Tiny Core Linux

General TC => Remasters / Remixes - Unofficial => Topic started by: martin on January 28, 2012, 06:28:19 PM

Title: corepkg - a new core package and updates manager
Post by: martin on January 28, 2012, 06:28:19 PM
Instead of trying to match all current md5 files against the ones in the repository, which generates a LOT of small web server requests to the repository and can take a long time, depending on how many extensions you have, CorePkg downloads one small database quickly and then simply matches against that. Downloads are only made from the repository if there is an outdated package or you are fetching a new package database, and never at any other time. This means update checks are performed in mere seconds, rather than potentially much longer. For more details, check my profile.

Another benefit is instant keyword searches for additional extensions you are interested in, and another is built-in offline downloading for your own private network repository or to simply to transfer to your TCL machine if it has no current working internet connection. This saves having to trace dependencies of a program, and all their sub-dependencies. This saves a HUGE amount of time and effort.

Besides the install feature and dependencies check, this program wont do much else without the master package database. Think of this as something along the lines of "apt-get" for TinyCore Linux. ALL updates checking and management is done on the client side and no remote requests are done unless absolutely necessary. This means it is very fast for updates and upgrades checks to be done.
Title: Re: corepkg - a new core package and updates manager
Post by: curaga on January 29, 2012, 01:06:46 AM
Focusing merely on the license, source that you can look at but not modify? Was this intentional?
Title: Re: corepkg - a new core package and updates manager
Post by: martin on January 31, 2012, 10:59:11 PM
I am awaiting a reply from administration, but if the admins here are happy to generate the master package database on the server/mirror, I will not only release corepkg as a proper extension, but will also re-release it under the GPL v2 license.

I see a few downloads, but that's it. Is there actually any interest in this as a way of speeding up package updates and management on the admin and user side?
Title: Re: corepkg - a new core package and updates manager
Post by: paxrex33 on February 01, 2012, 12:28:45 AM
Martin, there is interest, of course.
I was waiting for someone to start this issue.
I think that all of us (TC users) should push the admins to generate the database.
I'm sure that it will be much easier to install and update TC extensions with your package.
I don't know what your database looks like but you could consider adding category to every extension (Driver, Office, Utility, Graphics...).
That way new users would find extensions much easier.
Title: Re: corepkg - a new core package and updates manager
Post by: ixbrian on February 01, 2012, 08:15:21 PM
Personally, I wouldn't even look at it based on the non-free licensing (and by non-free I'm referring to the FSF definition of free software)
Title: Re: corepkg - a new core package and updates manager
Post by: martin on February 01, 2012, 08:23:43 PM
See two posts above. If the program is deemed useful here, I will re-release it under GPL v2. I am setting up a project on sourceforge now for it.

The source was "open" so people would know there is nothing malicious about it, but ideologies are quite strong, so I will do what I can to ensure it doesn't become useless from code rot and disuse. After some good long bit of thinking, I believe converting it to GPL v2 probably would be for the best.
Title: Re: corepkg - a new core package and updates manager
Post by: martin on February 01, 2012, 10:23:31 PM
Ok done, source is available under GPL v2, both corepkg.c and coreupd8.c is now under GPL v2 instead of a simplified BSD license. Sourceforge project URL available in opening post.
Title: Re: corepkg - a new core package and updates manager
Post by: martin on February 02, 2012, 03:39:16 AM
A side project of corepkg, is a graphical package manager designed to handle the new features and abilities of corepkg. Think appbrowser combined with synaptic.

Here is a screenshot of it in alpha stage, but already being able to list packages in the master package database (downloaded through "corepkg fetch") and perform a keyword search. I will change it into two text boxes though, one up top with the listing, one down the bottom with extension info, and a status indicator in the middle of whether you already have the extension installed/downloaded or not.

(http://www.gadget-linux.info/images/coresome_01.png)

Anyway, I named it CoreSoMe, an unimaginative combination of CorePkg SOftware ManagEr. Sounding like "awesome" was intentional, as that is what I think of the excellent TCL foundation.

edit: Playing around with image display vs attachment.
Title: Re: corepkg - a new core package and updates manager
Post by: vinnie on February 02, 2012, 06:52:56 AM
I'm curious to see how it will be in the future
Title: Re: corepkg - a new core package and updates manager
Post by: martin on February 02, 2012, 04:26:49 PM
Here is v0.2, showing a "Xorg" keyword search, and selecting one of the results:

(http://www.gadget-linux.info/images/coresome_v02.png)
Title: Re: corepkg - a new core package and updates manager
Post by: martin on February 02, 2012, 05:35:47 PM
Well, it has been made explicitly clear to me that TinyCore Linux will not be using nor directly providing the corepkg software for extended package management and updates, so I will be making a remaster instead which will use it for anyone who wants it.
Title: Re: corepkg - a new core package and updates manager
Post by: bmarkus on February 02, 2012, 11:37:56 PM
It is not universal but a dedicated TC tool. Why don't you provide .tcz at SourceForge?
Title: Re: corepkg - a new core package and updates manager
Post by: paxrex33 on February 03, 2012, 12:58:08 AM
That would be the best bmarkus.
Then every user would have the choise...
Title: Re: corepkg - a new core package and updates manager
Post by: martin on February 03, 2012, 01:12:30 AM
It is not universal but a dedicated TC tool. Why don't you provide .tcz at SourceForge?
Because users would still need the package database to be available on the repository for it to work properly and I received a message from roberts that they are not willing to do that.

Then every user would have the choise...
That was what I put forth to the admins here but they didn't go for it.

So in order for users to now take advantage of it, I need to create a re-master that is based on it. Which means creating a TinyCore derivative basically, which is 99% TC and uses corepkg and coresome instead of tce-update and appsaudit.
Title: Re: corepkg - a new core package and updates manager
Post by: bmarkus on February 03, 2012, 01:37:58 AM
It is not universal but a dedicated TC tool. Why don't you provide .tcz at SourceForge?
Because users would still need the package database to be available on the repository for it to work properly and I received a message from roberts that they are not willing to do that.

Do not understand. You are promoting a program without making it available in a usable format (aka .tcz) and forcing a user to compile it. Instead of doing a proper job yourself pushing others. Nice approach. I wanted to try it but can't spend time for compilation.

So interest is gone.
Title: Re: corepkg - a new core package and updates manager
Post by: martin on February 03, 2012, 02:17:55 AM
Quote from: bmarkus
Do not understand. You are promoting a program without making it available in a usable format (aka .tcz)
Because the version of the program for the administration side is compiled with a different setting. I can compile it for administrative use if they want.

Quote
forcing a user to compile it.
Chicken and egg I guess. It is useless to users without the package database already generated on the repository (by the admins). I can provide a tcz right now, but users will not be able to use it. Can you use tce-update properly if there are no tcz and md5.txt files in the repository? Same thing, corepkg can't be used properly without pkg.db in the repository.

Quote
I wanted to try it but can't spend time for compilation.

