Puppylinux for the OLPC laptops: XOpup
Puppy Archiver Stored Files
Mavrothal, this may sound pretty basic but I was looking for the storage directory after downloading Google-Chrome, found only the configuration/settings files.
Does that mean the repository downloaded files were auto-deleted?
This would be useful information since I'm sharing files between at least 2 notebooks, currently running Puppy on them both.
Again, appreciate the support you've provided!
Does that mean the repository downloaded files were auto-deleted?
This would be useful information since I'm sharing files between at least 2 notebooks, currently running Puppy on them both.
Again, appreciate the support you've provided!
Re: Puppy Archiver Stored Files
Sorry but is not clear to me again. What "storage directory"?WhyNot? wrote:Mavrothal, this may sound pretty basic but I was looking for the storage directory after downloading Google-Chrome, found only the configuration/settings files.
Does that mean the repository downloaded files were auto-deleted?
If you select save the file, it goes into whatever download directory you have defined. If you select open the file (that you are about to download) goes to /tmp and then is opened with whatever application opens it (petget in this case). It stays in /tmp till you restart the computer (since the /tmp directory is not saved).
Is that what you are asking?
== [url=http://www.catb.org/esr/faqs/smart-questions.html]Here is how to solve your[/url] [url=https://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~sgtatham/bugs.html]Linux problems fast[/url] ==
Storage directory for downloaded .Pet files
OK (again), will be more specific.
Went to the Puppy Lucid site and found what I was looking for, a fully assembled stable release of Google Chrome as a .Pet file. Did that because I was interested in sharing that download between 2 OLPC machines (XO1 and XO1.5) and typically archive .Pet files when possible including the new /ftp archive locations you provided.
But installation from available repositories under the package manager runs differently, there's no .Pet download typically, instead a collection of files are downloaded from a variety of locations, are these unassembled .Pet collections? Or just dependencies?
What I've noticed is that while downloading from the repositories there are nearly always several files involved, and I'm often prompted by the Puppy Package installation process that those libraries need to be complete.
No such prompting for Google_Chrome-Lucid-17.pet, got that directly thru download via my browser.
So I was concerned that simply downloading and installing the .Pet (Large by Puppy standards, 41megs) may not include dependencies since it bypasses the packaging program altogether.
I realize that you've already answered that particular case, you've recommended downloading and installing that .Pet. But I want to answer the larger question about whether I can go to the Lucid Puppy site and simply download and install .Pet files without concern for dependencies, and of course I'd like to share those archived .Pet files between machines if possible.
I've tried to track this process before, searched directories for files while installing another program (FBreader) under the package manager but couldn't locate any .Pet files, ran a search under MC (Midnight Commander) without success other than finding the "Alternate Pets" directory.
Again I'm wondering about unassembled .Pet (collective) files that may make it difficult to archive or share files between 2 OLPC machines, would I otherwise know that my downloaded Google_Chrome-Lucid-17.pet contains all necessary files?
As a general case applied to ANY .Pet Lucid download, I mean.
Thanks again Mavrothal, realize these details may entirely bore you but my curiosity persists
Went to the Puppy Lucid site and found what I was looking for, a fully assembled stable release of Google Chrome as a .Pet file. Did that because I was interested in sharing that download between 2 OLPC machines (XO1 and XO1.5) and typically archive .Pet files when possible including the new /ftp archive locations you provided.
But installation from available repositories under the package manager runs differently, there's no .Pet download typically, instead a collection of files are downloaded from a variety of locations, are these unassembled .Pet collections? Or just dependencies?
What I've noticed is that while downloading from the repositories there are nearly always several files involved, and I'm often prompted by the Puppy Package installation process that those libraries need to be complete.
No such prompting for Google_Chrome-Lucid-17.pet, got that directly thru download via my browser.
So I was concerned that simply downloading and installing the .Pet (Large by Puppy standards, 41megs) may not include dependencies since it bypasses the packaging program altogether.
