Some of you may know that Puppy 3 "Very Happy" is compatible with Slackware binaries . . .
What will this mean?
Have we joined the Church of the Sub-genius from which the term slack is derived?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Church_of_the_SubGenius
Does it mean that Slackware has some of this Xll software we can use?
http://www.snap2objects.com/2007/08/21/ ... _programs/
S L A C K
Lobster? If you look into Mark's PSI programme? You'll find that he has a "GSlapt.pup". IF that dotpup is STILL compatible with 2.20 it'll mean this: You can have yourself a field day of FUN with all the programmes found in GSlapt! 
Actually, since Puppy has always had a fairly good compatibility record with Slacky those of us who have been brave enough to "test the waters" with Mark's "GSlapt.pup" have been having that field day ever since he brought that programme out. I've installed it on every single pup I've had and with wise use I've yet to bork my system up!
Of course, now when 2.20 become stable those of us using Mark's dotpup will be able to lessen some of the restrictions which he's placed into it for protecting us from borking our installs, such as relaxing the GTK2 downloads and such.
I hope this helped Lobster?
Amicalement,
Eyes-Only
"L'Peau-Rouge"
(P/S: And give yourself more credit than you do Lobster! You're far brighter in Linux than many of us here!)
Actually, since Puppy has always had a fairly good compatibility record with Slacky those of us who have been brave enough to "test the waters" with Mark's "GSlapt.pup" have been having that field day ever since he brought that programme out. I've installed it on every single pup I've had and with wise use I've yet to bork my system up!
Of course, now when 2.20 become stable those of us using Mark's dotpup will be able to lessen some of the restrictions which he's placed into it for protecting us from borking our installs, such as relaxing the GTK2 downloads and such.
I hope this helped Lobster?
Amicalement,
Eyes-Only
"L'Peau-Rouge"
(P/S: And give yourself more credit than you do Lobster! You're far brighter in Linux than many of us here!)
*~*~*~*~*~*
Proud user of LXpup and 3-Headed Dog.
*~*~*~*~*~*
Proud user of LXpup and 3-Headed Dog.
*~*~*~*~*~*
Yes, with gslapt you already could install slackware packages in the past, from Slackware 10/11.
But there was no guaratuee that they would work (though many did).
Puppy used some different basic libraries, and placed/expected files in some different folders, this could be a problem.
Now in Puppy 2.20 you could change the settings in gslapt, to use the repository of Slackware 12 instead of Slackware 11.
Now almost every package should work.
I *think* Gslapt will not download dependencies by default, as I had to disable for example the glibc package.
I think enabling it would be needed so that the dependency download works.
You might try to remove some of the exclude-statements in the options of gslapt.
This will require some tests (trial and error), but do NOT do it on a "productive" system!
Start Puppy with "pfix=ram" or create a backup of pup_save.2fs first, so in case your trials will completely destroy your Puppy you do not loose your working system.
If someone finds good settings, please report them, or simply post your /etc/slapt-get/slapt-getrc.
We then might create a new gslapt.pet with those optimal settings for Puppy 2.20.
I'd really love to check this out on my own, but currently am too busy
So we depend on curious and brave explorers
Get gslapt and background-information from this thread:
http://murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?t=11929
Bien de saluts, Mark
But there was no guaratuee that they would work (though many did).
Puppy used some different basic libraries, and placed/expected files in some different folders, this could be a problem.
Now in Puppy 2.20 you could change the settings in gslapt, to use the repository of Slackware 12 instead of Slackware 11.
Now almost every package should work.
I *think* Gslapt will not download dependencies by default, as I had to disable for example the glibc package.
I think enabling it would be needed so that the dependency download works.
You might try to remove some of the exclude-statements in the options of gslapt.
This will require some tests (trial and error), but do NOT do it on a "productive" system!
Start Puppy with "pfix=ram" or create a backup of pup_save.2fs first, so in case your trials will completely destroy your Puppy you do not loose your working system.
If someone finds good settings, please report them, or simply post your /etc/slapt-get/slapt-getrc.
We then might create a new gslapt.pet with those optimal settings for Puppy 2.20.
I'd really love to check this out on my own, but currently am too busy
So we depend on curious and brave explorers
Get gslapt and background-information from this thread:
http://murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?t=11929
Bien de saluts, Mark
moved slapt-get2 to slapt-get
updated all the repositories to version 12
removed restrictions on glibc-solib* and alsa*
installed moc
it automatically pulled down all the dependencies
moc ran fine both before and after booting
the dependencies used up a lot of space when I think puppy already provided all the necessary libs
I wish that I had removed the dependencies from the list and tried to install without them first.