So interest is gone.
I compiled it just now, with compiletc.tcz loaded, from the command in the opening post. Worked just fine.

Look, no ill will against the admins here, they just don't want it at the moment, but as something which simplifies some aspects of package manegement and speeds up package updates tremendously, it has a few benefits which can be taken advantage of. I'll create a derivative system and let the users choose.
Title: Re: corepkg - a new core package and updates manager
Post by: vinnie on February 03, 2012, 07:41:07 AM
I do not express regarding the decision to include or not the db (I lack the skills To make this), but if you place on a site the db generated in an automatic way from repository and make a corepkg.tcz pointing directly to the db might work?
Title: Re: corepkg - a new core package and updates manager
Post by: martin on February 04, 2012, 03:02:26 PM
I offered that too, no response from the admins.

So I have finished making a TinyCore derivative that is based on CorePkg. It is all GPL and non-commercial. I have a link in my forum signature.

Near complete feature listing of corepkg is:
* Download tcz files, optionally install them.
* Install existing tcz files (tce-load wrapper).
* Fetch package database from master mirror.
* Check and update all existing packages by checking their current md5sum with the new one in the package database.
* Keyword search for any package currently known by the database. Searches the tcz name, the description and the complete info for the keyword.
* Regenerate any missing md5 files.
* Will recursively download a tcz and all missing dependencies for offline use. This is great for downloading on a separate Linux machine all the extensions you want to run on TinyCore if it does not have an internet connection and transferring them over and wanting to know that it will work properly. This is extensively well tested. Others sometimes call this offline downloading.

I hope it proves useful.
Title: Re: corepkg - a new core package and updates manager
Post by: roberts on February 04, 2012, 04:07:16 PM
It is fine that you have decided thet you can make a better dstro than ours.
But where are the sources? You are in violation of the GPL without hosting/providing the sources.
Your link to your external site is in violation of our forum rules and has been removed.
I expect to you respect us and our rules just as now you would expect the same for your site.

I really feel that it is too bad that you cannot join a common effort. But then there are always those that won't.
Title: Re: corepkg - a new core package and updates manager
Post by: martin on February 04, 2012, 04:18:03 PM
But where are the sources? You are in violation of the GPL without hosting/providing the sources.
I only have to show where to get them. I haven't finished the website yet. I was going to link to the TinyCore src and the sourceforge page from the about page.

Quote
Your link to your external site is in violation of our forum rules and has been removed.
there are quite a few rules in several places, could you point to the ones I violated in case I overlooked anything?

Quote
I really feel that it is too bad that you cannot join a common effort. But then there are always those that won't.
I tried very hard to join the common effort, everything from contribute several extensions to wanting to propose a possible system that is complementary to the base TinyCore idea, but you wouldn't have it. I felt I could handle package updates in a more effective and much faster way than they are currently performed and I displayed it as well as expressing it so as not to seem like I am all words and no action.

So please, tell me how I have fallen foul of your goals and good will by my well intentioned actions.
Title: Re: corepkg - a new core package and updates manager
Post by: gerald_clark on February 04, 2012, 04:21:10 PM
Linking to someone else's sources is not in compliance with the GPL.  You must provide your own sources.
Title: Re: corepkg - a new core package and updates manager
Post by: roberts on February 04, 2012, 04:27:41 PM
Demanding that we bloat up just to use SQL is the only thing that was rejected.

Title: Re: corepkg - a new core package and updates manager
Post by: roberts on February 04, 2012, 04:33:18 PM
We are not against remasters of Core but trying to comply with the GPL is not easy. I am posting a link to this topic that I was personally, being co-developer of DSL,  involved with at the time.

http://www.linux.com/archive/feature/55285 (http://www.linux.com/archive/feature/55285)

When I started Tiny Core, I wanted to be sure that GPL sources would be easily available and not have to worry about handling media for such purposes.
Title: Re: corepkg - a new core package and updates manager
Post by: martin on February 04, 2012, 04:35:51 PM
Linking to someone else's sources is not in compliance with the GPL.  You must provide your own sources.
I didn't full realise that, and must have had a clause mixed up with GPL v3, which has wording that allows me to provide a link. I am setting up the source directory now.
Title: Re: corepkg - a new core package and updates manager
Post by: martin on February 04, 2012, 04:41:37 PM
Demanding that we bloat up just to use SQL is the only thing that was rejected.
Right, but after careful consideration at the start, I came to the conclusion that using sqlite3 was the only sane and fast way to do what I wanted to do,

You are going after "Tiny Tiny" Core Linux. Based entirely around busybox, as you said.
I am happy with "Tiny Small" Core Linux. I don't mind the extra 400Kb to make the corepkg system work, for my version/remaster. I am based on busybox and sqlite3.
Title: Re: corepkg - a new core package and updates manager
Post by: roberts on February 04, 2012, 04:44:34 PM
No attribution to Core or all the work of the many volunteers here. You are a real class act.
Title: Re: corepkg - a new core package and updates manager
Post by: martin on February 04, 2012, 04:47:52 PM
No attribution to Core or all the work of the many volunteers here. You are a real class act.
huh? On the sourceforge page, I mention the TinyCore Linux project. On the project forums, I mention TinyCore Linux and provide a link to TinyCore Linux and in the startup scripts of the system, I mention TinyCore Linux. If you download it, check out tc-config in /etc/init.d/. At no point is there not a reference to TinyCore Linux.

edit: Heaven forbid you should look at the about page for my project, which has mentioned TinyCore Linux since the very, very start. Even before I changed the name and was calling it Gadget Linux* (http://www.gadget-linux.info/about.htm (http://www.gadget-linux.info/about.htm)) I mention TinyCore Linux.

* Gadget Linux because I wanted to provide a great toolbox to be used with TinyCore Linux, but since there was no administrative support for cooperating with the tools, I went it alone.
Title: Re: corepkg - a new core package and updates manager
Post by: martin on February 04, 2012, 05:35:06 PM
All sources have been updated. I didn't copy everything because I had only taken 3 utilites (only 2 of which are used in the system at the moment). So kernel, 3 FLTK programs and the busybox stuff. I have updated the about page with this information. The about page, the one where TinyCore Linux acknowledgment and attribution has been since the very beginning...