I realize that you've already answered that particular case, you've recommended downloading and installing that .Pet. But I want to answer the larger question about whether I can go to the Lucid Puppy site and simply download and install .Pet files without concern for dependencies, and of course I'd like to share those archived .Pet files between machines if possible.
I've tried to track this process before, searched directories for files while installing another program (FBreader) under the package manager but couldn't locate any .Pet files, ran a search under MC (Midnight Commander) without success other than finding the "Alternate Pets" directory.
Again I'm wondering about unassembled .Pet (collective) files that may make it difficult to archive or share files between 2 OLPC machines, would I otherwise know that my downloaded Google_Chrome-Lucid-17.pet contains all necessary files?
As a general case applied to ANY .Pet Lucid download, I mean.
Thanks again Mavrothal, realize these details may entirely bore you but my curiosity persists
Now I get it
1. Pets from another puppy are likely to work if they are using the same base (ie Racy 5.3.x) and unlikely if different (ie Lucy 5.2.x to Precise 5.4.x). No warranties though, just try and see. If you start the app from the terminal (ie "chromium") and fails it is going to "tell" you what is missing.
2. When you install a pet from the PPM goes through the pet.specs file in the pet and checks to see if the dependencies are there. Also does an independent check. If anything is missing tries to find it and if it does it downloads it. Be advise that the system is not perfect (depending on puppy and pet). ie, some dependencies may not be necessary and some necessary are not reported. This is not common but it capens . The terminal is your friend in these cases again.
If you download a pet and you install it locally (by clicking it) you do not go through this process. Supposingly you know what you are doing...
3. When you install pets through PPM the pets are downloaded in /root but deleted after installation be default. If you want to keep them edit /usr/local/petget/downloadpkgs.sh to copy the downloaded files in a place you want let's say /mnt/home/PET_DOWNLOAD. There other ways to keep your pets but also need petget modifications. I find copy the less "intrusive" to the PPM setup.
The patch below will do that for you (you need devx to run "patch"). Is for precise but you get the idea. If it fails in the pup you use you can add the 2 lines manually.
1. Pets from another puppy are likely to work if they are using the same base (ie Racy 5.3.x) and unlikely if different (ie Lucy 5.2.x to Precise 5.4.x). No warranties though, just try and see. If you start the app from the terminal (ie "chromium") and fails it is going to "tell" you what is missing.
2. When you install a pet from the PPM goes through the pet.specs file in the pet and checks to see if the dependencies are there. Also does an independent check. If anything is missing tries to find it and if it does it downloads it. Be advise that the system is not perfect (depending on puppy and pet). ie, some dependencies may not be necessary and some necessary are not reported. This is not common but it capens . The terminal is your friend in these cases again.
If you download a pet and you install it locally (by clicking it) you do not go through this process. Supposingly you know what you are doing...
3. When you install pets through PPM the pets are downloaded in /root but deleted after installation be default. If you want to keep them edit /usr/local/petget/downloadpkgs.sh to copy the downloaded files in a place you want let's say /mnt/home/PET_DOWNLOAD. There other ways to keep your pets but also need petget modifications. I find copy the less "intrusive" to the PPM setup.
The patch below will do that for you (you need devx to run "patch"). Is for precise but you get the idea. If it fails in the pup you use you can add the 2 lines manually.
Code: Select all
--- a/usr/local/petget/downloadpkgs.sh 2012-11-05 14:36:29.000000000 +0200
+++ b/usr/local/petget/downloadpkgs.sh 2012-11-13 09:54:18.000000000 +0200
@@ -211,6 +211,8 @@
fi
sync
DLPKG="`basename $ONEFILE`"
+ [ ! -d /mnt/home/PET_DOWNLOADS ] && mkdir -p /mnt/home/PET_DOWNLOADS
+ cp /root/$DLPKG /mnt/home/PET_DOWNLOADS/$DLPKG
if [ -f $DLPKG -a "$DLPKG" != "" ];then
if [ "$PASSEDPARAM" = "DOWNLOADONLY" ];then
/usr/local/petget/verifypkg.sh /root/$DLPKG
== [url=http://www.catb.org/esr/faqs/smart-questions.html]Here is how to solve your[/url] [url=https://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~sgtatham/bugs.html]Linux problems fast[/url] ==
.Pet assembled files
Mavrothal, yep, that's what I was inquiring about.
