Lucid Puppy 5.2.8 - Updated ISO Version 005 - APR 05 2012

[bigpup]

Lupusuper2-5.2.8.6-3.2.48-20140321
manual frugal install to USB flash drive
initial boot
First shutdown.

Asked about how I wanted to save.
Selected save to sdb3 (use the entire partition) not a save file.

Next screen was blank with a blinking white line top left corner.
No message or anything saying save in progress.

This stayed for about 2 minutes and computer powered off.

Rebooted and seems the save was successful. The stuff that was added or changed was there.

Just info for others that this option to save to the entire partition does work, but nothing is going to tell you it is saving.

On a slow computer,
I could see this blinking white line would look like something not working. Could blink for many minutes before computer powers off.

Sure needs a message displayed indicating save in progress.

[jeff757]

For Nvidia drivers with kernel 3.2.48 go here http://www.murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?t=72405 and look under PRECOMPILED: next to last /precise/opt.
For standard lupu with 2.6.33.2 use the last entry /lupu/opt.

jeff

[rerwin]

Lupusuper2-5.2.8.6-3.2.48-20140321

Need some graphics drivers compiled to support the different kernels being used in Lucid versions.

I have already provided a set for lupusuper2 here:
https://www.mediafire.com/folder/39gu2e ... r2-k3.2.48 sfs
and
https://www.mediafire.com/folder/j93ga7 ... r2-k3.2.48 pets

I do not have access to the repo, so provide them that way. There is also a set for lupusuper4 (just navigate to them).

EDIT: BTW, since I intend the "plus" variants I provide to be collections of SFS files commonly needed in some installations, and since the nVidia graphics hardware is everywhere, maybe those drivers should be added to the "plus" ISOs. What is your thought regarding doing that? The current added files are for LibreOffice. Are there any other SFS files that would qualify?

Thank you for your report on saving to a partition. I wonder if the same behavior occurs under the regular lupu, 528-005 or precise pup. I am glad that it still does the job, albeit unnervingly.
Richard

[bigpup]

rerwin,

I do not think it would be too hard for you to get access to add files to the Lucid Puppy repository at ibiblio.org
It seems to just be a matter of requesting to have access.
Playdayz had it

01micko has access.
Maybe ask him what you need to do.

This seems to be where you start.
http://www.ibiblio.org/share/

[bigpup]

since I intend the "plus" variants I provide to be collections of SFS files commonly needed in some installations, and since the nVidia graphics hardware is everywhere, maybe those drivers should be added to the "plus" ISOs. What is your thought regarding doing that?

That would be one solution.
However, you would need to provide several driver packages as well as ones for AMD/ATI hardware.
How much size would all of them add to the ISO files?

[playdayz]

Quickpet->Drivers->Nvidia

No drivers available in repo for your card.

(I know there is a driver, for this card, in the repo, but it is not compiled for the kernel in Lupusuper2)

Need some graphics drivers compiled to support the different kernels being used in Lucid versions.

Must be someone, who has repo access, that could help.

We can do whatever is best for Lupu users. As soon as that is decided One problem: Unless someone rewrites the drivers section in Quickpet--which is not a trivial task--it is not going to know what to do with all of the kernel variants and proprietary drivers and new video hardware, as it was originally written for one kernel and that was complicated enough to get right (ask 01micko). My personal suggestion is to just delete the drivers tab from Quickpet for all but the 2.6.33.2 original kernel.

Putting in proprietary drivers for every kernel into the repo would be a heck of a lot of files, especially nivida drivers. And if they are in the repo, how many times are people going to download the wrong driver for their kernel? And making all those drivers would be a whole lot of work--compiling and packaging them is not trivial either.

One suggestion would be to link to the drivers right below the link to the iso for those who need the drivers. Or create a separate page.

Another suggestion: Discourage proprietary drivers. Yes, they are maybe 33% faster, but the open source Xorg drivers work wonderfully in most cases--and there is only one set. So I tell people to just install Xorg-High and call it good. That's what I do. Xorg-High gives hardware acceleration just the same as the proprietary drivers. rerwin might even consider adding Xorg_High to the iso, as both Slacko and Precise have done.

Yes, there are some new video cards and chips that the Xorg in Lupu cannot handle (such as my Lenovo g580 laptop). Proprietary drivers *might* work in those *if Lupu has the requirements to compile them* and they are not Intel. That seems like a lot of work, when there are a wonderful bunch of Puppies, Slacko, Precise, Lxpup, and a number of others, that run splendidly on my laptop, and I can configure them to run just like Lupu.

