@Announcer
Actually your proposed system willl probably work fine assuming someone techie makes the initial files. I was questioning that instead of using your obvious abilities to provide a fix for a common (check the forum) problem of save file corruption perhaps you should divert your attention towards looking at better ways of saving on puppy...one idea does involve sfs since an archive is very robust ( who has ever has to replace the pup_xxx.sfs file?) but there are others. Dive into the core of puppy...remove the spaghetti and you never know what you might come up with. This forum is about the exchange of ideas.
@sunburnt...
You have a "save folder option", instead of a "Save file". You cretin! That`s my idea!
Hmm name calling lol.. funky bunny is the expression you are looking for.
Well actually slax gave me the idea as it does more or less that. By using a save folder you get the save partition idea but in a neater way. Advantage is you have oodles of room without those precarious 2GB save files I see in use. I use it for all our regular systems apart from on the netbook as it has plenty of ram and I can turn off the hard drive once booted using sfs. (with tidiness and sfs for apps saves run in at 30-60mb uncompressed) As for copyright I did this 3 years ago ...ha! Ooo and for fun have an pupsave like file used like a full install...ie no union...think of emulators...so low ram etc but can run from ntfs/fat. I left multisession alone as thats quite neat a it is. Oh yes I scrapped the usbflash mode 13... seemed silly to me and sfs suits it well.
On a general note remember puppy loads sfs files backwards normally (yeah sorted that too
) so any additional sfs are 'underneath' the main one ...a pain in the neck at times so that's why I changed it... but it may affect any proposed 'recovery' system using the standard sfs loaders.
don't let the bedbugs bite
Mike