Any interest in ArchPup?

Message

tomberek · #1 Post by **tomberek** » Fri 05 Mar 2010, 19:00

Any interest in an arch puppy? Woof seems to have some support for it or at least it was thought of.

puppyluvr · #2 Post by **puppyluvr** » Fri 05 Mar 2010, 22:22

Hello,
Yes, there is a Woof to build Arch pup, and I have an ISO built from it, but it had problems and I just kinda let it go...I`ll take a look at it and see if it is fixable...I even made a background for it...

I`ll get back....

tomberek · #3 Post by **tomberek** » Fri 05 Mar 2010, 22:38

Excellent! I've been asking around for a while and haven't heard anything, though many have said that they would be interested. I tried to get Woof and build an aPup, but I'm not knowledgeable enough to get all the library dependencies correct. I can do some work on this, but other than testing and some light tweaking, I need help for the actual work.

puppyluvr · #4 Post by **puppyluvr** » Sat 06 Mar 2010, 04:36

Hello,
Well, I dug out the iso and booted it up..I remember what was broken now...xorg..Here is a screenshot in xvesa... I also cant seem to D/L from the Arch repos..This one might need remaking from Woof, IDK..I`ll see what else is broken and report back...
Edit: OK, the Puppy repos dont work either, so the package manager is broken..grrr..I`ll try some local Puppy and Arch stuff tomorrow and get back...

tomberek · #5 Post by **tomberek** » Tue 09 Mar 2010, 01:10

Can you post what you have?

puppyluvr · #6 Post by **puppyluvr** » Tue 09 Mar 2010, 01:44

Hello,
Um, yea, but gimme a day to remember where I put my ISO`s, and my upload passwords..LOL
Been gone since august and misplaced a few things...

Xorg should be easy enough to fix, and the Package manager could be a simple url change IDK
I`m pretty sure that someone has posted a working apup iso before, but I havent done a thorough search..
I`ll see what I can dig up and post a link...

Lobster · #7 Post by **Lobster** » Tue 09 Mar 2010, 02:55

Jay
Woof has improved considerably since August - as you can imagine

What would you say are the advantages of Apup?
As I understand it Arch compiles for specific hardware
- would this be useful or possible?

puppyluvr · #8 Post by **puppyluvr** » Tue 09 Mar 2010, 03:31

Hello,
Well heck Lobster, IDK...
I just made it because, like a mountain "it was there" when I was playing with Woof..
I cooked up one of each to see what I would get...
DPup Didnt..
SPup Sorta did..
APup Almost did..
UPup Use it to this day!!

(Shh, I hate Ubuntu..But I love their repos...)

I had forgotten about the APup I made till I read the OP..LOL...Looked in my grub, and `viola, there it was..
I swear I remember someone devoting to an APup ISO when Woof came out, but IDK who now...I may try to Woof it again, just for SAG...I may also try to fix this one, but if the Package Manager aint fixable to the Arch repos, then its a mute point..
Mostly, PAW is taking up my time, and my brain cells...

That and that damn screensaver Im working on LOL...
Back to the B.A.S.G...."If then do while grep end done fi.."

tomberek · #9 Post by **tomberek** » Mon 22 Mar 2010, 11:10

bump... any more interest?

puppyluvr · #10 Post by **puppyluvr** » Mon 22 Mar 2010, 16:48

Hello,
Yea, Im still here...I looked at the APup iso I had made before, and its too broken to fix...So I d`l the latest Woof and am trying again...Down to 6 errors this morning...

Will work on it somemore tonight...

steve_s · #11 Post by **steve_s** » Tue 23 Mar 2010, 21:44

I have interest in apup if it can do something similar to the gentoo package manager per my post on this thread.

I understand that Arch uses pacman or something like. As long as it has a similar feel and can run as a livecd (in other words, I hear Gentoo's portage is too big; even though I've used it, I couldn't tell you have much space it takes up), I'd give it a go if the work hasn't been done yet....

playdayz · #12 Post by **playdayz** » Thu 25 Mar 2010, 01:30

I learned a lot from Arch and would like to see an Apup. Arch has excellent documentation imo. I also like, in theory, the rolling release model.