I've tried to remove the dependencies now but run out out of space on the pup_save and managed to even b0rk the recovery console. I think I've removed ncurses (not clever). I think I'll be dumping this pup_save and stop experimenting with this for now.
I think this is an excellent move forward, if gslapt isn't put into the iso it would an excellent thing to have available through pupget.
updated all the repositories to version 12
removed restrictions on glibc-solib* and alsa*
installed moc
it automatically pulled down all the dependencies
moc ran fine both before and after booting
the dependencies used up a lot of space when I think puppy already provided all the necessary libs
I wish that I had removed the dependencies from the list and tried to install without them first.
I've tried to remove the dependencies now but run out out of space on the pup_save and managed to even b0rk the recovery console. I think I've removed ncurses (not clever). I think I'll be dumping this pup_save and stop experimenting with this for now.
I think this is an excellent move forward, if gslapt isn't put into the iso it would an excellent thing to have available through pupget.
I am not too happy with this binary compatibility with slackware, because it breaks some basic puppy principles. (imho)
(1) Puppy is known to simply 'work'. New experience will be that many but not all packages do work.
(2) Resolving dependencies means beeing dependent of many other developers. We all know that very often dependencies are not resolved correctly.
(3) Puppy is so small that it can easily provide the overhead and redundancy .pup files do have.
(4) The comunity is happy to fulfill compile-requests, providing happy enduser-feeling.
(5) Binary compatibility with slackware will be a compromise in question of diskspace. Moreover the future development of slackware will have influence on the puppy project.
yust my 2 cents.
-f.
(1) Puppy is known to simply 'work'. New experience will be that many but not all packages do work.
(2) Resolving dependencies means beeing dependent of many other developers. We all know that very often dependencies are not resolved correctly.
(3) Puppy is so small that it can easily provide the overhead and redundancy .pup files do have.
(4) The comunity is happy to fulfill compile-requests, providing happy enduser-feeling.
(5) Binary compatibility with slackware will be a compromise in question of diskspace. Moreover the future development of slackware will have influence on the puppy project.
yust my 2 cents.
-f.
-
Pizzasgood
- Posts: 6183
- Joined: Wed 04 May 2005, 20:28
- Location: Knoxville, TN, USA
Actually, the way I see it is this is more for the developers than the users. The users can just stay out of Slackware land and they'll be fine. Meanwhile, the better compatibility will make it easier for people to make packages for Puppy out of slackware packages.(1) Puppy is known to simply 'work'. New experience will be that many but not all packages do work.
So in other words, this just makes it easier to make packages that do work in puppy.
[size=75]Between depriving a man of one hour from his life and depriving him of his life there exists only a difference of degree. --Muad'Dib[/size]
[img]http://www.browserloadofcoolness.com/sig.png[/img]
[img]http://www.browserloadofcoolness.com/sig.png[/img]
-
Lobster
- Official Crustacean
- Posts: 15522
- Joined: Wed 04 May 2005, 06:06
- Location: Paradox Realm
- Contact:
Exactly. Before laborious compiling and depency checking, an existing package can be tried. Puppy has a long history of using packages from other distros. This process will be easier for Barry and other developers.Pizzasgood wrote:So in other words, this just makes it easier to make packages that do work in puppy.
Would either of these be of use?
http://www.slackpkg.org/
http://swaret.sourceforge.net/
I agreeLobster wrote:Exactly. Before laborious compiling and depency checking, an existing package can be tried.
I just used gslapt to load Battle for Wesnoth. It wanted to bring a whole load of dependencies with it. I, unchecked them all except python, loaded the libSDL-for-DOOM dotpup. It worked, cool game, my son will really enjoy that.
As it stands it cost 185MB, but knowing it works is a much better place to start removing rather than having to keep adding stuff just to get it to compile or run.
-
Pizzasgood
- Posts: 6183
- Joined: Wed 04 May 2005, 20:28
- Location: Knoxville, TN, USA
I've made a package or two of Wesnoth for Puppy before, but I don't think it was that big (more like 60-90mb). I didn't include Python, for sure, and it still worked. I don't know how old that version is anymore, maybe Python is a more recent dependency.
On the other hand, the Slackware package might have a bunch of extra files. I'm pretty sure I compiled the last package I did myself so it didn't have anything extra (the source now, was at least 120mb, maybe 200).
