess was better than mine." I asked for feedback.
The problem with PaDS under "Ubuntu64-bit" Puppies was its dependency on a application, unrpm.pet, which utilized a binary, dpkg-deb2, compiled in 2008, for "unpacking" debs. Xenialpup64 and Tahrpup64 include a binary, /usr/lib/depkg-deb, for that purpose.
LazyPuppy is highly skilled in writing Bash-applications. I'm not. PaDS and unrpm are his creations that, with few exceptions such as the dpkg-deb2 binary, consist of Bash-scripts. The best I can do is follow their logic: figure out their work flow. As I haven't tried to build applications under Fatdog64s or Slacko64s (a) I haven't tried to follow the logic of LazyPuppy's pets to figure out how they unpack tgzs, txzs, nor rpms for that matter and; (b) don't know if they also unsuccessfully attempt to employ an old binary on such packages.
I'm not sure how often someone working under FatDog64 or Slacko64 will want to unpack a deb. I thought about including a binary but decided that binaries might differ somewhat between Ubuntu-based Puppies and that a symlink to an existent binary would be less likely to fail. Edit, I just checked Slacko64-6.3.2. It does include /usr/bin/dpkg-deb, so unrpm64 should be able to decompress debs under that Slacko for whatever that is worth.
The explanation of the problem and my solution should enable reasonably skilled users of FatDog64 and other Slacko64s, if they need to, to obtain a dpkg-deb binary and modify unrpm64. And, if and when feedback is provided, I'll be happy to generate and publish different versions if needed.
mikesLr
p.s. The logical place to post about unrpm64 was the Utilities section where LazyPuppy also published about his originals. But I rarely have occasion to view that section and wondered how often other users did. Before the above post, there had only been 5 downloads of unrpm64. In the last day there has been 10 more. "If you build a better mousetrap the world will beat a path to your door" isn't true. Which is why people in advertising make the big bucks.
-
Puppus Dogfellow
- Posts: 1667
- Joined: Tue 08 Jan 2013, 01:39
- Location: nyc
unrpm-all should enable use of PaDS on All Modern Puppies
Hi All,
I think I can now answer Flash's question even though I've only used it under Xenialpups and Tahrpups, both 32 and 64-bit versions. The answer is yes.
All "modern" Puppies (both 32 & 64-bit) include a binary for extracting the files packaged as ".debs". That binary is /usr/bin/dpkg-deb. PaDS was published along with a companion pet, unrpm.pet, which PaDS called to extract debs. The operative binary to accomplish that was /root/my-application/bin/dpkg-deb2. dpkg-deb2 was compiled in 2008 and apparently no longer worked with "modern 64-bit" debs.
The unrpm-all pet merely deleted dpkp-deb2 and substituted in its place a bash-script which calls/utilizes the already present /usr/bin/dpkg-deb.
I have examined a representative sample of all "modern" Puppy variations, with Carolina being the oldest examined. All include /usr/bin/dpkg-deb. Carolina was a continuation of Saluki, and Saluki was a remaster of Racy. Barry K published Racy in or about 2012 "for modern computers"; publishing Wary at about the same time "for older computers". They were the foundation for the "5th" series of Puppies.
I can not recall any discussion by any Puppy creator since then who felt the need to utilize anything other than /usr/bin/dpkg-deb for extracting debs. So, with at least the Series 5 Puppies, unrpm-all, when used with PaDS should function.
As I've mentioned several times, I have not examined any version of unrpm's ability to extract any other type of package.
Unrpm-all can be found here: http://www.murga-linux.com/puppy/viewto ... 751#940751
mikesLr
I think I can now answer Flash's question even though I've only used it under Xenialpups and Tahrpups, both 32 and 64-bit versions. The answer is yes.
All "modern" Puppies (both 32 & 64-bit) include a binary for extracting the files packaged as ".debs". That binary is /usr/bin/dpkg-deb. PaDS was published along with a companion pet, unrpm.pet, which PaDS called to extract debs. The operative binary to accomplish that was /root/my-application/bin/dpkg-deb2. dpkg-deb2 was compiled in 2008 and apparently no longer worked with "modern 64-bit" debs.
The unrpm-all pet merely deleted dpkp-deb2 and substituted in its place a bash-script which calls/utilizes the already present /usr/bin/dpkg-deb.
I have examined a representative sample of all "modern" Puppy variations, with Carolina being the oldest examined. All include /usr/bin/dpkg-deb. Carolina was a continuation of Saluki, and Saluki was a remaster of Racy. Barry K published Racy in or about 2012 "for modern computers"; publishing Wary at about the same time "for older computers". They were the foundation for the "5th" series of Puppies.
I can not recall any discussion by any Puppy creator since then who felt the need to utilize anything other than /usr/bin/dpkg-deb for extracting debs. So, with at least the Series 5 Puppies, unrpm-all, when used with PaDS should function.
As I've mentioned several times, I have not examined any version of unrpm's ability to extract any other type of package.
Unrpm-all can be found here: http://www.murga-linux.com/puppy/viewto ... 751#940751
mikesLr