I did a test build. Wary with gzip compression gave me a 121.5MB .iso file, then with xz compression gave a 104.6MB .iso file.
Hmmm, should be easy to take out some less-useful kernel drivers and get that under the magic 100MB figure. This Wary has everything, including Flash player and SeaMonkey 2.2.
I booted off a usb stick to test if responsiveness is any slower, particularly opening applications. However, I can't tell. Maybe apps do open a tad slower, but perhaps it isn't something that you would really notice. I'll have to upload a build and see what you guys think.
Comments:Posted on 13 Jul 2011, 23:45 by GCMartin
PAE enabled WARY
As you probably remember, when JamesBond built the 1st PAE WARY, he couldn't tell the difference either.
Most, if not all of us, who have tested Puppies has felt improvements in operational speed overall.
Some of us have posted video and hardinfo reports to support our finding of very fast operation of the PAE enabled PUPs.
Pemasu's efforts and those who have contributed has reported fast and STABLE environments in bout ISE and POLARPUP (PAE enabled PUPs).
Stu90 and PuppyLuvr have also posted PAE based purely on Puppy525 that are stable, fast PUP derivatives.
I have tested your (alpha) implementation and it is very fast.
Great, great work by everyone.
And, I don't think anyone is going to "pounce on you" for 4MB considering an observed speed improvement that you've provided us.
Congratulation, and again, Thank you Barry
check you PM
Posted on 13 Jul 2011, 24:34 by maxerro
Guys, did you get your Flash player to work?
Mine was libnspr4 and libnss3 deficient, so that was another megabyte of supplements.
Posted on 14 Jul 2011, 3:36 by joec.
"This Wary has everything, including Flash player and SeaMonkey 2.2." 100MB!
Magic and Amazing
Posted on 14 Jul 2011, 5:47 by Sage
Black screen bug reappears - briefly
FULL install, first run, Xorg/Probe/etc gives black screen. CTRL-ALT-BKSPCE to prompt, xwin, regular desktop emerges. There has been some previous discussion about this within the last 6mnths, forget where. May also be a bit HW specific?
Posted on 14 Jul 2011, 6:03 by mavrothal
100MB sure makes a strong publicity statement :-)
However, size per se is only important for limited resources hardware with less than 256MB of RAM, eg P3s, early P4s, or machines with embedded-class processors.
In these machines gz to bz2 to zx makes a noticeable difference, so I hope wary-builds will stay wary and thus with gzip
Posted on 14 Jul 2011, 19:46 by ICPUG
The importance of size is NOT just for old hardware with lower levels of RAM.
It is also important for download time, which is especially important for those without fast broadband.
When will you guys with fast broadband realise that there are others in the world less fortunate than you!