I will say though, I make no modifications to the GPL'ed programs at all, so why can't I just provide a link to them instead? You don't ask for the source to every extension made, you guys are happy with a link to the home page in the .info file to suffice for those wanting the sources, and those making the extensions are still distributing the software.

edit: Now that this thread is in Remasters/Remixes, I have clarified the opening post as to what CorePkg is for, what it was designed to do and the benefits it brings.
Title: Re: corepkg - a new core package and updates manager
Post by: Rich on February 04, 2012, 06:02:25 PM
Hi Martin C
Sources for extensions are here:
http://distro.ibiblio.org/pub/linux/distributions/tinycorelinux/4.x/x86/tcz/src/ (http://distro.ibiblio.org/pub/linux/distributions/tinycorelinux/4.x/x86/tcz/src/)
If the extension was copied from TC3.x without recompiling, the source is here:
http://distro.ibiblio.org/tinycorelinux/3.x/tcz/src/ (http://distro.ibiblio.org/tinycorelinux/3.x/tcz/src/)
If it is unchanged since TC2.x, it is here:
http://distro.ibiblio.org/tinycorelinux/2.x/tcz/src/ (http://distro.ibiblio.org/tinycorelinux/2.x/tcz/src/)
Title: Re: corepkg - a new core package and updates manager
Post by: martin on February 04, 2012, 06:15:32 PM
Hi Martin C
Sources for extensions are here:
http://distro.ibiblio.org/pub/linux/distributions/tinycorelinux/4.x/x86/tcz/src/ (http://distro.ibiblio.org/pub/linux/distributions/tinycorelinux/4.x/x86/tcz/src/)
Right, must have missed that. Thank you.

I guess I was thinking back to xzgv, xbmc, xterm and xtrans in that noone asked me to provide the source to them when submitting it, and I figured the link to the home page was good enough. Wow, no wonder some program repositories can get quite large. How much space is needed for ALL programs and ALL sources?

I have a few ideas for simplifying some of the stuff in my project to accomodate the extensive source requirement. Might put them to work.
Title: Re: corepkg - a new core package and updates manager
Post by: martin on February 04, 2012, 06:38:12 PM
Sorry, one more response.

Another idea I had was, I provide a tcz that contains corepkg and coresome (in it's various stages). CorePkg will get the package database from my server where it is generated and hosted.

On my server, I only grab the tcz file names, the md5 files and the info files from the repository. I use those to create the package database. This way, it can still track updated files, TinyCore Linux users can still benefit from CorePkg, all downloads are still made from the TinyCore Linux repository network and the TinyCore Linux admins don't need to run anything on the server. I do all that, and if users want to, they download corepkg through appbrowser and use it in place of tce-update if they want to. All under the TinyCore Linux banner.

Does that suit better?

edit: plus this gets me out of having to host all that source!
Title: Re: corepkg - a new core package and updates manager
Post by: vinnie on February 04, 2012, 06:52:30 PM
+1 to latest martin post

sorry if I intervene again, but I wanted to try to understand something

Martin, you wanted that they were integrating your package manager enlarging the distribution of 400 kb?
I understand why they have said no, if that was the request.
I saw the size of tinycore shaping slowly, externalizing parts no longer needed or considered accessory (ex. tool for install merged into core plus) and also programs of good quality but left to the choice of users (like dirwin).
In this case I can understand the reaction of developers, a similar request would clash with the coherence maintained so far.

However, if enough hosting corepkg in the repository and generate a db on the server for use, I think it would be feasible test with hypothetical benefical feedback.

Title: Re: corepkg - a new core package and updates manager
Post by: martin on February 04, 2012, 07:09:52 PM
My apologies, I sometimes think of the most complex way to solve a situation or problem before the simplest occurs to me.

If there is no problem with my last proposal, I will re-change the original website I worked on to explain corepkg and what it does, and my Tiny Core Linux derivative, Nucleus Desktop, will be no more.
Title: Re: corepkg - a new core package and updates manager
Post by: Rich on February 04, 2012, 07:13:30 PM
Hi Martin C
I don't see a problem if you wish to offer an extension with an alternative package management
system so long as:
1. It does not create excessive traffic on the Tinycore repository, which it doesn't sound like it will.
2. It conforms with how AppBrowser and AppsAudit installs, removes, and deals with packages.
Title: Re: corepkg - a new core package and updates manager
Post by: martin on February 04, 2012, 07:17:55 PM
1. It does not create excessive traffic on the Tinycore repository, which it doesn't sound like it will.
Absolutely not. That was one of the core (pun not intended) purposes and motivations for its design.
Quote
2. It conforms with how AppBrowser and AppsAudit installs, removes, and deals with packages.
When it does install a package, it wraps around tce-load, and absolutely does not get in the way of AppBrowser nor AppsAudit. CoreSoMe is meant to be complementary to AppBrowser and provide similar functionality but uses the CorePkg system instead for working, and part AppsAudit functionality is re-made in CorePkg, so users can user either/or at any time and not be in conflict.

edit: Hey, I want to call a truce to prevent any (further) unnecessary hostilities here. I mean it's all about continuing to make the great TinyCore Linux project even greater, right?
Title: Re: corepkg - a new core package and updates manager
Post by: Rich on February 04, 2012, 07:35:56 PM
Hi Martin C
While I did not think there would be a problem, I felt those two points were worth highlighting in the
interest of avoiding any conflicts.
Title: Re: corepkg - a new core package and updates manager
Post by: martin on February 04, 2012, 07:59:01 PM
As a point of closure, I want to show that [Link removed due to forum policy violation] is no longer as it was, but I will leave [Link removed due to forum policy violation] as it is temporarily so that Robert can see for himself that I clearly credited and attributed the project to TinyCore Linux from the very beginning. The USB download is also no longer available.

The main information page (Well, I bought the domain, might as well do something with it) is at [Link removed due to forum policy violation] but it will mostly be to just explain what CorePkg is. I will put the current manual on the front page there, as well as a secondary download link for the tcz.

The .info file will contain a condensed version of the manual.

This is all non-commercial and all GPL'ed, of course.
Title: Re: corepkg - a new core package and updates manager
Post by: martin on February 04, 2012, 10:11:30 PM
After processing 3,520 packages, the package database is done (comes to 3.5MB). I am now making the corepkg.tcz for download and then everyone will be able to try it out.
Title: Re: corepkg - a new core package and updates manager
Post by: roberts on February 04, 2012, 10:48:56 PM
You are persisting on ignoring our forum rules.
Please read Forum Rules and Guidelines and specifically rule 2.
Wouldn't you expect users of your forums to be respectful of your posted rules?
Title: Re: corepkg - a new core package and updates manager
Post by: Rich on February 04, 2012, 11:49:56 PM
Hi Martin C
I removed the links from your post #36. While I feel you started this project with good intentions,
there was some friction created due to some misunderstandings. Hopefully this is now just water
under the bridge and we can all move on.
Title: Re: corepkg - a new core package and updates manager
Post by: martin on February 04, 2012, 11:51:15 PM
You are persisting on ignoring our forum rules.
Please read Forum Rules and Guidelines and specifically rule 2.
Forum Rules and Guidelines (http://forum.tinycorelinux.net/index.php/topic,7738.0.html (http://forum.tinycorelinux.net/index.php/topic,7738.0.html))
"2. No attachments/links of binary extensions".