Also, the executables and libraries might not have been striped in your package. That would add some weight...
On the other hand, the Slackware package might have a bunch of extra files. I'm pretty sure I compiled the last package I did myself so it didn't have anything extra (the source now, was at least 120mb, maybe 200).
Also, the executables and libraries might not have been striped in your package. That would add some weight...
[size=75]Between depriving a man of one hour from his life and depriving him of his life there exists only a difference of degree. --Muad'Dib[/size]
[img]http://www.browserloadofcoolness.com/sig.png[/img]
[img]http://www.browserloadofcoolness.com/sig.png[/img]
-
Lobster
- Official Crustacean
- Posts: 15522
- Joined: Wed 04 May 2005, 06:06
- Location: Paradox Realm
- Contact:
You can have yourself a field day of FUN with all the programmes found in GSlapt!
Are we having fun yet?
So it seems even now, more so with 2.20, we have even more software available.
Ny first Linux experience was with slackware. This was before Puppy even existed.
Austrumi (which I feel is far better to use than DSL) is a Slackware based distro that aims to be small. Anything small and cute we can use there for 2.20?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Austrumi
Last edited by Lobster on Tue 18 Sep 2007, 22:30, edited 1 time in total.
-
jonyo
Why so?Lobster wrote: Austrumi (which I feel is far better to use then DSL
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Austrumi
-
Lobster
- Official Crustacean
- Posts: 15522
- Joined: Wed 04 May 2005, 06:06
- Location: Paradox Realm
- Contact:
If Puppy was not available I would use Austrumi
If Austrumi was not available I would have to use one of the larger (and slower) Linux versions.
Puppy and Austrumi compare favourably as desktop distros for the end user. On very old hardware there is a place for DSL (it is deservedly popular for this role)
If I was using a very fast up to date computer I would not want or need DSL. So it does not have a future for me, if I upgrade hardware.
If you like or prefer DSL, that is great. I keep an eye on it and find it is true to its below 50MB roots which is great but as other small distros improve, it begins to feel dated and limited.
There is a thread on what DSL is good for (somewhere) and the arguments make perfect sense.
It is not for me [shrug]
If Austrumi was not available I would have to use one of the larger (and slower) Linux versions.
Puppy and Austrumi compare favourably as desktop distros for the end user. On very old hardware there is a place for DSL (it is deservedly popular for this role)
If I was using a very fast up to date computer I would not want or need DSL. So it does not have a future for me, if I upgrade hardware.
If you like or prefer DSL, that is great. I keep an eye on it and find it is true to its below 50MB roots which is great but as other small distros improve, it begins to feel dated and limited.
There is a thread on what DSL is good for (somewhere) and the arguments make perfect sense.
It is not for me [shrug]
-
Colonel Panic
- Posts: 2171
- Joined: Sat 16 Sep 2006, 11:09
There's also Feather Linux, which is based on DSL but with a slightly prettier interface;
http://featherlinux.berlios.de/
I lost my copy a while ago so I haven't tested it properly, but I think it worked pretty well.
http://featherlinux.berlios.de/
I lost my copy a while ago so I haven't tested it properly, but I think it worked pretty well.
To get gslapt/slapt-get working right we need a /var/log/packages populated with puppy's installed packages. Anybody got some time on their hands?
I've been using the Latest gslapt/slapt-get for slackware 12. Don't really see anything better than the one MU posted. Here's the sources I've been using:
SOURCE=http://software.jaos.org/slackpacks/12.0/
SOURCE=http://www.slacky.eu/repository/slackware-12.0/
SOURCE=http://de.slackware-current.net/slackware-current/
SOURCE=http://slackware.cs.utah.edu/pub/slackw ... ware-12.0/
SOURCE=http://mirrors.easynews.com/linux/slack ... ware-12.0/
#DISABLED=ftp://ftp.slackware.com/pub/slackware/slackware-12.0/
I've been using the Latest gslapt/slapt-get for slackware 12. Don't really see anything better than the one MU posted. Here's the sources I've been using:
SOURCE=http://software.jaos.org/slackpacks/12.0/
SOURCE=http://www.slacky.eu/repository/slackware-12.0/
SOURCE=http://de.slackware-current.net/slackware-current/
SOURCE=http://slackware.cs.utah.edu/pub/slackw ... ware-12.0/
SOURCE=http://mirrors.easynews.com/linux/slack ... ware-12.0/
#DISABLED=ftp://ftp.slackware.com/pub/slackware/slackware-12.0/
Since puppy is Slack-compatible, some of you may want to try my src2pkg program which has been especially designed to produce Slackware-compatible packages. But it has also, from the start, included some features which make it great for producing tiny packages as well, such as built-in compression of binaries with upx. It also can be made to archive all the regular documents which also saves space.
