Wine 1.1.30 + winetricks +color setter +goodies ...pet & sfs
-
- Posts: 203
- Joined: Tue 06 Jan 2009, 02:49
- Contact:
I recently installed 'pxtget-20090930.pet', then uninstalled it for testing purposes. When I click on it again to reinstall it, nothing appears to happen. Is there something I can do so it will install again?
testing software: Puppy Linux 4.30.
details: full hard drive install from 'puppies-431.1-main-Xserver.iso' [1]
testing software: Puppy Linux 4.30.
details: full hard drive install from 'puppies-431.1-main-Xserver.iso' [1]
- technosaurus
- Posts: 4853
- Joined: Mon 19 May 2008, 01:24
- Location: Blue Springs, MO
- Contact:
crap - you uninstalled the package manager with the package manager
umm... you can run pet2tgz on the .pet and then open the tar.gz and dump it into /
umm... you can run pet2tgz on the .pet and then open the tar.gz and dump it into /
Check out my [url=https://github.com/technosaurus]github repositories[/url]. I may eventually get around to updating my [url=http://bashismal.blogspot.com]blogspot[/url].
That would seem to be part of the problem with using PPM for patches to PPM, or other apps for that matter - it doesn't maintain a difference log to determine how things should be once installed, only knowing that replaced files, if uninstalled, should be gone completely.technosaurus wrote:crap - you uninstalled the package manager with the package manager
umm... you can run pet2tgz on the .pet and then open the tar.gz and dump it into /
Perhaps a puppypatch is in order, that can patch or update apps, and maintain a difference log that knows what files were changed, and more importantly what changes those were, perhaps as descriptors in a tgz or something, so that it can extract and rewrite said differences... that would be complicated, but once done would be a useful tool for updates...
- technosaurus
- Posts: 4853
- Joined: Mon 19 May 2008, 01:24
- Location: Blue Springs, MO
- Contact:
Or maybe I could I repackage it and have it not "register" with... itself - I answer yes to that question so many times I didn't even think about it....would at least prevent breakage.
Check out my [url=https://github.com/technosaurus]github repositories[/url]. I may eventually get around to updating my [url=http://bashismal.blogspot.com]blogspot[/url].
- SilverPuppy
- Posts: 143
- Joined: Fri 29 May 2009, 02:21
Oh goody
I'm glad to see the latest wine a la Technosaurus is available. Just in time to welcome my new daughter into the world, too! She'll have a linuxier world to grow up in. Yay!
I have considered the need for PPM to keep uninstall information beyond just what files were added, too, but not being a coder I am not able to be much help with implementation. I like the idea of being offered the option to create bzip, gzip, or no archive of files replaced during installation, and then be able to have them seamlessly drop back into place during uninstallation. I think that people should have a choice; after all, there would be times (like when I'm building a Puppy WebTV) when the uninstallation archive would be of no use whatsoever as the outcome was known beforehand, and creating the replaced files archive would just lengthen the installation time for no purpose. Also, giving the choice between gzip and bzip allows people to choose the trade-off: faster installation but larger uninstall archive with gzip, or slower installation but much smaller uninstall archive with bzip.
Let me rephrase that: I used to do some coding years ago in Basic and Batch (DOS Scripting) but have since forgotten most of it. At some point I will probably start teaching myself whatever coding languages are widely used in Linux, but right now I have 2 young children and a business that kinda precludes that. Hopefully later I'll be able to give more than ideas back to this community, which means so much to me.
Ciao!
I have considered the need for PPM to keep uninstall information beyond just what files were added, too, but not being a coder I am not able to be much help with implementation. I like the idea of being offered the option to create bzip, gzip, or no archive of files replaced during installation, and then be able to have them seamlessly drop back into place during uninstallation. I think that people should have a choice; after all, there would be times (like when I'm building a Puppy WebTV) when the uninstallation archive would be of no use whatsoever as the outcome was known beforehand, and creating the replaced files archive would just lengthen the installation time for no purpose. Also, giving the choice between gzip and bzip allows people to choose the trade-off: faster installation but larger uninstall archive with gzip, or slower installation but much smaller uninstall archive with bzip.
Let me rephrase that: I used to do some coding years ago in Basic and Batch (DOS Scripting) but have since forgotten most of it. At some point I will probably start teaching myself whatever coding languages are widely used in Linux, but right now I have 2 young children and a business that kinda precludes that. Hopefully later I'll be able to give more than ideas back to this community, which means so much to me.
Ciao!
- SilverPuppy
- Posts: 143
- Joined: Fri 29 May 2009, 02:21
Just curious.....