I'm not posting anything.

there was some friction created due to some misunderstandings. Hopefully this is now just water
under the bridge and we can all move on.
I'm trying to, really hard, but it seems roberts doesn't want to let me. I really don't know what I've done to offend so much, really I don't,

and yes, there are one or two forums I help over see in a semi-official capacity, and they don't care about what links are posted, as long as they aren't blatantly commercial. There are implicitly commercial links on these forums in several places, but it seems only I'm being picked on.

edit 2: I had a brief look over some history here before, and roberts is nearly approaching this matter (similar hostility level) along the lines of that guy who tried to create a project called tinycore on sourceforge. Look, that aint me, I just want to create something awesome for TinyCore Linux. I became a fan over 2 years ago, and have been very heavily using it since early December last year, hoping to go to it full-time very soon, but this is all leaving a very sour taste in my mouth.

edit 3: Sent last PM to robert to try and find out, privately, what I have done to annoy him so much. I'm going to make an honorable and civil gesture to find out what is wrong so I can make amends. Is that not a good approach to this? If he doesn't respond, I'll keep working on this, and submitting stuff, but I do not know why he is unresponsive to me.
Title: Re: corepkg - a new core package and updates manager
Post by: Guy on February 05, 2012, 01:53:18 AM
Martin

What are the advantages and disadvantages of your method compared with the existing.

For example, an advantage may be quicker checking for updates. How much quicker?

What else?

- - - - - - - - - - - - -

Robert

Why don't you give a direct answer expressing what you really think. When you avoid the real issue, people get the impression that you have bad feelings towards them, but they don't know why. Martin was trying to make a positive contribution. He does not know why you are reacting this way.

For example, you may say something like:

"Martin, I appreciate that you are trying to make a contribution, but after the time and effort I put into making the existing apps, I don't want to replace it with another one which has only minor improvements."

That way Martin will know what you are really thinking.

If you show appreciation for him trying to make a contribution, he may not have bad feelings.

Robert, one more thing: Does Martins app offer any genuine advantages? If it does, you may want to include them. That way Tinycore improves, Martin made a positive contribution, and everyone is happy.
Title: Re: corepkg - a new core package and updates manager
Post by: martin on February 05, 2012, 02:16:04 AM
What are the advantages and disadvantages of your method compared with the existing.

Advantages:
* Scenario: You have two computers, one with an internet connection, one without. The one without, you are trying to install TinyCore Linux on. You know what extension you want, but you don't want to have manually figure out what dependencies it has, plus their dependencies, to copy over. CorePkg can do this. This helps also when downloading larger segments on a restricted on-peak/off-peak internet connection. Get the remainder parts when more convenient and the larger parts in the cheaper data time. One command will fetch them all, after detecting what you already have.
* You grabbed the TCZs, but you didn't get the MD5's. CorePkg can re-generate the md5's for you.
* Primary: tce-update checks all current md5s against those it remotely fetches and compares them. This means network traffic being used, internet speed and repository speed possibly limiting, etc just to check if there is anything newer to retrieve. The time it takes depends on how many extensions you have (and of course, their dependencies). CorePkg does all this without using any network connection at all, except for whenever you fetch the latest database. Think of Debian "apt-get update" (uses network) and "apt-get upgrade" (doesn't use network unless you want it to).
* Instant keyword search. This is just a consequence of the design. In appbrowser, you search for an item, you select Provides, Keyword, etc and it takes a second or so to find what you want, but you may have to select one of the three options to find what you are after. CorePkg does a keyword search in less time than I can measure (I might time it). This is nice, but it's not even a part worth boasting about, it's just a good side benefit.

Disadvantage:
* The program embeds SQLite3 and therefore is approximately 425KB in size. This would make Core Linux that much bigger if included in core.gz (which I'm not asking for at all).
* Until CoreSoMe is mature, the only way to engage the tool is via the command line.

I simply wanted to link to an online manual I wrote for it here and the link was taken down. There was nothing commercial on the page whatsoever, in fact, there were no less than 5 links on one page to tinycorelinux.com.

Quote
For example, an advantage may be quicker checking for updates. How much quicker?
Depending on how many extensions you have, a tce-update could take a minute or two. I have a 19Mbps connection and I had to wait about 2 minutes for the check to be done, which depended on the speed of the repository. Using CorePkg, it can verify everything in 1-2 seconds, but I will have to time it first to be more accurate.

edit: timings
corepkg search Xorg
(results excluded)
Found 128 results.

real    0m0.036s
user    0m0.028s
sys     0m0.004s

corepkg -u (detect upgradeable packages) - out of a record of 3,520 packages in the known repository:
456 files processed. (this is how many I had in my tce/optional directory)
Your files are all up to date!

real    0m1.953s
user    0m1.012s
sys     0m0.940s
Title: Re: corepkg - a new core package and updates manager
Post by: Guy on February 05, 2012, 04:29:35 AM
Martin, I don't make any decisions, Robert and the team may disagree with everything I say.

Quote
The program embeds SQLite3 and therefore is approximately 425KB in size. This would make Core Linux that much bigger if included in core.gz (which I'm not asking for at all).

It is unlikely that they would want to include it in core.gz. But then you are not asking them to.


As more and more extensions are added to the Tinycore repository, searching, and checking for updates, may take longer and longer. Robert and the team may consider using a database to make this quicker. A script could be written to update the database every time an extension is updated.

I don't know how this is done in distros with large repositories. Does anyone know?


Martin: If Robert and the team would allow you to submit this as an extension in the Tinycore repository, would you want to. You would need to be responsible for improving it, keeping it up to date, fixing any bugs, etc. You would need to develop it into a professional app. If you did not follow up with these, it is probably better that you do not start.

There would also need to be some agreement on having the database and how to keep it updated.

Robert: Would you consider allowing Martin to submit this as an extension (if he wants to)? Would you consider having a database, and some method of keeping it updated? All options could be considered, but one option is for the database to be another extension.
Title: Re: corepkg - a new core package and updates manager
Post by: martin on February 05, 2012, 04:42:21 AM
Quote
but one option is for the database to be another extension.
That is all I want, and the extension is being built. I'm cleaning up the current new version of a few things and will make the tcz very soon.

It is unlikely that they would want to include it in core.gz. But then you are not asking them to.
That's right.

Quote
A script could be written to update the database every time an extension is updated.
I offered to provide this for them. But if not, I have already found a way to keep it pretty up to date with the latest extensions.

Quote
You would need to be responsible for improving it, keeping it up to date, fixing any bugs, etc. You would need to develop it into a professional app. If you did not follow up with these, it is probably better that you do not start.
Just affirming, if I wasn't prepared for this, I wouldn't have offered. I definitely would like to be the overseer and maintainer for it.

Quote
There would also need to be some agreement on having the database and how to keep it updated.
How I made the current 3.5MB pkg.db:
On my VPS:
* Used lynx to get the directory listing from ibiblio.
* Convert the lynx dump to text.
* Used a bash script to extract only the tcz name.
* Use a bash script to create a fake .tcz file name of the real one (so CorePkg knows to process an extension of that name), download the .info and .md5.txt files from ibiblio.
* Process the folder containing all this with corepkg.