I am not sure that it will run correctly on a pure-puppy system though, since it is written for use with BASH.
I'd really like for folks like MU to have a go with it and let me know if something is not working, so I can fix it. I'm moving towards full POSIX compatibility and for usage with BASH-3.2 or dash.
I've been deveolping the program for over 3 years and it has received lots of 'kudos' from experienced Slack users, who are a hard bunch of folks to convince...
The program is multi-platform compatible -tested on x86_64 and ppc platforms(It includes a statically-linked version ot tar and busybox, plus shared lib version of installwatch.
It's a truly unique program among package building software and can compile all kinds of stuff, including simple Makefile, autoconf, Imake, jam, Scons and can even convert binary rpm or debian packages to slackware format. It does *lots* of sanity checks and corrections on package content. It can also be used to create packages from pre-compiled binaries which use an installer script like .run files or install.sh. It also includes a drop-in replacement for the checkindstall program but more robust and complete.
I just today released a new version, so it seemed a good time to mention it here. You can get the latest source or tgz package here:
http://distro.ibiblio.org/pub/linux/dis ... d/src2pkg/
I also maintain a program called PDV, which can be used to create self-extracting packages. I haven't integrated the functionality into src2pkg as I know it won't be use by Slackers. But, I think that it would work well for systems like puppy as it would allow for easy on-the-fly installation of multiple packages. I'd also be willing to incorporate some functionality to make the creation of puppy-compatible packages easier.
src2pkg is pretty darn smart and can usually figure out how to compile sources and create a package without any help at all. It can also write a src2pkg script for you which insures repeatablilty of the build and/or allows you to insert custom code when needed.
I wrote it for myself and use it nearly every day -it allows me to create package in a *very* short time, usually. I currently maintain over 600 programs with it and haven't found anything yet that can't be packaged with it.
I'd really appreciate it if some of you would give it a go and report to me any problems you might have. As mentioned, if you run this without BASH you probably will find that some routines don't work, but I still haven't tried using it with dash or busybox ash, so I'm not sure exactly where there might be hangups.
I am not sure that it will run correctly on a pure-puppy system though, since it is written for use with BASH.
I'd really like for folks like MU to have a go with it and let me know if something is not working, so I can fix it. I'm moving towards full POSIX compatibility and for usage with BASH-3.2 or dash.
I've been deveolping the program for over 3 years and it has received lots of 'kudos' from experienced Slack users, who are a hard bunch of folks to convince...
The program is multi-platform compatible -tested on x86_64 and ppc platforms(It includes a statically-linked version ot tar and busybox, plus shared lib version of installwatch.
It's a truly unique program among package building software and can compile all kinds of stuff, including simple Makefile, autoconf, Imake, jam, Scons and can even convert binary rpm or debian packages to slackware format. It does *lots* of sanity checks and corrections on package content. It can also be used to create packages from pre-compiled binaries which use an installer script like .run files or install.sh. It also includes a drop-in replacement for the checkindstall program but more robust and complete.
I just today released a new version, so it seemed a good time to mention it here. You can get the latest source or tgz package here:
http://distro.ibiblio.org/pub/linux/dis ... d/src2pkg/
I also maintain a program called PDV, which can be used to create self-extracting packages. I haven't integrated the functionality into src2pkg as I know it won't be use by Slackers. But, I think that it would work well for systems like puppy as it would allow for easy on-the-fly installation of multiple packages. I'd also be willing to incorporate some functionality to make the creation of puppy-compatible packages easier.
src2pkg is pretty darn smart and can usually figure out how to compile sources and create a package without any help at all. It can also write a src2pkg script for you which insures repeatablilty of the build and/or allows you to insert custom code when needed.
I wrote it for myself and use it nearly every day -it allows me to create package in a *very* short time, usually. I currently maintain over 600 programs with it and haven't found anything yet that can't be packaged with it.
I'd really appreciate it if some of you would give it a go and report to me any problems you might have. As mentioned, if you run this without BASH you probably will find that some routines don't work, but I still haven't tried using it with dash or busybox ash, so I'm not sure exactly where there might be hangups.