1. What format is the archive inside the PXT files? The antiquated version of WinRAR that I shoved it at didn't recognize it. PET files it recognizes at .tar.gz archives inside a wrapper.
2. Can anyone read my text on my avatar or is it too tiny?
2. Can anyone read my text on my avatar or is it too tiny?
- technosaurus
- Posts: 4853
- Joined: Mon 19 May 2008, 01:24
- Location: Blue Springs, MO
- Contact:
pxt is in XZ format (basically the successor to lzma) it is even smaller than bzip2 for compression and almost as fast as gunzip for decompression the down side is long compression times similar to bzip (but that is usually only done once - decompression could be 1000s)
Backup
during install when the files are copied using cp you could check the destdir for a file of the same name (simple if) and mv $path/$file $path/~$file ... for uninstall you would need to check for the $path/~$file with and rm -f $path/~$file .... then mv $path/~$file $path/$file ... or something like that - may get more complicated with directories etc... (path and file are just random variable names I chose for illustration)... see /usr/local/petget/... for the scripts if you want to have a go at it
Backup
during install when the files are copied using cp you could check the destdir for a file of the same name (simple if) and mv $path/$file $path/~$file ... for uninstall you would need to check for the $path/~$file with and rm -f $path/~$file .... then mv $path/~$file $path/$file ... or something like that - may get more complicated with directories etc... (path and file are just random variable names I chose for illustration)... see /usr/local/petget/... for the scripts if you want to have a go at it
Check out my [url=https://github.com/technosaurus]github repositories[/url]. I may eventually get around to updating my [url=http://bashismal.blogspot.com]blogspot[/url].
- SilverPuppy
- Posts: 143
- Joined: Fri 29 May 2009, 02:21
Yuck.....
Well, I have to say that my first experience with the PXT file format has been less than satisfying. I installed the patch, but it didn't seem to do anything, and it still ignores me when I click on the PXT Wine file. I tried pointing it at the petget script through the "Open With" folder, but that didn't do anything either. The "Set Run Action" option is greyed out, and if I launch petget from the command line it won't open the Wine package because it's expecting a .PET file. What have I missed here?
I should note that I am using 4.1.2, as 4.2.anything is much too slow on these older machines and I haven't tried 4.3 yet. I'm not likely to soon, either, since I need a stable product for my application, not merely a proof-of-concept, and 4.3 is basically 4.1 rebuilt anyhow. If I'm missing pieces as a result, can someone kindly advise me as to which so that I can shoehorn them back in?
--Written on a PII-350 w/ 160MB RAM in Firefox 3.5 under Puppy Linux 4.1.2
I should note that I am using 4.1.2, as 4.2.anything is much too slow on these older machines and I haven't tried 4.3 yet. I'm not likely to soon, either, since I need a stable product for my application, not merely a proof-of-concept, and 4.3 is basically 4.1 rebuilt anyhow. If I'm missing pieces as a result, can someone kindly advise me as to which so that I can shoehorn them back in?
--Written on a PII-350 w/ 160MB RAM in Firefox 3.5 under Puppy Linux 4.1.2
- SilverPuppy
- Posts: 143
- Joined: Fri 29 May 2009, 02:21
Oi!
Well, I have further played around with it and discovered that I was missing some programs per here:
I still haven't gotten it to go, but am rather getting inclined to unzip it manually. I don't need the uninstall, and am getting peeved with this Xtra hassle PET........hopefully in the near future a true plug-n-play petget patch for the .PXT files will exist.....right now it clearly does not.
Oh, and simply applying all the patches as mentioned then renaming the archive to .PET just left me with a misnamed ".gz" file in my .Packages directory to clean up. Maybe that'll make it easier to un-XZ, we'll see.
I still haven't gotten it to go, but am rather getting inclined to unzip it manually. I don't need the uninstall, and am getting peeved with this Xtra hassle PET........hopefully in the near future a true plug-n-play petget patch for the .PXT files will exist.....right now it clearly does not.
Oh, and simply applying all the patches as mentioned then renaming the archive to .PET just left me with a misnamed ".gz" file in my .Packages directory to clean up. Maybe that'll make it easier to un-XZ, we'll see.
- SilverPuppy
- Posts: 143
- Joined: Fri 29 May 2009, 02:21
Nope!
......and the inappropriately-named .gz file gave me a warning about some bit being set and aborted. UGH!
Techno.....can you PLEASE make a regular .PET of that? If server traffic is an issue, I'll host it, but for goodness' sake! This PXT format is a bit much of a headache for me; I can only imagine what a total newcomer to Linux would make of this mess......
Techno.....can you PLEASE make a regular .PET of that? If server traffic is an issue, I'll host it, but for goodness' sake! This PXT format is a bit much of a headache for me; I can only imagine what a total newcomer to Linux would make of this mess......
