As always, the devil is in the detail, and it took me all weekend, but right now as I type this I'm running a Woof-built Puppy2, built from 2.1.7 packages.
This has all of the latest features, such as the Boot Manager, Puppy Package Manager, Event Manager, desktop drive icons, etc.
But, the exercise made me think about what is the attraction of Puppy2? It has GTK1 and Tcl/Tk applications by default, whereas Puppy4 is all GTK2. The packages in Puppy4 are also more up-to-date. If the GTK2 apps completely replace the old GTK1 and Tcl/Tk apps then there is not much point in having the older apps. But do they? Does any Puppy2 fan have someparticular GTK1/Tk app that they really like?
Then there's the kernel. I'm running Puppy2 with the 188.8.131.52 kernel. I do recall that some people had success with this kernel and trouble with later kernels. It is not really possible to use this old kernel with Puppy4 and later, as libc was compiled against kernel-headers of a later kernel version.
The Puppy2 build that I'm using right now, that I have assigned version 2.1.8, has GTK2 and GTK1 apps from 2.1.7, but no Tcl/Tk apps. I could include the latter if that's what people want. Or, I could compile more GTK2 apps to bring the application suite to a par with Puppy4+ -- bearing in mind that in some cases an application may need a later version of GTK2 than is in Puppy2.
Oh yes, Xorg. Puppy2 has Xorg version 7.0. I seem to recall some reports that this old Xorg worked whereas later versions were troublesome. Which would be another reason to go for Puppy2 on certain hardware. One comment: running this Puppy2 I noticed that Xorg starts faster -- after all, it is far simpler.
So, Puppy2 fans, express your wishes. I will upload Puppy 2.1.8 live-CD along with the next alpha release. Ttuuxx's packages will also be available for modernising this pup.
Ttuuxx's Puppy2 forum thread:
Comments:Posted on 2 Jun 2009, 11:17 by clarf
Why i like Puppy 2?. Why not? Simple, small, fast, yes I like that things and even more. Stability is very important too, for example Puppy 2.16 runs where newer versions donīt, I even had problems with Xorg in 2.17 (I know 2.17 uses a newer kernel than 2.16 but not sure about Xorg, then why it fails?).
Why I like a stable version?. Why should I waste time trying to run 4.1.2 when it crash continuously in some of my hardware, where Puppy 2.16 runs well.
Why I think 4.2 seems slow and fat, could be for Puppy 2 series then (although 4.2 looks better...)
I have 4 computers in my house, I want to give new live to these machines and not start a museum, I donīt want to drop them either, I keep really good memories with them.
Barry tell my, Why you still use JWM and not Gnome or KDE?. Now you understand me?. Do you feel the same dear Barry?.
Posted on 2 Jun 2009, 11:51 by dogone
Puppy 2 on Thinkpad 600E
I first met Puppy circa 3.01. I don't recall how the 3 series ran on my Thinkpad 600E, but I wound up running 2.17. I never got sound to work there but it otherwise ran and ran FAST.
I recently took a quantum jump to 4.2.1 retro on the laptop. Everything works well (sound was still tricky) but only about 70% as fast as 2.17.
Bottom line, an updated 2.17 would suit this 366MHz machine to a tee. So yes please.
Posted on 2 Jun 2009, 11:56 by Sage
It was 3.01 that stood out head and shoulders above the rest in the recent 'poll' (that wasn't really a poll). Apart from that 1.0.8r1 using k2.4 that is an important member of everyone's toolkit for truly ancient HW. Further work on these would seem well-deserved? Very smallest possible .iso is still an important goal - have you seen TinyCore's latest offering - MicroCore @ 7.4Mb; that's six floppies. And Slitaz got the Distrowatch award this month - a 30Mb d/l.
Apart from those, work on a MIPS port might provide adequate intellectual stimulation? Next big thing.
Posted on 2 Jun 2009, 11:59 by ttuuxxx
return of Puppy2!
Well since I've been dabbling with the earlier 2 series and reading up on past forum threads, There's been a few evident reasons for users liking 2 series over 3,4,5 series.
- One user reports 2.4.1 uses 146 mb ram usage and 81 mb swap usage and 2.14X uses 50mb ram and 0 swap, almost 100MB less memory and 81MB less swap. Keep in mind he only had 256MB to start with, so a 100MB saving is well worth using 2.14X. Plus I didn't remove any startup applications.