[bigpup]

Playdayz,

Want to do a test to see if Quickpet->Drivers->nvidia will work for Lupusuper2?

Put this pet package in the ftp://distro.ibiblio.org/puppylinux/pet-packages-lucid repository.
http://www.mediafire.com/download/g4o0l ... 3.2.48.pet
Make sure it is listed in the ftp://distro.ibiblio.org/puppylinux/Pac ... d-official

This is the driver I need for my hardware.

I will see if Quickpet will find it when I am running Lupusuper2.

I think it will as long as the driver pet is in the repo.
The repo has the Nvidia drivers for Lucid 5286 and Lupu3hd 5286 and Quickpet has no problem finding them.
I have tried it in both and it worked OK.

[playdayz]

My position is that 5.2.8.005 was the last official Lucid Puppy. Lucid 5.2.8.6 is a Puppy derivative, and no other puppy derivatives get space in the ibiblio repo. rerwin has created a viable Puppy subculture--but I don't think it should receive privileges that other unofficial Puppies do not get. This is also just my opinion. rerwin knows who to ask. I am out of it. Best, larry

[bigpup]

rerwin knows who to ask

With Barry K gone, who does have the control to say what is an official Puppy?

[mavrothal]

rerwin knows who to ask

With Barry K gone, who does have the control to say what is an official Puppy?

Barry K

[James C]

rerwin knows who to ask

With Barry K gone, who does have the control to say what is an official Puppy?

Barry K

What did I miss. Has Barry K gone missing?

[bigpup]

I guess what I read here can be ignored?
http://bkhome.org/news/?viewDetailed=00002
http://bkhome.org/bkauler/

Recently I announced in my old blog that I have placed Puppy Linux development into "maintenance mode", and I am retiring from the central role.
I am the creator of Puppy Linux, and was the chief developer until late September 2013, when I decided that after almost 11 years, it is time to retire. I put Puppy into "maintenance mode" and will continue with some input, however others are now taking the reins.

[mavrothal]

I guess what I read here can be ignored?

Why the trademark holder of puppylinux should actively develop it himself to be able to define which build is a "puppy"?

But to come to the problem at hand, building a repo somewhere else and having PPM/Quickpet, looking there also, should not be very difficult.

[bigpup]

Why the trademark holder of puppylinux should actively develop it himself to be able to define which build is a "puppy"?

Being active in developing a version of Puppy is not at issue.

Barry K. stating:
"I am retiring from the central role".
"others are now taking the reins."

To me indicates someone else is going to make decisions about Puppy.

Seems to me anyone that works on Woof-CE is controlling Puppy development.
The code changes they make to Woof-CE, directly affects Puppy in the future.
You use Woof-CE to build a version of Puppy.
The code in Woof-CE is controlling what is being done.

In trying to add graphics hardware drivers to the official Lucid repository, the question was are all of the new versions of Lupu 5286 now considered derivatives of Lucid Puppy? Thus not official versions. So, they do not get support in the Lucid Puppy official repository.

Should this repository be locked from adding any new packages or updates to the packages already in it?

Makes me wonder.
Is Slacko64 an official release of Slacko or a derivative or the official 64 bit version of Puppy?

[bigpup]

But to come to the problem at hand, building a repo somewhere else and having PPM/Quickpet, looking there also, should not be very difficult.

I think 01micko is the one to answer that question. Quickpet is his baby.

When he left to work on Slacko, I remember him saying Quickpet was a good idea, but a big pain in the you know what

[mavrothal]

Why the trademark holder of puppylinux should actively develop it himself to be able to define which build is a "puppy"?

Being active in developing a version of Puppy is not at issue.

Barry K. stating:
"I am retiring from the central role".
"others are now taking the reins."

To me indicates someone else is going to make decisions about Puppy.

Seems to me anyone that works on Woof-CE is controlling Puppy development.
The code changes they make to Woof-CE, directly affects Puppy in the future.
You use Woof-CE to build a version of Puppy.
The code in Woof-CE is controlling what is being done.

This discussion should probably be moved to another thread but lets leave it here for now.

I think we are confusing 3 things. Development, release and policies.
Woof development is the infrastructure that builds "official" puppies. However, not all woof-build puppies are "official". See Pemasu's Dpups as an example. So woof is necessary but not sufficient.
Release, is actually the production of a puppy version. People that released puppies can assure you that takes much more that just running a woof script to make a decent puppy.
What goes into a free public repository that is mirrored by 10+ other free sites and why, is a matter of policy. ie how long you support a release. Is updating the kernel of an old release an update, a new release or a derivative?
Is adding packages not compatible with the official release, going to give problems to the official?
Should the limited (allocation, bandwidth) resources be used for older or newer resources? etc etc.
This policies part is not relinquished in the "post-BK" era, but I would agree it should be discussed.

