WelcomeWelcome | FAQFAQ | DownloadsDownloads | WikiWiki

Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
1
Why not try dong it your self, like I said the thread before.
2
How to compile Astrolog 7.7 on Tiny Core Linux (for TCL-11.1 ; x86 & x86_64-bit)

https://sourceforge.net/projects/astrology/files/astrolog/
3
Micro Core / Re: XFCE in TinyCore 15 32 Bits
« Last post by GNUser on Today at 05:05:13 AM »
The wayland error you see is because mesa/x is not compiled against wayland in tc x86 to avoid additional size.
I was testing xfwm4 in TCL15 x86 in a pure X environment. I guess the libxfce4ui-2.so.0 library I borrowed from Debian Bookworm x86 is hardwired to ask about wayland display type even when running in X :o
4
Micro Core / Re: XFCE in TinyCore 15 32 Bits
« Last post by nick65go on Today at 04:17:59 AM »
Out of curiosity, what is so important/critically desired for XFCE?
I mean I like very much XFCE (in Alpine Linux), but my understanding is that XFCE is, like GNOME or KDE, just a desktop-environment, aka a bunch of applications (file manager, control panel, etc) + windows-manager + task-bar.

1.So, if small SIZE is the main goal, then Tiny Core has already the FLTK +WBAR + tc-panel, you just need a small file manager (gkt1 /2), some sound/memory applets (like flit, etc) for icons of ram/cpu/sound/network etc.

2. But if the goal is super-flue, like convenience, or "consistency" of colours (blah), or icons (who cares to remember their goal, if more than 10-20 icons) then ... good luck. BTW, XFCE was, once upon time, a relative small desktop paradigm alternative; not anymore.

3. if you want more "security" then CPU + kernel + libc/musl should be the latest (and bloated) -- because vulnerabilities were discovered and corrected (keep dreaming). The price must be paid somewhere, as time/ money /speed /size/ resources.

PS: in my conception, humanity must pay for at lest 3 things: laziness, or luxury or stupidity.
5
Micro Core / Re: XFCE in TinyCore 15 32 Bits
« Last post by Juanito on Today at 01:20:19 AM »
The wayland error you see is because mesa/x is not compiled against wayland in tc x86 to avoid additional size.
6
Micro Core / Re: XFCE in TinyCore 15 32 Bits
« Last post by GNUser on May 24, 2024, 08:52:55 PM »
Hi ALF. I have bad news: Building an xfwm4 extension with borrowed binaries and libraries from Debian is not going to work on TCL15 x86, so don't bother :-\

I tried it myself and got very close, but hit this brick wall:

Code: [Select]
$ xfwm4
... /usr/local/lib/libxfce4ui-2.so.0: undefined symbol: gdk_wayland_display_get_type

It seems that for TCL15 32 bit, creating a proper xfwm4 extension by compiling from source would be necessary.

The good news is that the TCL15 32 bit repo already contains a lot of xfwm4's dependencies, namely these:
Code: [Select]
gtk3.tcz
libXdamage.tcz
libstartup-notification.tcz
libXres.tcz

The bad news is that the TCL15 32 bit repo is missing a few libraries that, judging from the Debian binary, xfwm4 depends on. Namely these:
Code: [Select]
Shared library: [libxfce4kbd-private-3.so.0]                           
Shared library: [libxfce4ui-2.so.0]                             
Shared library: [libxfce4util.so.7]
Shared library: [libxfconf-0.so.3]
Shared library: [libXpresent.so.1]

Long story short, building xfwm4 for TCL15 x86 would be a big project that would entail creating normal and -dev extensions of the missing libraries plus xfwm4 itself (so potentially 5x2+1=11 new extensions). Brutal.
7
Micro Core / Re: XFCE in TinyCore 15 32 Bits
« Last post by ALF on May 24, 2024, 03:42:12 PM »
Perfect ! GNUser, Thanks you!!, sounds good!!! This weekend I will do it...I am very motivated...!!

I love to learn..

I'll keep you posted on the results!!
8
Micro Core / Re: XFCE in TinyCore 15 32 Bits
« Last post by GNUser on May 24, 2024, 01:12:09 PM »
Hi ALF. I don't use xfwm4 but decided to hack my way into making it work on my TCL15 64 bit system. Experiment was successful! I assume making it work on your TCL15 32 bit system would be similar. How motivated are you? ;D

1. Grab a few .deb packages

Do you have access to a Debian or Devuan installation? If so you can download the xfwm4 .deb file like so:

Code: [Select]
apt download xfwm4
It is trivial to convert a Debian .deb package into a TCL .tcz extension (search the forum).

I found xfwm4 needed a few libraries available in these other .deb packages: libxfce4ui-2-0, libxfce4util7, and libxfconf-0-3. You can likewise convert these .deb into .tcz.

2. Put the four custom .tcz extensions in the tce/optional directory and add them to tce/onboot.lst

3. Create startup script ~/.X.d/start-xfwm4.sh
Script should look like this and be executable:
Code: [Select]
#!/bin/sh
xfwm4 &

4. Reboot

It works for me (see attached). If it doesn't work for you, it's probably just a matter of a few additional missing libraries. If you decide to pursue this and get stuck, let me know and I'll help if I can. We can also make it less hacky (e.g., by creating a proper xfwm4.tcz.dep rather than listing each individual custom extension in onboot.lst).

9
TCE Talk / Re: upx for large executables?
« Last post by nick65go on May 24, 2024, 01:02:55 PM »
IMHO, we should first define the "environment" where we want to use the "optimizations", like UPX-compression which was intended for small size of executables (initially was used in Windows for pseudo protected/obfuscated executables, to hide their resources and code against disassembling/debugging).

If we want "common" scripts etc for 32 bits and 64 bits (admin hiro style), then will be AVERAGE (not optimum) for a specific environment.

1. if we use a powerful environment, like SMP -- multithreading, multicore etc 64 bits CPU, with fast SDD --not HDD, lot of RAM (over 4GB).. then UPX, zstd, gzip, does NOT matter too much. The differences are not worth the effort. Time wasted to test/benchmark, re-build TCZ, etc will never be recovered, even when used by 100 users and 100 applications. If you do not believe me, then lets try to estimate/agree how much hypothetically you want to GAIN in speed/size/RAM-usage etc (be it relative %, or absolute values), versus how much you want to INVEST to succeed as time/money/pride etc. So basically to define the target and budget.

2. if we use 32 bits, slow 486 CPU (tiny core user compatible), not SMP, not multithreading, with slow media like HDD/CDROM, then maybe UPX can be discussed with better success. Because here, in this environment, the small/minuscule gains should matter, for some particular BIG applications. For already small size tcz, it does not matter anyway too much the algorithm or block size.

PS: I hope I did not offend anyone with my comment. For me is about efficiency, small effort for small reward, or big effort for big reward, but not big effort for small reward. YMMV.
10
Micro Core / Re: XFCE in TinyCore 15 32 Bits
« Last post by ALF on May 24, 2024, 12:03:59 PM »
Hello GNUser, you're absolutely right!! In fact, I use TC with OpenBox and Rox-Filer ( view attached image ) to have icons on the desktop... it works very well!!

Regarding XFCE, it's more of an academic topic... if it's in the repository, I hoped it would work... XFCE is very well-known and could be very comfortable for other people... I'm thinking of installing TC on some XFCE installations if possible... the support team is more familiar with an XFCE desktop... in summary, it's an academic and comfort matter.
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10