Voila. That generated the package database of all 3.5 thousand current known extensions from the repository. I have automated this to need little work and little oversight for myself, there is no problem doing this 1-2 even 3 times a week. The package database generation took me just a few minutes to do once, then it is available for the client to fetch and use.
Title: Re: corepkg - a new core package and updates manager
Post by: roberts on February 05, 2012, 04:55:19 AM
First of all the SQL was rejected because of size. Not only in the base but the database itself.
Second having to maintain a second database on the server is overhead that is not needed.
Third quick updates are already in 4.3 by using a 96k database. Keyword has been in the infrastructure since 4.0.

Martin had written that if this was rejected he would consider it as "enjoyed creating it as a bit of an intellectual exercise". Instead I get a threat of forking. Then an announcement of his new forked desktop on that webpage was no attribution to Core and was in violation of the GPL. I was not talking about corepkg but the forked desktop remaster.

Is this the way to react when rejected. Force your way in? Your way or else? Are these winning tactics to gain favors?

Finally we have rules that everyone else has had to follow and respect. So, given the forceful nature of Martin, we should ignore the rules that we have?

Martin has had PMs with me and I was not sharing it with everyone. They are confidential.
But Martin comes across as only trying to make a contribution? Oh please.

And now Guy, has to, again, personally attack me. It makes me sick.
Title: Re: corepkg - a new core package and updates manager
Post by: martin on February 05, 2012, 05:04:37 AM
Martin had written that if this was rejected he would consider it as "enjoyed creating it as a bit of an intellectual exercise".
I don't remember wording it like you say in the former, but the latter is true. I found it a great little piece of problem solving to engage it.

Quote
Then an announcement of his new forked desktop on that webpage was no attribution to Core and was in violation of the GPL.
I PM'ed you about this with no less than 3 major places on the website where Core was attributed and credited. I may have unintentionally violated the GPL, which I attempted to fix, and I realised it (creating a spin-off) is not what I really wanted to do anyway. So deleted it all.

Quote
Finally we have rules that everyone else has had to follow and respect. So, given the forceful nature of Martin, we should ignore the rules that we have?
I still have not been shown the rules I have broken. But if there were any, I apologise.

Quote
But Martin comes across as only trying to make a contribution? Oh please.
The spirit of my well intentioned efforts have always been to make a contribution. I went over-dramatic in one place because I was convinced my concept introduced a great improvement, and created a "fork" because noone seemed wholly interested, but it really not what I wanted to do.

and Roberts is still acting hostile and cynical towards me and I cannot really grasp the motivation behind it. Apologies if I tread on anyone's toes here, and I mean ANYONE.

So, something happened between "hey, I made some extensions for you guys" and "hey, I got a great idea to improve handling of system updates and stuff" which set Robert off and I can't find what or where.
Title: Re: corepkg - a new core package and updates manager
Post by: roberts on February 05, 2012, 05:11:33 AM
You still cannot accept that it has been rejected for the reasons I have repeatedly stated.
I have no plans to bloat up the base or bog down the server with unecessary additional databases.
Title: Re: corepkg - a new core package and updates manager
Post by: martin on February 05, 2012, 05:13:39 AM
You still cannot accept that it has been rejected for the reasons I have repeatedly stated.
No, I have accepted the reasons why you don't want to bundle it with core.gz and/or Core Plus and I have no problem with that. At all.

Quote
I have no plans to bloat up the base
Not asking you to.

Quote
bog down the server with unecessary additional databases.
You don't need to. It all runs on my server.

I simply want to provide it as an extension that people can use. They download the package database from MY server (via corepkg, it is completely invisible to them unless they know the source code), and when packages are fetched, the mirror is read from the usual place in the system. That's it.

edit: clarifying last part.
Title: Re: corepkg - a new core package and updates manager
Post by: Guy on February 05, 2012, 05:19:23 AM
Just one question Robert: What part do you consider to be a personal attack?

Now a decision has been made. The idea is history. Let's all move on and be happy.
Title: Re: corepkg - a new core package and updates manager
Post by: roberts on February 05, 2012, 05:20:40 AM
Then submit corepkg via normal channels.
Title: Re: corepkg - a new core package and updates manager
Post by: martin on February 05, 2012, 05:34:03 AM
Then submit corepkg via normal channels.
Will do. I have been testing the polishing up of v0.82 all evening. It's bedtime here in Oz, so tomorrow I will package it up, update the code on sourceforge and await. Do you have any objections if I were to also post a direct link to the tcz hosted on my personal home page from here directly? Noone has to see the site, just get the file.

If you have a problem with that, I can probably wait for it to be uploaded.
Title: Re: corepkg - a new core package and updates manager
Post by: roberts on February 05, 2012, 05:46:54 AM
It is not I but forum rule 2 specifically states:
http://forum.tinycorelinux.net/index.php/topic,7738.msg41259.html#msg41259 (http://forum.tinycorelinux.net/index.php/topic,7738.msg41259.html#msg41259)
2. No attachments/links of binary extensions
Title: Re: corepkg - a new core package and updates manager
Post by: martin on February 05, 2012, 05:59:08 AM
oh right, yes.
Title: Re: corepkg - a new core package and updates manager
Post by: bmarkus on February 05, 2012, 06:11:02 AM
I'm sad.

On one side, there is Tiny Core a great toolkit to build special systems, distributions, remasters (you can name them as you want). Flexible, easy to customize, efficient. A great tool to make your own system.

On the other side there is a person who invest time, energy to use it for such purpose and to implement what he think is useful and to create a new desktop system. I have never tried it, but all my symphaty goes to those creating something new, somethin different.

Now his project is dead according to its WEB site:

Quote
The Nucleus Desktop is no more. We recommend TinyCore Linux instead.

I'm sad. I'm really sad to see a project to die before its birth.

Title: Re: corepkg - a new core package and updates manager
Post by: Guy on February 05, 2012, 06:46:57 AM
Martin

Quote
quick updates are already in 4.3 by using a 96k database.

Before going ahead, I suggest you have a good look at the official apps, and see if yours offers a genuine advantage. I have not looked into this myself. If your app does not offer any genuine advantage, give up the idea.

If yours does offer a genuine advantage, can this be done using the official database. If so use it, and don't host your own.
Title: Re: corepkg - a new core package and updates manager
Post by: Rich on February 05, 2012, 07:48:54 AM
Hi Martin C
I believe I've spotted one flaw in what you are doing.
Quote
* You grabbed the TCZs, but you didn't get the MD5's. CorePkg can re-generate the md5's for you.
This defeats the purpose of the MD5 file. By downloading both the tcz and MD5 and verifying them
against each other you ensure that neither file was corrupted.
Title: Re: corepkg - a new core package and updates manager
Post by: martin on February 05, 2012, 02:55:01 PM
If yours does offer a genuine advantage, can this be done using the official database. If so use it, and don't host your own.
Robert told me via PM once that he was basing his own version of a database on everything that is included in busybox, sed and awk primarily, I believe, but I could be wrong.