Wanted to confirm what I thought, and the PPM would confirm whether shared libraries while direct installation doesn't necessarily, that also explains why I've been unable to locate the downloaded files since they dump when I reboot as temp. files.
Thanks again.
Wanted to confirm what I thought, and the PPM would confirm whether shared libraries while direct installation doesn't necessarily, that also explains why I've been unable to locate the downloaded files since they dump when I reboot as temp. files.
Thanks again.
Precise_5.4.1.1 for the XO
Precise puppy 5.4.1 with the 5.4.1.1 service pack has some significant improvements mostly in the PPM and ubuntu repo compatibility. So I made an XO build
To install, download Precise_5.4.1.1_XO.tar.gz (md5sum: 68af0e3691ebb5ae916b2819b9b02a60), expand it at the root of a USB stick or SDcard and boot your unlocked XO.
Precise_5.4.1.1_XO will update OK Precise_5.4_XO but not any XOpup-2.x.
To install, download Precise_5.4.1.1_XO.tar.gz (md5sum: 68af0e3691ebb5ae916b2819b9b02a60), expand it at the root of a USB stick or SDcard and boot your unlocked XO.
Precise_5.4.1.1_XO will update OK Precise_5.4_XO but not any XOpup-2.x.
== [url=http://www.catb.org/esr/faqs/smart-questions.html]Here is how to solve your[/url] [url=https://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~sgtatham/bugs.html]Linux problems fast[/url] ==
Precise_5.4.2 for the XOs
Things are moving fast but this should be the last for some time...
Here is Presise_5.4.2_XO.tar.gz for the XO-1 and XO-1.5 with further improvements.
Will update Presise_5.4_XO and Presise_5.4.1.1_XO but not any XOpup-2.x
Follow the usual drill (see above)
Here is Presise_5.4.2_XO.tar.gz for the XO-1 and XO-1.5 with further improvements.
Will update Presise_5.4_XO and Presise_5.4.1.1_XO but not any XOpup-2.x
Follow the usual drill (see above)
Last edited by mavrothal on Fri 30 Aug 2013, 21:29, edited 2 times in total.
== [url=http://www.catb.org/esr/faqs/smart-questions.html]Here is how to solve your[/url] [url=https://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~sgtatham/bugs.html]Linux problems fast[/url] ==
Anybody interested in ArchPup for the XO?
It runs fine on the XOs (net, sound, keys, rotation, power management), though is mostly Arch linux (with pacman and everything!) with a little bit of Puppy Linux (layers, running in RAM)
The original Archpup still needs some work polishing/debugging but if you are an Arch linux user with an XO-1 or XO-1.5 you should be OK. But in this case, you can probably build it yourself as well...
It runs fine on the XOs (net, sound, keys, rotation, power management), though is mostly Arch linux (with pacman and everything!) with a little bit of Puppy Linux (layers, running in RAM)
The original Archpup still needs some work polishing/debugging but if you are an Arch linux user with an XO-1 or XO-1.5 you should be OK. But in this case, you can probably build it yourself as well...
== [url=http://www.catb.org/esr/faqs/smart-questions.html]Here is how to solve your[/url] [url=https://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~sgtatham/bugs.html]Linux problems fast[/url] ==
I am.
mavrothal wrote:Anybody interested in ArchPup for the XO?
Too late...eph.zero wrote:I am.
mavrothal wrote:Anybody interested in ArchPup for the XO?
