DistroWatch needs a newer Puppy version listed for Puppy Linux!!!!!

[bigpup]

Totally disagree.

These features of how Puppy is put together allow it to operate the way it does.
How it can be a frugal install.
Which allows installing on any drive, any partition, any format, even inside another operating system install.
The different SFS's make this possible because they are a Linux file system inside a file.
Only changes are made to the save. it is only part of Puppy that is read/write.
The core operating system SFS's are read only.
Allows the complete OS to be loaded into RAM. Everything but the save.
Allows operation in different pupmodes.
Allows easy backup. Only need to copy the save to have a backup.

1. There is no kernel modules inside initrd. The initrd will do the layered root filesystem setup on boot.
2. The root filesystem was layered fs
3. Able to load savefile or savefolder
4. Able to load in full ram
5. the kernel modules must be in seperate sfs modules
6. Able to load/unload sfs modules
7. The kernel has builtin storage device, input device, filesystem kernel modules

8. Firmware is in a specific fdrv.sfs and easily allows updating firmware and kernel changing. (only two SFS's need to be changed)

[mikeslr]

Ditto what bigpup wrote. The operative term in 3, 4 and 6 is able; neither required nor unable, that is 'User Choice'. For example:

4. Able to load in full ram

That's Puppys condition OOTB: Pupmode 5. Once you create and use a SaveFile/Folder Puppy no longer is 'able' to load in full ram and runs in either Pupmode 12 or 13. But rather than creating a SaveFile/Folder [taking advantage of "1...The initrd will do the layered root filesystem setup on boot."] additional filesystems --adrv, ydrv, bdrv, etc-- can be created or modified so that again Puppy is able to load in full ram.

[retiredt00]

Once up on a time puppy was a very compact but full featured distribution with a lot of homegrown and transparent to the user utilities that could be installed and run form everywhere on everything.
With time puppy lost its original character and its apparent transparency made it a playground for aspiring developers from the diverse and mostly non technical forum.
As a result what is today around, has no distinct character or aim. I would say that its only characteristic is that is made primarily as a portable, secondary distribution as evident by the multi OS use of most (all?) forum members.
Any attempt of standardization and uniformity (see woof-CE) failed miserably the past 10 years. And when as a result puppy linux became a hard to identify distribution, we now consider how to try to rescue it and build again a traditional boring puppy for distrowatch and the first time users to actually use.
I hope there is still energy in some developer(s) to pursue it and no energy in the forum pundits to bring it down.

[wanderer]

hi all

i think dimkr is taking the best approach to all of this
we should all get behind him and help him as much as we can

if we make bookworm64 and bookworm32 reproducible woof-ce builds
that anyone can build and work on

then we will have a community puppy
that the gurus
can work together on if they want to
or take over if they need to
the rest of the community can test or help where they can

this can be long term and eventually all the bugs can be worked out

and we also will always have at least one candidate for distrowatch

the gurus will always want to work on whatever catches their fancy
and some of that could eventually be added to the community puppy

if someone sees the community puppy on distrowach
and comes to the forum
they will quickly realize that puppy is a concept
small, fully functional, fast, versatile, modifiable, etc
and has a lot of variants
some puppy and some puppy inspired

and thats probably why they were interested in puppy to begin with
i know thats why i got involved

wanderer

[mimine]

So which puppy will be on distrowatch ?

[Clarity]

This comment is not intended to recommend anything. It is merely an observation from a mere user standpoint.I am saying mere user(s) as I often deal with students and seniors from time to time. Every person I have helped over the past DOZEN years has a 4GB x86-64 PC/Tablet, and their units are both old as well as new. You can skip this if you are depth-charged in the bowels of system internals as this would NOT apply to you. But those who have an occasion from time to time to reach an audience of 10+ people, read on.

1st
"USERS dont care about SIZE!" Oh this doesn't mean to ignore it from a system standpoint as this in not the intent of the statement. It means that users seek an easy to understand, easy to use, swift stable system OOTB. That is it!!! This notion that continues to be thrown around with comments about size of an ISO/IMG and/or the constant tosses of comments on bloat are NOT factors for users who come from Windows to a Linux. THEY DONT CARE!

2nd
Members who constantly comment about SIZE and BLOAT have forgotten that PUPPY long ago addressed those issues in its past! Those distros are still around and they operate today as they did in the past. Puppy was built to address its environment of the past and that environment has changed from 2005 to now. Yet those older PUPs continue to run on old and many new as well. Nothing stops any member from using older PUPs,today.

3rd
Some of us have grown up and are now OLD! It is expected that we have also matured. IMHO, forum distros, along with technology advancements have also matured. We should not be expecting that PUPPY Linux should stay lost in the past. We SHOULD expect it to mature as fast and as equivalent with the technology offered us today.

4th
This thread is attempting to determine a suitable distro that is representative of the MATURITY that this community has to offer to its members and the world.

5th
When @01micko was handed the reigns, it appears, the builder that the community adopted for a PUP was WoofCE. It seems to continue to be one that is used to generate what we call a "PUP". And, it has MATURED.