My solution is more flexible and more, IMHO, and it will be up to users to tell me if I am wasting my time. The other benefit to CorePkg is the flexibility in the system; I've seen mention of people looking at wanting the possible ability to categorise extensions in the future, CorePkg offers this.

Of course, at the very start, Robert was only hinting at behind the scenes development to address the problem of slow update checks. I had no idea when 4.3 was coming along, so I had a go at it myself and produced what I believe to be a very, very fast and efficient method. It is up to the users to decide which one they prefer.

Like I said before, in some implicit ways CorePkg might be competition, but I rather see it as complementary.
Title: Re: corepkg - a new core package and updates manager
Post by: martin on February 05, 2012, 03:02:54 PM
Hi Martin C
I believe I've spotted one flaw in what you are doing.
Quote
* You grabbed the TCZs, but you didn't get the MD5's. CorePkg can re-generate the md5's for you.
This defeats the purpose of the MD5 file. By downloading both the tcz and MD5 and verifying them
against each other you ensure that neither file was corrupted.
That feature was a quick hack. Under the most strict circumstances, you may be right. In other times, you may know you have a great connection and just get the file. One quick example for this: to be considerate to other network users, I got libreoffice.tcz and sun-jre.tcz in my off-peak time. Just the files. then, during the day, I got the rest using CorePkg's "offline downloader". I then used CorePkg rather than waste a network request to re-create the md5 files for later when doing an update check. I had already tried the extension for myself so I knew that it worked and I wasn't too concerned at the time of verifying it manually. It's just a matter of choice; There is more than one way to do it.

If noone ever, ever uses that feature for themselves, I wont be offended. Like I said, a quick hack. It's not even a primary feature that I cared about even if it works flawlessly. It was just another part of the CorePkg toolbox.
Title: Re: corepkg - a new core package and updates manager
Post by: martin on February 05, 2012, 03:07:35 PM
A follow-up:
* Can anyone tell me the right way to link to a set of easy to read instructions for CorePkg to give people an idea of how it works so that the link wont get deleted? The Rules here http://forum.tinycorelinux.net/index.php/topic,7738.0.html (http://forum.tinycorelinux.net/index.php/topic,7738.0.html) aren't clear on it, nor why my previous links were deleted (which were not commercial in any way, and the only links IT contained were to sourceforge and tinycorelinux.com).
* I'm looking for 1 or 2 testers for CorePkg before submission. Let me know here or via PM if you're interested.

edit: ahh stuff it, I'll just include the text file as it is and hope people know where to look. still looking for testers.
Title: Re: corepkg - a new core package and updates manager
Post by: martin on February 05, 2012, 03:31:13 PM
(comment removed, but saved offline. can't be bothered venturing into politics.)
I'll use this space to demonstrate instructions instead.

Sample commands tested, working and ready:
* corepkg -f - fetch package database
* corepkg fetch - same as above
* corepkg -u - check if updates are available, but do not download them.
* corepkg -uf - same as above, but download them.
* corepkg update - same as -uf above
* corepkg -df package[.tcz] - similar functionality to (but does not use) "tce-load -w [package]", fetches an extension and all dependencies (recursive) for later installing, storage and transporting. This is considered the "offline downloading" part.
* corepkg -i package[.tcz] - wrapper to "tce-load -wi"
* corepkg install - shortcut for above
* corepkg search keyword - searches entire database for references to [keyword]. This will soon include all files within packages as well.
* Server side compilation only: corepkg -g - Re-freshes the package database pkg.db.

Features in progress:
* Display estimated download size for packages to be updated.
* Keyword search to the include file list.

Related Summary:
My primary and first motivation for making corepkg at the start was how long it took tce-update to work. Then a few days after I started (it was 80% complete at the time), I saw a member here post about how slow it took tce-update to work for them. A few days later (just before the convention), I saw Robert mention that something was being worked on for 4.3 to help address this. CorePkg was complete and working by then (I sent a PM to Robert at this time introducing my software and what it did). It was a little after that that I announced CorePkg publicly.

Keeping that in mind, corepkg's second primary motivation was simply speed. If the official tools can detect potential updates quicker and perform keyword searches quicker than corepkg, I'll re-consider whether corepkg needs to exist. If corepkg is faster at both than the current tools and those in testing for 4.3, I'll keep working on it. CorePkg will never be faster at fetching extensions and/or installing them, as it uses the very same methods as tce-load does (wget to get the software, tce-load to install them).

The timings I made for corepkg are on the previous page. I can't time appbrowser doing a keyword search because I don't think it accepts one on the command line.
Title: Re: corepkg - a new core package and updates manager
Post by: roberts on February 05, 2012, 07:38:58 PM
Quote
My primary and first motivation for making corepkg at the start was how long it took tce-update to work. Then a few days after I started (it was 80% complete at the time), I saw a member here post about how slow it took tce-update to work for them. A few days later (just before the convention), I saw Robert mention that something was being worked on for 4.3 to help address this. CorePkg was complete and working by then (I sent a PM to Robert at this time introducing my software and what it did). It was a little after that that I announced CorePkg publicly.

Stop with the suppositions and taunting.
Facts using an md5 database was internally suggested to me on Jan 11.
Your first PM to me is dated Jan 16. However the result is A 4MB database versus 96k. A intergated GUI versus command line. Integrated code versus an extension requiring connection to an offsite database thay can never be as current as the official site.




I


Title: Re: corepkg - a new core package and updates manager
Post by: martin on February 05, 2012, 07:49:26 PM
Quote
My primary and first motivation for making corepkg at the start was how long it took tce-update to work. Then a few days after I started (it was 80% complete at the time), I saw a member here post about how slow it took tce-update to work for them. A few days later (just before the convention), I saw Robert mention that something was being worked on for 4.3 to help address this. CorePkg was complete and working by then (I sent a PM to Robert at this time introducing my software and what it did). It was a little after that that I announced CorePkg publicly.

Stop with the suppositions and taunting.
Facts using an md5 database was internally suggested to me on Jan 11.
Your first PM to me is dated Jan 16. However the result is A 4MB database versus 96k. A intergated GUI versus command line. Integrated code versus an extension requiring connection to an offsite database thay can never be as current as the official site.




I

wrong thread. and I didn't know on the 16th that another one was being worked on, so I had no idea. besides, I thought this was already resolved? I mean, it's not like it's going to make the work you have put in your version redundant, so it's not like there is a threat or anything.
Title: Re: corepkg - a new core package and updates manager
Post by: martin on February 05, 2012, 07:57:22 PM
Let it be known that I have privately made another offer of reconcilliation towards Robert and to make amends for whatever it was I did to offend and upset him. I really, REALLY do not know what it was! I'm not kidding, being sarcastic or provocative at all.

Just trying to amicably fix this. My offer is on the table.

edit: come on Robert, please don't let a potentially great partnership (we are all partners in helping make TinyCore Linux awesome and useful for all computer uses) and possible friendship turn sour.
Title: Re: corepkg - a new core package and updates manager
Post by: martin on February 05, 2012, 08:06:01 PM
One more. Whether you're annoyed at the seeming duplication of effort or what, I don't know because so far you wont tell me.