- Another reason is that the Guys who updated 2.14 to 2.14.1R compiled extra drivers, so Newer video cards, monitors, sata dvdrw are recognized, When tested on my home pc's I couldn't load 202-214 on a sata dvd burner or a 512MB nvidia graphics card, but with the newer drivers in 2.14.1R I could no problem. Before on 2.14 I was using xvesa running @ 10fps, so slow, lol.
- pxe booting enabled also was a big hit for people like ecomoney for net cafe's.
Gtk1.2 is still useful for some older apps like Xmms, but it ran buggy on 2.14X so I removed it and replaced it with BMP, with a few plugins that worked from xmms, like converting mp3's to wav. etc
So basically the reasons why they like this version better than any other 2 series is, 100MB less memory resources, extra kernel modules for video,sata,pxe,older kernel used in 2.14, takes less resources.
Flash is terrible, The glibC is outdated and I can't update that, or it will cripple the who OS.
The 184.108.40.206 kernel needs to recompiled with extras, as stated above.
What the 2 series needs
I would like to see a new really bare bones made up, using the same glibc, and gtk as Upup or Dpup, then they could interchange most compiled apps,I could compiled the rest of the packages if I had a working base. Just need a head start.
Thanks for your time
Posted on 2 Jun 2009, 14:49 by puppymike
214 because its fast
I like 214R (and now 214X) because its so so fast!.
I've been mainly using 412 which for me is very stable (only problem I have is occasional failures to shutdown which I suspect is Samba/Netwoking issues (I use Sanba all the time not to Windows but to LANDisks).
Posted on 2 Jun 2009, 15:25 by Raffy
Useful but need new drivers
Pros: The 2 series (am using 2.13) ran well in the low-power PCs that I tested, such as the eBox, the Geode, and yes, the eeePC701-900. Plus, it supports PXE/LAN booting.
The 2 series has nice font rendering, and 2.14R made that better.
Kernel 2.16.18 + Xorg worked well. The only problem I suspected was pup-save filling up even if I regularly delete files in /root.
Cons: New applications required newer glibc (?), and new hardware like the dual-cores needed new drivers - these are the only reasons I have for using the new 4.x. But beginning with 4.2, my desktop regularly gets confused with a desktop too active (WM interprets mouse gestures as commands?).
It will be good to have an updated Puppy 2 that also makes use of humongous initrd creation (made available via unleashed).
Posted on 2 Jun 2009, 15:31 by Raffy
No KDE nor Gnome
Clarf (the first poster above), KDE or Gnome will make Puppy very fat. But developers have produced KDE and Gnome add-ons for Puppy. Search for KDE* or Gnome in the Forum.
Posted on 2 Jun 2009, 17:17 by tempestuous
Barry, your numbering convention is inconsistent with the old 2 series. It should be 2.18, not 2.1.8.
I have posted some comments on the main forum about Flash, XMMS, and glibc.
Posted on 2 Jun 2009, 21:14 by John Biles
As most of you know I still use Puppy 2.14 as the base for TEENpup. Living with that version for over 2 years now has highlighted the following items I would like to update. glibc 2.3.5 to glibc 2.5 minimum. alsa 1.0.11 needs to be updated to 1.0.18 to work with EeePC 900A Also the latest version of Gutenprint needs to be compiled to work with the Puppy 2 series.
Posted on 2 Jun 2009, 24:09 by clarf
I know that Raffy... The point is that KDE or GNOME will make Puppy too heavy for old systems.
They are not included in the bases system but delivered like add-ons, that talks about the flexibility of Puppy, and how it can fill all kind of tastes (I personally use IceWM and works as fast as JWM, but JWM is in the base system and not IceWM because there are no stability issues in JWM with Puppy, for me this is more than enough).
Posted on 3 Jun 2009, 4:11 by puppymike
If [possible please include Pnethood and dump Lineighborhhod. Thanks.
Posted on 3 Jun 2009, 13:21 by Sage
I suppose that's what we all do all the time!
Sometimes, though, we have to try to put aside our own preferences in the interests of objectivity. One can well understand why ttuuxx wants to push 2.17 & related versions after all the (mostly well-received) efforts he has expended.
