[SOLVED]how to create right click menu entry

[manit123]

you mean that loop mounts are read only so usb stick would not deteriorate . Also access to RAM is fast , my computer has 4GB of it . So copy2fs will help me in faster access ?

[Rich]

Hi manit123
Actually, the extensions are packaged in a read only file system so they can't be messed up. If you use copy2js, your
boot time will take longer, but applications will start faster.

[manit123]

Won't they run fast too considering that they are loaded into RAM whose access time is much faster than USB ?
Also , can you tell me way to have copy2fs flag in boot (I have grub 0.97 ) ?

[gerald_clark]

All programs run from RAM.  The copy2fs.flg is a file in your tce directory

[manit123]

i do not want to pester you .
Can you point me to link explaining copy2fs mode ?

[Juanito]

you can use the apps gui to set the copy2fs flag:

installation options -> toggle default install to file system flag

This will put a file named copy2fs.flg in your /tce folder and extensions will then be copied to ram

[Rich]

Hi manit123

Can you point me to link explaining copy2fs mode ?

Check out the diagrams for mount mode and copy mode found here:
http://wiki.tinycorelinux.net/wiki:tiny_core_file_architecture_diagrams

[manit123]

That was wonderful .
As i thought - copy2fs will help my applications like dictionary , word-letter-combination-search-software-for-scrabble to run faster at the expense of longer startup time .
I think if I create an empty copy2fs.flg file in tce folder my usb stick  . I will get copy2fs mode . Is that right (why should I bother systemtool>apps for that) ?

The difference I think among the tcz & copy2fs is that - in tcz mode one can see  what has been loaded as there will be many loop mounts . In copy2fs mode I won't get so many mountpoints . Isn't it ?

[Rich]

Hi manit123

I think if I create an empty copy2fs.flg file in tce folder my usb stick  . I will get copy2fs mode . Is that right (why should I bother systemtool>apps for that) ?

Yes, that will work. The tool is suggested because that is one of the functions it provides.
The applications will run just as fast as mount mode. The time from when you start the application until you see
results on the screen will be a lot less (startup time).

[tinypoodle]

The applications will run just as fast as mount mode.

Hmm, isn't there a possibility where a mounted app would access squashfs while running (and therefore might be a bit slower, depending on storage medium throughput)?

[Rich]

Hi tinypoodle
The executables and libraries will be loaded into and running from RAM. If the application includes a data file in the
squashfs that it routinely opens and reads, that could slow things down a bit, though caching would probably serve
to reduce that.

[tinypoodle]

The executables and libraries will be loaded into and running from RAM. If the application includes a data file in the
squashfs that it routinely opens and reads, that could slow things down a bit

Request for clarification please:
1. Is statement referring to squashfs in particular or generally applicable (incl. e.g. uncompressed scatter files)?
2. Is statement referring to compiled code exclusively or generally applicable (incl. e.g. interpreted code)?

though caching would probably serve
to reduce that.

True, but OTOH even in copy2fs mode swapping to disk could lead to decrease speed.

[Rich]

Hi tinypoodle
1. The program will be loaded into RAM regardless of how/where it is stored.
2. Compiled code. I don't know how for example ash or a basic interpreter would handle it.

True, but OTOH even in copy2fs mode swapping to disk could lead to decrease speed.

I was referring to if the program routinely read from a data file, those reads would wind up being cached in RAM. If
the program went to read from that file again, it may already have been cached since reads are done in blocks of
4K in think.