So, another gesture to prove I only want to help, contribute and what not. If not the updates and keyword search facilities, tell me then, what parts you DO need or want assistance with in the base. I've contributed several extensions of programs I use a lot so I can enjoy them under TCL. Tell me then, where would you like the extra man power within the base or another part of the project and I'll get to work.

No kidding, if this is the only way I can prove to you beyond all doubt I have only good intent here, so be it.
Title: Re: corepkg - a new core package and updates manager
Post by: martin on February 05, 2012, 09:02:23 PM
Ok, another. It seems Robert has the impression that I am implying, throughout this thread, that he produced a better (than is currently used) updater system as a result of me mentioning mine to him.

Let me state definitely, here, that I had no idea whatsoever that he was already working on something at the same time I was, in fact, he started working on his BEFORE I did. Only, I did not know it. I independently came up with my own idea for the design of CorePkg, without any external help, suggestion or influence, and Robert was working on his, in a way he can explain if he wants to, in his own way.

Mine is made by me, following my own "developer's itch" and later re-enforced by seeing a member's posting here. At best, I had started work on mine on late 15th of January, whereas he was working on his earlier. I made mine all in C, using SQLite3 for data manipulation and Robert (as he said to me) based on the internal utilities of busybox.

He built his, I'm sure, to be functional and use the existing base without needing any extra help that would inflate core.gz. I was merely building on the flexibility of SQL and concentrating on speeding up what it was made for.

Robert: as you can see, this post contains no direct quote from any private message, excepting the first sentence only carries an abstract and vague reference (but definitely no quote, copy and paste, or anything) to give readers context and to allow people here to reach their own logical conclusion.

Once more, Robert's came first, I wrote mine without knowing he was working on his, the primary difference is the design and mechanism.

edit: clarity.
Title: Re: corepkg - a new core package and updates manager
Post by: vinnie on February 06, 2012, 07:22:03 AM
Martin forgive me, I do not speak English and I find it hard to read such long posts.
Seems to me that Robert has given you permission to send the TCZ to the repository,
I think that's a good thing, it allows users to use it and test it.
Maybe it just takes a little patience, in all the other distros I've tried there have always been different packagemanager alternative in the repository.
Title: Re: corepkg - a new core package and updates manager
Post by: martin on February 06, 2012, 05:46:50 PM
More than one member here has hinted to me at the probable source of Robert's abrasive attitude towards me and that I need to be very sensitive, extra patient and also diplomatic in the whole thing. (Which I've tried, really)

I have also appreciated the PM's of support, not only of my efforts to attempt to resolve this with Robert but also for having a go with CorePkg.

However, last night, I came to the conclusion that logically, I see no reason why I need to pander to Robert's needs.

So after an intensive several hours long session following a few guides and performing a lot of mkdir'ing and gcc'ing, I have an optimised base system for my own project which has been created from scratch, built around corepkg. I have named it the same as my previous TinyCore fork (but uses nothing from TinyCore's base whatsoever, I use a brand new package installer as well).

Someone else will have to take over maintenance of xzgv, xterm, xtrans, rp-pppoe and the recently submitted fbpanel in the repository, because I wont be anymore.

I wont be quitting this community entirely (unless my account is forcefully closed), I will just no longer be contributing anything to (Tiny)Core Linux.

Thank you, it's been (mostly) fun.

PS: For those interested, I'll be closing down the sourceforge project too. The sources there are about 3 revisions behind anyway, and there have been several large improvements and bug fixes since then.
Disclaimer: This post contains no direct quotes from any private messages. Only vague references have been made to provide context.
Title: Re: corepkg - a new core package and updates manager
Post by: vinnie on February 06, 2012, 08:17:48 PM
I'm sorry, unfortunately we can not always go in agreement, best wishes for the project and fun for the future.
Title: Re: corepkg - a new core package and updates manager
Post by: CaptBill on February 08, 2012, 12:46:41 PM
I'm sad.

On one side, there is Tiny Core a great toolkit to build special systems, distributions, remasters (you can name them as you want). Flexible, easy to customize, efficient. A great tool to make your own system.

On the other side there is a person who invest time, energy to use it for such purpose and to implement what he think is useful and to create a new desktop system. I have never tried it, but all my symphaty goes to those creating something new, somethin different.

Now his project is dead according to its WEB site:

Quote
The Nucleus Desktop is no more. We recommend TinyCore Linux instead.

I'm sad. I'm really sad to see a project to die before its birth.

Guess it will have to go out to the porch like poor Lazarus just did.

I'm curious here...what is the point of having an OS in component form if you you are breaking the the license by using it for it's STATED PURPOSE- a modular OS centered around full customization from the ground up based on personal needs?

Is a personal repository via a database a no-no? Is that 'taking free to far' or something?

If I build a custom PPR have I or anyone 'broke the law' ?

 
Title: Re: corepkg - a new core package and updates manager
Post by: gerald_clark on February 08, 2012, 12:58:36 PM
CaptBill, I suggest you re-read the whole thread.
Title: Re: corepkg - a new core package and updates manager
Post by: CaptBill on February 08, 2012, 02:19:14 PM
CaptBill, I suggest you re-read the whole thread.

What you really mean to say is 'read between the lines' concerning what is to be considered 'lawful use'...

Seems a 'yes' or 'no' would be nice concerning legal matters before investing time and energy, reading, re-reading and reading again. Could have swore I read 'free to use'.

I certainly won't fault anyone because I 'see' the political hot potato ,'TinyCore' ,for what it is. How am I to judge what I don't know?

So all I will do is express my exasperation with the whole online legality quandary that abounds. No different than Windows, really. Actually, Windows seems the lesser offender because it is not 'sold' as free when it's not really 'free', like Gpl seems to be.

I spent a couple hours this morning trying to figure out how to be sure my Windows wasn't trying me a 'pirate', and now I can't figure out if Gpl is doing the same or could potentially.

Rather fair question that I know is hard to answer so I leave it there

Thank you all


Title: Re: corepkg - a new core package and updates manager
Post by: gerald_clark on February 08, 2012, 02:22:21 PM
Free to use means you can "use" it.
Distributing is not "using" and has specific requirements per the GPL.
Title: Re: corepkg - a new core package and updates manager
Post by: CaptBill on February 08, 2012, 02:36:35 PM
Free to use means you can "use" it.
Distributing is not "using" and has specific requirements per the GPL.

So you are the 'Dealers' and we are just 'users'.

Thanks for clarifying that.

At least you came right out and said it.

I respect that.