Furthermore, even polls, whether they are proper polls or not, do not always reflect the true state-of-the-nation.
Notwithstanding, careful reading of :
does seem to have drawn in a wider range of opinions than one normally reads on the Forum. A main attraction to so many for 3.01 seems to be its Slackware base, inter alia, as well as it not being the 2-series!
Perhaps the question only BK can answer is how far SlackWoof can supercede without too much additional complexity & bloat.
As for 1.0.8r1, it has revolutionised my own testing and resurrection of ancient boxes. It could be a lot smaller for this porpoise. But it's an also not an instead of tool in the arsenal.
Posted on 3 Jun 2009, 17:09 by disciple
> But do they? Does any Puppy2 fan have someparticular GTK1/Tk app that they really like?
I wouldn't claim to be a Puppy2 fan (although its last versions certainly seemed a lot more bug free than everything since).
Tk: Rarsa's tray volume control is vastly superior to anything else, especially with my modifications to it and using it in conjunction with an alltray'd xtmix. I notice the new Tk "tile" interface can follow the Gtk theme too :)
GTK1: xmms is still my benchmark for audio players... I've never had any problems with it and it does everything I want as I want, except it doesn't read CD-text. And I guess album art might be nice too :)
Posted on 3 Jun 2009, 21:44 by greenpossum
Xorg stopped working in VirtualBox
One of the things that broke between Puppy 3 and 4 is Xorg inside VirtualBox. I never looked into it to see why, it wasn't essential for me to have Xorg inside VB since I just use VB to have a look at Puppy releases so Xvesa is ok. But it sounds like something is wrong with Puppy 4's Xorg when all the other distros' Xorg work fine in VB. Noteworthy?
Posted on 4 Jun 2009, 7:43 by Pizzasgood
Xorg in Ems
I can't speak for VirtualBox, but in Qemu Xorg looks like it doesn't work, but it actually does. The screen just doesn't get reset properly during Xorgwizard after the probing. If you can finish the wizard blindly, X will then come right up. I believe somebody posted a fix somewhere on the forum.
I imagine VitrualBox is probably similar.
Posted on 4 Jun 2009, 8:37 by foo
themes like only yesterday
Funny, I just popped in an 'old' Pup 216 liveCD a few days ago .. yes, much to revisit with fresh eyes. Always did like Dillo, and the earlier Jwm with the full border (almost forgot that 'simple dark grey' gtk theme :) ). Biggest surprise was tkgamma :lol: (a good tool for a quick look even if the settings don't hold) .. apps were for the most part simpler and more robust and it seems like there's more to the local docs as well.
Posted on 12 Jul 2009, 8:06 by blippilb
resolve your touchpad acting up
Quote: But beginning with 4.2, my desktop regularly gets confused with a desktop too active (WM interprets mouse gestures as commands?).
If you're using a laptop and you're having this problem, it will be well worth your time to turn off touchpad scrolling in /etc/X11/xorg.conf under any instances of Section "InputDevice" that correspond to touchpads. If present, comment out Option "ZAxisMapping" "4 5". If Option "VertScrollDelta" "100" is present, then comment it out also and add Option "VertEdgeScroll" "false" as well as Option "HorizEdgeScroll" "false".
Prior to these changes, Firefox for me would seemingly randomly navigate through the history and Puppy would switch workspaces, among other things, simply because I went a little too close to the right and bottom edges of my touchpad. You can also modify this file to add tap-to-click functionality.
Posted on 14 Jul 2009, 8:52 by ralphv
How old is the glibc? In any puppy with glibc 2.3, flash 9 crashes when you leave a flash site. But that doesn't happen in 2.14x3
Posted on 14 Jul 2009, 24:17 by ttuuxxx
Hi ralphv, 2.14X uses glibC 2.5 from 3 series, I hacked in 2.5, It worked out very well as you know :) Plus don't forget it also has the latest GTK,Glib etc to make Firefox run plus Gio, dbus, png etc etc, its practically a new operating system with some past bugs/parts that I'm working out, The only thing I'm for sure not changing is xorg and the kernel, that will keep the system stable. Doesn't mean I won't update some drivers etc.
GlibC 2.3.5 came out 07-Apr-2005 01:55
and glib 2.5(puppy3 series,slackware 12) came out 29-Sep-2006 16:50
you can view all releases at http://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/glibc/