6th
Every forum distro 'family' that I am aware on this forum is generated from one builder or another. The ones I am aware of are

• PUPs via WoofCE builder

• DOGs via the T2 Fatdog generator-builder

• DOGs via the generator that @fredx181 and @rcrsn51 generate

• KLs via FirstRib base and the individual builders out of that base

• EASYs via the builders Barry continues to update

7th
Developers take those builders and present runable ISOs or IMGs from them for user shakedown and usage. Further, those builders also allow users to build their own if they choose and can find instructions to do so.

8th
I could go on, but I'll stop here. Today's forum distros are an EVOLUTION from the 2004. ... not something stuck in the past with arcane perceptions. It has evolved to today; and I, as many of you, expect this!

Lastly
None of this I share is new to anyone of us, but, let's not lose focus in why this thread has advanced to here. ... Seeking a suitable forum representative of what would be proud for users to use and to attract more talent who would enjoy the forum what it offers and be a party to contribute to its continued future.

[dimkr]

I could go on, but I'll stop here.

I don't understand how this bird's-eye view of activities in this forum and inaccurate description of Puppy's history (which happens to @mention people who are not here anymore, in part due to posts like this) addresses any of the concerns raised here.

I don't see why BookwormPup64 can't be submitted to distrowatch, especially if it becomes fully reproducible (or if it can become reproducible in reasonable time and effort). Once it's reproducible, bugfix releases can be built automatically and quickly, and nobody has to fix reported issues as a single developer. @radky's reluctance to invest more time (which is 100% legitimate) is the only (potential) deal breaker, do I understand correctly?

[bigpup]

BookwormPup64 and BookwormPup32 have already been released for people to download and use.
They have already been built.
Provide a good mix of programs.

Both have topics in the Distributions-> Mainline Puppy Linux Distros-> BookwormPup

Have these listed on DistroWatch, links to their specific topics, and download locations.

Just do it!!!

To Puppy Linux version developers.
If you do not want to continue supporting your version of Puppy Linux.
Hopefully it will be at release final stage as an ISO, when you want to stop working on it.
Then have the version ISO in a location we can be sure to find it , so people can download and use it.
Not at a location that is only provided by you or someone that may delete the location at anytime.
Example:
Your private Google Drive account.
That you could close at anytime.

Better to do nothing anymore.
If you do not want to support it.
The rest of us will for you! (which some of us have been doing for the Bookworm versions)
We have been doing this for Fossapup64 9.5 for years now, after 666philb is no longer around.
Good thing is 666philb put Fossapup64 9.5 ISO in the Puppy repository on http://distro.ibiblio.org/puppylinux/

This repository is the best place for long term location for Puppy version ISO downloads.
It is always going to be there and be an active storage location that is free to use.

[wanderer]

hi all

bookworm64 and bookworm32

have already been submitted to distrowatch
it just usually takes them a while to change the page

that is a done deal

so we are good for 1 year

dimkr appears to be doing the work to make bookworm64 woof-ce reproducible
thank you dimkr for doing all this work for the puppy community
(as an aside could not one build a new bookworm64 from scratch if it is too hard to modify radkys version)

peebee i think has stated that bookworm32 is already reproducible
thank you peebee for doing all this work for the puppy community

what i am proposing is that we make bookworm64 and bookworm32
a long term community puppy
and everyone works on them *** indefinitely ***

they are the newest debian so they are up to date
and they are already complete
so we are ahead of the game

in my opinion
having a community puppy will yield a number of significant advantages

1. it will give us a distrowatch candidate if and when we need it

2. if it is complete and reproducible and anyone can build it
it will encourage more people to try to learn woof-ce
because they will end up with a complete distro when they run it
so it may bring in more developers to puppy

3. it will allow the distro to be taken over by someone if for any reason it is abandoned
so we will always have a currently supported distro

4. it will give the puppy community a distro everyone can follow and try to contribute to
and this will foster community involvement

the gurus will continue to do whatever is interesting for them
so nothing is lost there

so i see no downside

wanderer

[tosim]

@wanderer Thank you for a "job" well done. And, like you, kudos to peebee, dimkr, wiak, fred,rockedge, barry,
and others who contribute so very much to making Puppy, Dogs,(and other related distros) for all to use.

Gedanke.jpg (49.96 KiB) Viewed 956 times

[wanderer]

and thank you tosim
for being such a great asset to our community

wanderer

[peebee]

Basic updating of webpage done.

[wanderer]

thank you so much peebee
thats a big thing
makes it easier for distrowatch and everyone

looks great

wanderer

[Clarity]

I could go on, but I'll stop here.

I don't understand how this bird's-eye view of activities in this forum and inaccurate description of Puppy's history (which happens to @mention people who are not here anymore, in part due to posts like this) addresses any of the concerns raised here.

I don't see why BookwormPup64 can't be submitted to distrowatch, especially if it becomes fully reproducible (or if it can become reproducible in reasonable time and effort). Once it's reproducible, bugfix releases can be built automatically and quickly, and nobody has to fix reported issues as a single developer. @radky's reluctance to invest more time (which is 100% legitimate) is the only (potential) deal breaker, do I understand correctly?