Title: Re: corepkg - a new core package and updates manager
Post by: vinnie on February 08, 2012, 03:24:10 PM
One way to clarify is to read the license terms, CaptBill, you know the terms of the GPL?
Redistribuition is not denied, but is permitted only in accordance with respecting some requirements.
Frankly I think the GPL is a good licenze because it protects intellectual property (or call it paternity) of a work without denying the intellectual property (or call it chance to learn) of others.
It is a restrictive license, but because it is protecting the interests of the community

Other licenses such as the bsd do not.
This bsd like licenses are very intellectually honest (or philosophically higher if you want), but look at what makes the apple to take advantage of it ...
Title: Re: corepkg - a new core package and updates manager
Post by: ixbrian on February 08, 2012, 06:18:46 PM
CaptBill, I suggest you re-read the whole thread.

What you really mean to say is 'read between the lines' concerning what is to be considered 'lawful use'...

Seems a 'yes' or 'no' would be nice concerning legal matters before investing time and energy, reading, re-reading and reading again. Could have swore I read 'free to use'.

I certainly won't fault anyone because I 'see' the political hot potato ,'TinyCore' ,for what it is. How am I to judge what I don't know?

So all I will do is express my exasperation with the whole online legality quandary that abounds. No different than Windows, really. Actually, Windows seems the lesser offender because it is not 'sold' as free when it's not really 'free', like Gpl seems to be.

I spent a couple hours this morning trying to figure out how to be sure my Windows wasn't trying me a 'pirate', and now I can't figure out if Gpl is doing the same or could potentially.

Rather fair question that I know is hard to answer so I leave it there

Thank you all

The GPL allows you to use the software for free.   The GPL has requirements if you want to distribute software - but the thing to keep in mind is that these requirements are there to ensure people you distribute the software to have the same rights that you have.   

If you would like to better understand why the GPL was written the way it was, I would recommend you read the book "Free Software, Free Society"  which is available online:  http://www.gnu.org/doc/fsfs-ii-2.pdf (http://www.gnu.org/doc/fsfs-ii-2.pdf)
Title: Re: corepkg - a new core package and updates manager
Post by: CaptBill on February 08, 2012, 08:20:01 PM
I read in the first sentence that I need to BUY this book, so I better not read it or I will be in violation of the law apparently.

I am trying to set up my computer for a cross/platform  development environment which requires a highly flexible repo/package management environment. And choose TinyCore on good faith in the Gpl license , and not needing or wanting to become a lawyer. I don't need to. I really don't. I can just write my software and instruct others to download TinyCore themselves and they can say my egg came before your chicken and be done with that. But that would frankly be more 'rude' to all the hard work of the TinyCore team...but still not as rude as you causing me to be a lawbreaker when I am not.

All I ask for is strait/honest dealings which seems a moving target with the Gpl. It is my computer and code therefore my responsibilty to know. If it means being a jerk to be legal that is a shame is all.

Title: Re: corepkg - a new core package and updates manager
Post by: Jason W on February 08, 2012, 08:27:17 PM
Tinycore and it's community did not create the terms of the GPL, but rather we have to abide by it, whether we see it as ideal or not.

So please don't blame Tinycore for the GPL, or the BSD, or the Mozilla License, etc, etc, or any other license that is abided by in our repo. 
Title: Re: corepkg - a new core package and updates manager
Post by: Rich on February 08, 2012, 08:38:42 PM
Hi CaptBill
Quote
I read in the first sentence that I need to BUY this book, so I better not read it or I will be in violation of the law apparently.
I'm afraid you took that out of context, that was part of a book review.
This is from page four of the book:
Quote
Copyright c
 2002, 2010 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
Verbatim copying and distribution of this entire book are permitted
worldwide, without royalty, in any medium, provided this notice is
preserved. Permission is granted to copy and distribute translations
of this book from the original English into another language provided
the translation has been approved by the Free Software Foundation
and the copyright notice and this permission notice are preserved on
all copies.
You are free to read it and give it away.

Rather than complain, if there is something you wish to do but are unsure of the legality, ask a
question.
Title: Re: corepkg - a new core package and updates manager
Post by: CaptBill on February 08, 2012, 08:55:09 PM
Tinycore and it's community did not create the terms of the GPL, but rather we have to abide by it, whether we see it as ideal or not.

So please don't blame Tinycore for the GPL, or the BSD, or the Mozilla License, etc, etc, or any other license that is abided by in our repo.

Certainly not. My aggravation is toward the Gpl et al. Which means to play it safe with the law means I now cannot even seed a Torrent for fear of breaking the contract, when I am more than willing to chip in and help when it is only fair and right that I do so.

I guess your hands are tied because all the repo apps are liscensed separately.



Title: Re: corepkg - a new core package and updates manager
Post by: Jason W on February 08, 2012, 09:04:46 PM
Exactly, our hands are tied to whatever license that upstream source dictates.  And like mentioned, the GPL is not an easy one to be in compliance with.
Title: Re: corepkg - a new core package and updates manager
Post by: Jason W on February 08, 2012, 09:17:59 PM
Like with libdvdcss, I would love to provide an extension for it, or to at least for someone to be able to upload one to the repo to make it simple for those who would like to watch their legally purchased DVD's.  But the license and legal requirements dictate otherwise.    We just have to abide, since we will respect upstream license requirements, even if we personally disagree.
Title: Re: corepkg - a new core package and updates manager
Post by: CaptBill on February 08, 2012, 10:17:57 PM
Like with libdvdcss, I would love to provide an extension for it, or to at least for someone to be able to upload one to the repo to make it simple for those who would like to watch their legally purchased DVD's.  But the license and legal requirements dictate otherwise.    We just have to abide, since we will respect upstream license requirements, even if we personally disagree.

This is why it is crucial that there is a personal repo (PPR) with bi-directional qualities. Would be perfect if we could 'save to repo' as easily as saving a file in a file manager. What is not available in the main repo we can simply download, prepare into a tcz and save to our PPR, freeing the TinyCore team from these issues. Just means enabling a easy way for things into as well as out of the repo for us end-users.

In fact a PPR seems even better than a standard file manager as an all around file management practice. And not just for apps but everything...apps, folders, folders/files in iso's/vhd's ...next is packages (collections of all previous).

This would be a feature unlike any other repo and is a perfect fit for TinyCore.

Essentially then the repo would serve as a powerful middle tier between the OS and the file system, rendering a much more manageable scenario.

I have been planning on doing it via vsFtpd server, but like the SqlLite approach even better. I just gotta have it in a cross platform development system. Would help out immensely in all kinds of ways.

Thanks again to the team for all your great work thus far. TinyCore truly is a world class engineering marvel for sure regardless.





Title: Re: corepkg - a new core package and updates manager
Post by: martin on June 07, 2012, 11:02:38 PM
For those who are interested, and the many who privately contacted me with words of support and encouragement, the latest code is now finally and fully released as GPL v2 at github:
https://github.com/markerr/core-pkg-man

No I am not back to contribute again to the Tiny Core Linux project, I am just releasing full sources and announcing it here because so many people were interested in it. I will still maintain it upon request though. It's better to have it out in the open now than to have it sit and rot on my hard drive not being used.