We moved on there are 3 brand new 5.5 puppies (Racy, Precise and Slacko) in the XO-testing phase currently. Assuming they do OK I'll post them.
== [url=http://www.catb.org/esr/faqs/smart-questions.html]Here is how to solve your[/url] [url=https://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~sgtatham/bugs.html]Linux problems fast[/url] ==
I always wanted/tried to make this ingenious but severely underperforming machine, the XO-1, a bit more usable.
But I'm afraid that when it comes to modern browsers, image editing etc there is nothing that can be done for the lack of CPU power.
Puppy/TC/Slitaz or anything else (unless someone writes an OS and all the apps in assembly )
The XO-1.5 though is a different story. The best XO by far for me.
Too bad that so few where made (~150.000) and almost none was released in the wild. If you find anything on eBay go for it
But I'm afraid that when it comes to modern browsers, image editing etc there is nothing that can be done for the lack of CPU power.
Puppy/TC/Slitaz or anything else (unless someone writes an OS and all the apps in assembly )
The XO-1.5 though is a different story. The best XO by far for me.
Too bad that so few where made (~150.000) and almost none was released in the wild. If you find anything on eBay go for it
== [url=http://www.catb.org/esr/faqs/smart-questions.html]Here is how to solve your[/url] [url=https://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~sgtatham/bugs.html]Linux problems fast[/url] ==
I got the XO-1 as a curiosity, but I've gotten a surprising amount of use out of it. Just trying to trim it down as much as possible now. I don't really need a full OS on it; just using it mostly as a jukebox, plus occasional email or text editing. I wouldn't mind going all-CLI on it, but it's been impossible to increase that font size without the GUI. A bug in open firmware, I think.
mavrothal wrote:I always wanted/tried to make this ingenious but severely underperforming machine, the XO-1, a bit more usable.
But I'm afraid that when it comes to modern browsers, image editing etc there is nothing that can be done for the lack of CPU power.
Puppy/TC/Slitaz or anything else (unless someone writes an OS and all the apps in assembly )
The XO-1.5 though is a different story. The best XO by far for me.
Too bad that so few where made (~150.000) and almost none was released in the wild. If you find anything on eBay go for it
Why would you say that is an OFW bug?eph.zero wrote:I wouldn't mind going all-CLI on it, but it's been impossible to increase that font size without the GUI. A bug in open firmware, I think.
Are your fonts particularly small? SUN12x22 is one of the bigger fonts and pretty comfortable usually.
I'm not sure if any bigger font is compile into the kernel but I could check.
In this page you can find a lot of things related to console fonts.
== [url=http://www.catb.org/esr/faqs/smart-questions.html]Here is how to solve your[/url] [url=https://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~sgtatham/bugs.html]Linux problems fast[/url] ==
I researched the problem to death some time ago, and never found a solution that worked. I recall finding something out there that suggested it was an OFW bug, but don't quote me on that. It was a couple of years ago, so I have no idea where I might have seen that.
I've tried changing fonts in the boot script, including SUN12x22, but it seems that it has no effect.
I've tried changing fonts in the boot script, including SUN12x22, but it seems that it has no effect.
mavrothal wrote:Why would you say that is an OFW bug?eph.zero wrote:I wouldn't mind going all-CLI on it, but it's been impossible to increase that font size without the GUI. A bug in open firmware, I think.
Are your fonts particularly small? SUN12x22 is one of the bigger fonts and pretty comfortable usually.
I'm not sure if any bigger font is compile into the kernel but I could check.
In this page you can find a lot of things related to console fonts.
Racy-, Precise-, Slacko-5.5 for the XO-1 and XO-1.5
Three brand new puppies version 5.5 came out in March! Racy, Precise and Slacko.