Several people may have access to ibiblio/puppylinux, some from the woof-CE team and some not. However, non of them would think to use the privilege as their personal server and I'm assuming that this is the reason that BK granted them access.

In trying to add graphics hardware drivers to the official Lucid repository, the question was are all of the new versions of Lupu 5286 now considered derivatives of Lucid Puppy? Thus not official versions. So, they do not get support in the Lucid Puppy official repository.

Should this repository be locked from adding any new packages or updates to the packages already in it?

Makes me wonder.
Is Slacko64 an official release of Slacko or a derivative or the official 64 bit version of Puppy?

I think from the beginning they were derivatives (see 3HD) and I do not see why is that different now.
In general the so far policy was only official builds and packages directly linked/usable to/by them go to ibiblio. Otherwise we wouldn't have 10 sites with pet packages and then few more thousands in the forum.

Regarding slacko64, it does aspire to mature enough to become the first official 64-bit version of puppylinux.

Anyway, maybe is a good idea to open a new thread to discuss these matters because I think with BK's retirement from development they may arise often. Who knows he might even drop in for a comment

[bigpup]

Rerwin,

Can you also post these links in the Lucid Puppy Revitalized as 5.2.8.6! topic.
In the 3rd post would be a good place.
Also, any other driver links you have.

Thanks!!

Lupusuper2-5.2.8.6-3.2.48-20140321

have provided a set Nvidia drivers for lupusuper2 here:
https://www.mediafire.com/folder/39gu2e ... r2-k3.2.48 sfs
and
https://www.mediafire.com/folder/j93ga7 ... r2-k3.2.48 pets

[npierce]

Richard,

After not logging-on to the forum for a couple of weeks, I was pleased to visit this week and see that you have released lupu-5.2.8.6-20140321. I have downloaded it, am using it now, and am quite happy with what I see.

I know that the process of fixing bugs, testing and generally maintaining a whole distro full of applications and utilities must be a large task, and I appreciate all the effort that you must have put in to make this happen. For many developers, fixing bugs is not nearly as exciting as adding new applications and features, and so bugs don't always get the attention they deserve. Many users, as well, tend to be more excited by new stuff then they are by old bugs which have been squashed. But for some of us, no amount of new stuff will make up for the aggravation of repeatedly tripping over old bugs -- especially those that have already been reported.

So I thank you not only for including so many bug fixes in this release, but also for going the extra mile of doing the research and tracking down old bug reports to ensure that as many bugs as possible were eliminated from Lupu. It is good to see someone put in so much effort to improve the reliability of a Puppy.

[rerwin]

Can you also post these links in the Lucid Puppy Revitalized as 5.2.8.6! topic.
In the 3rd post would be a good place.
Also, any other driver links you have.

Done, for sulu2 and sulu4. Thanks for the recommendation.
http://www.murga-linux.com/puppy/viewto ... 520#739520

npierce, thank you for your words of encouragement.

mavrothal, et al, I will stay consistent with playdayz's classification of 5.2.8.6 and not attempt to access the repo for the graphics drivers. The links to them are now in the 5.2.8.6 thread. Since there is so little download activity for them, I conclude that I need not add them to the "plus" variants.

After uploading the remaining variants for 3HD, sulu1 and sulu3, I plan no further updates other than LibreOffice for at least several months, maybe many. Although I do not want to compete with the newer puppies, I do want to keep lupu/sulu viable for those of us feeling no need to migrate to them, yet.
Richard

[mavrothal]

After uploading the remaining variants for 3HD, sulu1 and sulu3, I plan no further updates other than LibreOffice for at least several months, maybe many. Although I do not want to compete with the newer puppies, I do want to keep lupu/sulu viable for those of us feeling no need to migrate to them, yet.
Richard

Dear Richard,
in my mind 5.1.x/5.2.x puppies are the benchmark puppies that hugely improved the appeal of puppylinux. And the fact that you (and others) still support it and people use it 4 years latter, is a testament to that.
I do not know if it *should* compete with newer puppies but as I said from the beginning, Lucid-5.2.8.6.<last_date> should get a version update to 5.2.9 and its place in the puppy mirrors.
I do not know if this will be considered competition but I do know that still supporting and updating a puppy 4 years after its release is certainly very welcome and I may add beneficial for the puppy-brand as a whole
So how "APR 05 2014" sounds as a release date ?