I'm using the Ubuntu build right now, very happy with it. The Slackware build looks good too. I don't know about the Debian Lenny build, haven't looked at that for awhile.
Um, let's see. I'll be in Perth on the 16th Feb., so will have access to fast upload. I'll aim to get a "pre-alpha" out on the 16th -- or even "alpha" if I feel more confident.
I don't really need fast upload anyway, as the Woof build tarball is only 6.5MB. That's all you need. But, I also want to build a couple of live-CD iso's and upload those.
I should also create a web page that explains what Woof is and how to use it.
I'm thinking of supporting a fourth distro...
I was thinking also, for the Slackware build we can resurrect the Slackware package installer that was being developed for Puppy3.
Comments:Posted on 10 Feb 2009, 19:47 by lobster
Fedora, Centos, Red Hat
"I'm thinking of supporting a fourth distro..."
Will it be a Red Hat base I wonder. That would cover the main packages management systems that developers tend to provide software for :)
Posted on 10 Feb 2009, 21:30 by Rahim
Hi there, this is a very exciting concept! I can't wait to build a custom distro. I am especially excited about a Debian or Ubuntu based Puppy. I think it would also be nice to support RPM based distros. Maybe openSUSE would be good, since it has an excellent build service ( http://en.opensuse.org/Build_Service ) and many enthusiasts that maintain bleeding edge packages.
A few questions:
1. Will it be possible to mix packages from Debian and Ubuntu, or even Slackware and Debian?
2. Will there be a web interface to mix a custom Puypp distro right on the server and then download it?
Posted on 11 Feb 2009, 3:14 by PaulBx1
Um, why even provide an iso? Presumably, anyone experimenting with it at this point in development will be able to build from the tarball. Save yourself some work.
Posted on 11 Feb 2009, 4:23 by happypuppy
+1 for Fedora compatibility (the most cutting-edge distro with the latest (experimental) packages.
Posted on 11 Feb 2009, 4:23 by happypuppy
+1 for Fedora compatibility (the most cutting-edge distro with the latest experimental/dev packages)
Posted on 11 Feb 2009, 11:33 by dogone
Whoa, Woof. It seems to me we'd better get one Woof working with one distro before we get too carried away. Woof will no doubt be monitored carefully by the community. Now is the time to err on the side of caution. Let's stay off the front page until we're sure of just how far Barry's "Woof" carries.
Posted on 11 Feb 2009, 18:52 by Terryphi
Apart from bug fixes what are most the significant changes in the new Live-CD from the original Live-CD, i.e. what have you added/amended?
I have fixed the particular bugs that bother me in the original and I am enjoying using it.
Posted on 11 Feb 2009, 18:53 by Dougal
I was thinking of mentioning before that you should probably support Fedora, too (I'm sure Rarsa and Nathan will be pleased...). I'm just not sure if it wouldn't be complicated by SElinux.
One more thing: I've been trying out dash and there's one thing about it that is a bit of a problem: the builtin "echo" only supports the "-n" option. It doesn't support "-e", but it _does_ transform the special chars (like "-e" is always on).
This is a real problem. Say you are creating a configuration file and run:
echo -e "VAR1='bla'\nVAR2='baa'" >my-file
What you will get is:
The only way I found around it is to add at the beginning of each script:
Posted on 11 Feb 2009, 20:43 by Rahim
I just read the new update at http://puppylinux.com/woof/ , and possible Arch support was mentioned. Nice idea! That's even more exciting than Fedora support. The ease of use of Puppy combined with the high quality and simplicity of the Arch rolling release system would be really impressive. My personal preference would be:
1. Debian / Ubuntu
Could you clarify the following points:
1. Would it be possible to mix packages from different systems?
2. If the end user installs additional packages onto his pre-built Puppy system, how would that process work? Does he download DEBs or RPMs that later get converted into Puppy packages, or will he directly use apt-get or YUM, or will packages have to be compiled on his local machine?
Thanks again, these are exciting developments!
Posted on 12 Feb 2009, 5:14 by davesurrey
When Barry suggested in his blog of 5 Feb that Woof might support 3 distro packages, Debian, Ubuntu and Slackware, I suggested that Debian and Ubuntu were too close and that it might be better to go for Debian or Ubuntu, Slackware and an RPM distro such as Fedora.
I see others are now also suggesting an RPM distro.
However after a little more thought I suggest that Arch might be a good contender. It has the disadvanatge of not having a huge team of supporters behind it but, and it's a big but, it does have the advantage of being a rolling rather than a scheduled release.
Posted on 12 Feb 2009, 5:23 by davesurrey
Or to put it another way, if you are going to give people choice then I guess it's better to give them real choice: stability versus bleeding edge, rolling updates versus scheduled updates, the security of a big distro versus something small dynamic and fast.
Posted on 13 Feb 2009, 5:44 by CsO
My tupence worth...
Woof! base distro support wish list:
Posted on 13 Feb 2009, 11:13 by Mean old man with no legs
Arch sounds nice
Of all these distros that could most benefit from the Puppy ease of use touch, Arch would probably be the most outstanding example. I would really like to see what Barry comes up with in his Arch experiments.
The largest performance gains by comparison would probably be evident in a Puppy based on openSUSE or Fedora, as these distros are the slowest in my experience.
Posted on 18 Feb 2009, 12:37 by Darrryl
Would love to see a page on Woof, haven't gotten around to using it yet, not sure I have the basics