So here they are all 3 adapted for the XO-1 and XO-1.5
Racy-5.5_XO.tar.gz (114.11MB - md5:27d4adec48b19c3c3ea891072eb6c974)
Precise-5.5_XO.tar.gz (167.67MB - md5:c5882f4bc48f4694fd99398abafc9c49)
Slacko-5.5_XO.tar.gz (171.81MB - md5:4660d8d7d2645b9c51c1917c5719333a)
Racy is indeed the faster on the XOs but does not have the compatibility with the huge ubuntu package collection that Precise has. Their functionality OOB is comparable though and will both update successfully previous Racy-5.3.x and Precise-5.4.x, XO builds.
Slacko is the most updated, feature rich and nice looking of the 3 and is compatible with the extended slackware package collection. Is bigger and has some issues with audio/video recording. Also since is Slackware14-based, will NOT update Slacko-5.3.x builds.
NON of the 3 will update XOpup-2.x (which I still find the fastest )
To install, expand (one of) the downloaded tarball at the root of a USB stick or SDcard and boot your unlocked XO.
Known issues: 5.5 builds have the new frisbee-1.0 instead of the original Frisbee-beta2. If it fails on anything for no "apparent reason" just hit "Restart Networks" button
Note:The files are in Sendspace so they will be taken down after some time of inactivity. Let me know if you can not find them.
So here they are all 3 adapted for the XO-1 and XO-1.5
Racy-5.5_XO.tar.gz (114.11MB - md5:27d4adec48b19c3c3ea891072eb6c974)
Precise-5.5_XO.tar.gz (167.67MB - md5:c5882f4bc48f4694fd99398abafc9c49)
Slacko-5.5_XO.tar.gz (171.81MB - md5:4660d8d7d2645b9c51c1917c5719333a)
Racy is indeed the faster on the XOs but does not have the compatibility with the huge ubuntu package collection that Precise has. Their functionality OOB is comparable though and will both update successfully previous Racy-5.3.x and Precise-5.4.x, XO builds.
Slacko is the most updated, feature rich and nice looking of the 3 and is compatible with the extended slackware package collection. Is bigger and has some issues with audio/video recording. Also since is Slackware14-based, will NOT update Slacko-5.3.x builds.
NON of the 3 will update XOpup-2.x (which I still find the fastest )
To install, expand (one of) the downloaded tarball at the root of a USB stick or SDcard and boot your unlocked XO.
Known issues: 5.5 builds have the new frisbee-1.0 instead of the original Frisbee-beta2. If it fails on anything for no "apparent reason" just hit "Restart Networks" button
Note:The files are in Sendspace so they will be taken down after some time of inactivity. Let me know if you can not find them.
- Attachments
-
- 5.5s.jpg
- 5.5 puppies on the XO
- (102.02 KiB) Downloaded 2566 times
Last edited by mavrothal on Fri 30 Aug 2013, 21:34, edited 3 times in total.
== [url=http://www.catb.org/esr/faqs/smart-questions.html]Here is how to solve your[/url] [url=https://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~sgtatham/bugs.html]Linux problems fast[/url] ==
Try to ask at the olpc devel mailing list. Will be hard to justify since on OLPC releases you never get to console, but you can say something related to debugging or using it as a server (music server ) etc.eph.zero wrote:I researched the problem to death some time ago, and never found a solution that worked.
== [url=http://www.catb.org/esr/faqs/smart-questions.html]Here is how to solve your[/url] [url=https://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~sgtatham/bugs.html]Linux problems fast[/url] ==
Thanks.simargl wrote:Congrats for this 3-in-1 release, they look nice although it's kinda funny to see same icons on different OS versions.
Regarding visual similarities, all I can say is that GNOME/KDE/XFCE/LXDE etc, do look similar across distros. That is actually the idea! Consistency, familiarity and functionality.
They are of course easy to customize through one or more GUI apps, exactly as the above ROX-JWM puppies are.
== [url=http://www.catb.org/esr/faqs/smart-questions.html]Here is how to solve your[/url] [url=https://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~sgtatham/bugs.html]Linux problems fast[/url] ==