- technosaurus
- Posts: 4853
- Joined: Mon 19 May 2008, 01:24
- Location: Blue Springs, MO
- Contact:
The patch is against 4.30. (4.2.X is significantly different) - did you install the pet at the beginning of this thread?
To manually convert to pet:
pxt2txz *.pxt
xz -d *xz
gzip *.tar
tgz2pet *.tar.gz
To manually convert to pet:
pxt2txz *.pxt
xz -d *xz
gzip *.tar
tgz2pet *.tar.gz
Check out my [url=https://github.com/technosaurus]github repositories[/url]. I may eventually get around to updating my [url=http://bashismal.blogspot.com]blogspot[/url].
- SilverPuppy
- Posts: 143
- Joined: Fri 29 May 2009, 02:21
Umm...yeah......
Yes, I did install the patch at the beginning of the article, and it doesn't do squat that I can see. I'd have probably uninstalled it, too, except that someone else was kind enough to bork his PPM first and tell us about it.
So I guess I'll have to do it manually. What a load of yucky! Maybe I'll expand it to a folder and make a standard .PET of it. I should learn how anyway......... if I can make a working .PET of it, I'll post it on my website and link it here.
So I guess I'll have to do it manually. What a load of yucky! Maybe I'll expand it to a folder and make a standard .PET of it. I should learn how anyway......... if I can make a working .PET of it, I'll post it on my website and link it here.
- Dingo
- Posts: 1437
- Joined: Tue 11 Dec 2007, 17:48
- Location: somewhere at the end of rainbow...
- Contact:
uncompressed pxt package and repackaged as simple pet
you can download here (bottom of page)
http://puppylover.netsons.org/dokupuppy/programs:wine
or here (direct link)
http://www.megaupload.com/?d=UPF1FXO7
you can download here (bottom of page)
http://puppylover.netsons.org/dokupuppy/programs:wine
or here (direct link)
http://www.megaupload.com/?d=UPF1FXO7
replace .co.cc with .info to get access to stuff I posted in forum
dropbox 2GB free
OpenOffice for Puppy Linux
dropbox 2GB free
OpenOffice for Puppy Linux
- SilverPuppy
- Posts: 143
- Joined: Fri 29 May 2009, 02:21
Thanks a muchos!
Thanks greatly! That'll make things much easier on me. I'll try it soon, probably tomorrow. (Not at my real computer. Am running Puppy, though, on a laptop whose hard drive is out of it for copying. )
I'll put it on my website and send you a link so future people don't have to fight with megaupload.
I'll put it on my website and send you a link so future people don't have to fight with megaupload.
- technosaurus
- Posts: 4853
- Joined: Mon 19 May 2008, 01:24
- Location: Blue Springs, MO
- Contact:
-
- Posts: 632
- Joined: Tue 02 Oct 2007, 07:39
WINE 1.1.31 is out!
This version brings improved GDI rendering performance, sound driver fixes and finally fixes the nasty bugs when running Trackmania Nations
...and a lot of additional bugfixes and improvements (as always).
http://www.winehq.org/announce/1.1.31
This version brings improved GDI rendering performance, sound driver fixes and finally fixes the nasty bugs when running Trackmania Nations
...and a lot of additional bugfixes and improvements (as always).
http://www.winehq.org/announce/1.1.31
- SilverPuppy
- Posts: 143
- Joined: Fri 29 May 2009, 02:21
Aha!
PET! PET! PET!
Stuck record, aren't I?
Stuck record, aren't I?
- SilverPuppy
- Posts: 143
- Joined: Fri 29 May 2009, 02:21
HEY!
Hey now! I resemble that remark!mikeb wrote:Thee obsession with compression.....well one has to be careful with those 200MB hard drives
mike
Actually, I have been known to use those old hard drives as swap space. Puppy goes easy on its swap space, so it actually works out well. Although the data transfer rates on those old drives is not really very hot, the fact that it's a dedicated device makes it OK, since the bulk of the transacting is occuring on the main HD. The swap drive(s) in my machines don't have to do a lot, just take a bit of overflow once in awhile, then give it back upon request.
I tested it to see if having a swap partition on the main hard drive (faster) or the little hard drive (slower) was more advantageous to net system speed. Without actually benchmarking it, it felt a bit faster with the separate device. I blame that on it being a separate channel so it reduces the seeking on the main HD.
FWIW........
-
- Posts: 203
- Joined: Tue 06 Jan 2009, 02:49
- Contact:
wine_lite-1.1.30-i486.pet
If no one has any objections, I have mirrored 'wine_lite-1.1.30-i486.pet'
here.
here.