Rupp · #13 Post by **Rupp** » Sun 28 Mar 2010, 09:15

puppyluvr · #14 Post by **puppyluvr** » Sun 28 Mar 2010, 17:14

Hey,
I havnt disappeared, just have very limited time ATM...
Still trying to solve package errors, no point in "builddistro" till I get them straightened out..
Also trying to get pacman to work on Puppy...Even if I get it to run, and D/L the packages, it will need a script to alter the install directory structures...
I think before I go much further, I will D/L Arch, and check it out more thoroughly...I looked at it briefly once about a year ago, but not enough to look at its glib / gtk / busybox/ ect to compare / contrast to Puppy..
I`m sorta hoping some other more knowledgeable developers will jump in here and help fill in the blanks...With enough interest, eventually a usable iso will appear..
I would post the APup.iso I built before, broken tho it is, but Eric is having problems with .ca ATM, and as my stuff has been a royal pain in his butt before, I dont want to add insult to injury..
I still seem to clearly remember that when BK released the Woof system, someone latched onto each of the building systems, including Arch, but I cant remember who ...Myself, I went after Tinycore..Woofing / Unleashing Tinycore was pretty easy...But the ISO ends up huge, as TC packages are all independant..ie all libs necessary to the package are in the package, no "shared" directories to speak of..(like portable apps)...However, if you want to build a "self contained" .pet and size isnt an issue, grab a .tce/.tcz..They work great, and are really up to date..
LOL..
The actual reason I built an APup in the first place was to send it, tongue-in-cheek, to A.J.
Those who know the "back story" on that might see the humor in it...

Enough rambling on...no partner, 2 jobs, 3 kids, and no car ATM, make time very precious....
Be back.........

tomberek · #15 Post by **tomberek** » Tue 30 Mar 2010, 05:34

puppyluvr: It seems that you have the most expertise in this. I think the rest of us are mostly users, twiddlers, dabblers; ie, we can help, but can't do it all. Can you delegate sub-tasks to make things easier?

But to begin with, perhaps we need a discussion about what the advantages/disadvantages of aPup would be.

Should we set this up as a project? I'm not sure what the standard operating procedure is in the Puppy community.

Iguleder · #16 Post by **Iguleder** » Tue 30 Mar 2010, 08:52

Building apup can be good for all i686 hardware, but bear in mind that the kernel and EVERYTHING will require i686 recompilation.

tomberek · #17 Post by **tomberek** » Wed 14 Apr 2010, 05:22

bump bump

tomberek · #18 Post by **tomberek** » Thu 06 May 2010, 01:09

rebump

aarf · #19 Post by **aarf** » Thu 06 May 2010, 13:42

tomberek wrote: Should we set this up as a project? I'm not sure what the standard operating procedure is in the Puppy community.

the standard operating procedure is "go for it, then tell us about it later."

ajbibb · #20 Post by **ajbibb** » Fri 07 May 2010, 19:28

I am trying, but this is not a simple thing. Subsequent to Woof being released Arch has decided to change their repositories over to xz compression. The base Woof scripts only deal with PET and tar.gz files. I have got the scripts revised to deal with xz, however there are other items that will also need to be addressed.

One of the items is discussed on Barry's blog, and deals with version numbers for some packages containing a variable field. He mentions Amarok specifically and basically put a quick fix into Woof to remove any such package. I have also found the variable substitution in three other package names, and unlike Amarok these we just can't ignore. One other item I have run across I am still trying to figure out if I need to fix or not. I believe Woof assumes that packages must contain the string 'i686'. This is not always the case as a select few Arch packages contain the string 'any' indicating they can be used for both i686 and x86_64 builds. I am still working on translating the Woof scripts so I am not entirely sure on this. I'm a C++ guy and the arguments supplied to grep in the scripts look to me like cartoon characters trying to swear.

I have made several attempts a building an Arch Puppy, but I was never able to get Xorg to give me a desktop. I have now taken the Quirky 100 configuration file and am using that as a base for my next attempt, basically discarding the Arch configuration file supplied in Woof. If I have any success I'll post it here, but it is likely to be a bit.

(old)Puppy Linux Discussion Forum

(old)Puppy Linux Discussion Forum

Any interest in ArchPup?

Any interest in ArchPup?