Sometimes I wonder about your comments to me?

Not to mentions your references addressed to me. I didn't reference Radky or BKWP in that post, either?

Maybe next time, consider the point(s) you want us to see to help the thread's direction to keep its momentum.

[rockedge]

Basic updating of webpage done.

Looks really good! Thanks @peebee for pushing the changes.

[wanderer]

hi all

i guess everyone didnt realize i had submitted bookworm to distrowatch days ago
on apr 29 to be exact

what i am talking about is the next candidate 1 year from now

which i think should be an updated version of bookworm

a very minor update
that does not require dimkr to be finished with his woof-ce work

add a few new apps
change the background
and bump the version number up

as fredx181 has pointed out
its not realistic to have a 1 year cycle for a brand new distro each time
but a minor update should be possible

the less pressure on the developers
the better things will be all around

slow and steady wins the race

wanderer

[bigpup]

I started this topic to get some positive action out of members of this forum and the developers of Puppy versions.

Still see the usefulness to keep supporting DistroWatch.

It is very, very, good to see the actions people are stepping up to do

Puppy Linux is alive and well

This topic shows, that the original ideas of Puppy Linux involvement, are still well supported by the members of Puppy Linux.

Puppy Linux is a Linux operating system that you may produce as a developer, you use, help to work on, help others to use it, produce software for it, help test and find bugs, help to or actually find fixes for issues, etc.................

Thanks to all of the Puppy Linux forum members that volunteered, doing what was needed!!!

[bigpup]

Basic updating of webpage done.

I suggest we get a few of us as moderators for the puppylinux.com, to take the load off of peebee having to do all the editing.

The changes he made were well overdue.

The basic layout and how it is setup looks good.

But someone needs to keep it updated as stuff changes with Puppy Linux.

So to peebee, what help do you need with puppylinux.com?
How best to provide it?

[bigpup]

hi all

bookworm64 and bookworm32

have already been submitted to distrowatch
it just usually takes them a while to change the page

that is a done deal

so we are good for 1 year

I suggest you make an announcement topic about this.

I can make one, but you did the work!

It would also be a place to post about any requests, DistroWatch may have, for added information.
I am sure others could help with that.

[wanderer]

hi bigpup

thanks so much for starting this thread
without you we would not even have noticed

do we really need another thread

this thread has a lot of good stuff
about the distrowatch candidate
and the direction of puppy development
a community puppy
etc

these all seem to be intertwined
so we could just continue to discuss
where things are going

i can post anything from distrowatch here

wanderer

[mimine]

ok so it's bookworm64 ? gonna try it then...

[BologneChe]

Like humanity, stormy, in doubt, creative and resilient. Respect to all!

[peebee]

So to peebee, what help do you need with puppylinux.com?
How best to provide it?

Github - Pull Requests:
https://github.com/puppylinux-woof-CE/p ... .github.io
e.g.:
https://github.com/puppylinux-woof-CE/p ... s%3Aclosed

puppylinux-woof-CE.github.io
A repo for the puppylinux.com site
This repository holds the files for the puppylinux.com web site.

We have decided to use the [markdown] (https://github.com/adam-p/markdown-here ... Cheatsheet) language for the text portion of the files in order to make it simple for anyone to contribute content.

Contributions on web design are also welcome, as long as they do not complicate content contribution, and as long as the contributor agrees to license their changes as CC0 (Public Domain).

[Clarity]

ATM: Distrowatch > Puppy > ISO > gets this list of current WoofCE offerings
https://puppylinux-woof-ce.github.io/in ... l#download

via-Distrowatch.jpg (50.84 KiB) Viewed 640 times

[dimkr]

I think it's time to put F96-CE there instead of Fossapup64.

[peebee]

I think it's time to put F96-CE there instead of Fossapup64.

Just wish it had a more "meaningful" name...............

[dimkr]

I think it's time to put F96-CE there instead of Fossapup64.

Just wish it had a more "meaningful" name...............

It's just as meaningful as "S15Pup", if not more

[wanderer]

hi all

i just want to keep this topic in the limelight
and this thread is the place to do it

bookworm pup has been sent in to distrowatch
and eventually they will get around to updating our page

but now we only have 1 year left to choose the next distrowatch candidate
so we better get moving

my project is to encourage everyone to make bookworm pup our long term community puppy

so my nomination for the next distrowatch candidate is a minor upgrade to bookworm pup

thoughts anyone

wanderer

[mikeslr]

"but now we only have 1 year left to choose the next distrowatch candidate
so we better get moving".

Thinking about the future and preparing for it is a good idea. But debian bookworm's EOL is June 30th, 2028. peebee and others continue to develop Puppys binary-compatible with new release from Ubuntu and other Major Distros. Who knows what the future may bring? Maybe jasper and sonny (and others) may turn their 'updating' skills to Bookwormpup and a 'point-release' would be sufficient.

[tosim]

Anybody else, besides myself, thinking possibly Noble pup as a candidate? Naturally, with the assumption that by
the end of a year, this LTS will be "ready".