General TC > General TC Talk
Could be [tiny]core improved?
Leee:
--- Quote from: GNUser on December 30, 2024, 12:30:20 PM ---
--- Quote from: CentralWare on December 30, 2024, 02:12:20 AM ---The entire TCL methodology is getting a conceptual refit
--- End quote ---
Is this true? Can you please clarify what's being refitted?
IMHO these are TCL's main strengths:
1. It's methods/concepts (e.g., frugal install, tcz system, known pristine state after boot)
2. Diminutive size
The above strengths more than make up for TCL's weaknesses:
1. Small repo (cf. Debian)
2. Patchy official documentation (cf. Arch, Gentoo)
3. Few online how-tos (cf. Ubuntu)
I really hope TCL isn't getting a radical conceptual overhaul. At least for me, TCL's concepts (as they currently exist) are what make me want to continue using the distro and contributing to it.
--- End quote ---
I very much agree with this and GNUser's replay #19 as well.
yvs:
> IMHO these are TCL's main strengths:
> 1. It's methods/concepts (e.g., frugal install, tcz system, known pristine state after boot)
>
at the same time tcz/squashfs is the reason (I suppose) of so slow TC booting (comparing to boot of uncompressed files)
Leee:
--- Quote from: CentralWare on December 30, 2024, 02:12:20 AM ---...@nick65go: Your comment has been stirring with me for a few thus begs to ask... how many TCL users are in fact using i386/486 equipment anymore?. . o O ( Can I get a show of hands, please?? )
Non-retired admins: consider a sticky post with a survey -- the outcome may in fact alter future TCL builds.
--- End quote ---
Haven't we already left 386 behind right from the get-go? And I personally don't have any 386 nor 486 equipment.
--- Quote from: CentralWare on December 30, 2024, 02:12:20 AM ---
--- Quote from: neonix on December 24, 2024, 11:28:59 PM ---There should be few variants of Tiny Core...
--- End quote ---
I agree... but I also have to disagree.
Most anyone who is going to use TCL is going to boot the downloaded ISO and either burn it to CD-ROM (640MB), DVD or FLASH. That said, there's a minimum of 640MB or so that we have as a foundation of the BOOT IMAGE. IN MY OPINION this image does not have to be as small as possible as we're completely wasting the remainder of that blank CD otherwise. Let's leave "variants" alone for the moment and move on. (See below.)
--- End quote ---
I'll freely admit that I might be an edge case but I never boot from an ISO, but always use the kernel+modules.gz+rootfs.gz. I'd be curious to see a poll of regarding who uses the ISO vs who does it the right way. ;)
--- Quote from: CentralWare on December 30, 2024, 02:12:20 AM ---
--- Quote from: neonix on December 15, 2024, 02:21:59 PM ---Does TC have function to install extensions on local NAS server and load theme every time computer is booted?
--- End quote ---
@neonix: Yes. As @partikg pointed out, you can use network shares via NFS, SMB/CIFS, AOE, iSCSI, etc. and simply load extensions remotely. If you're booting a device via PXE this is almost vital as there's usually no local storage. You can also create your own mini-repository on your NAS and simply edit /opt/tcemirror to point at your NAS. (Options exist in numerous flavors!)
--- Quote from: mocore on November 21, 2024, 08:43:48 AM ---could the core(scripts) be made "more" modular without increasing complexity ?
--- End quote ---
@mocore: The TCE foundation (scripts) are being rewritten outside of Tiny Core's crew and may someday become a replacement - with caveats.
* The existing TCE foundation is already a tiny bit complicated due to the stringent repository structure
* Making it more modular... I don't personally see much if any advantage to justify the amount of work entailed
* Functionality... somewhere around v4.x the current TCE/Repo foundation was solidified (and thereafter became stagnated/limited.)In order to simplify and expand upon TCE would require an entire rewrite, which is on the books on my end for first quarter 2025 as we require repository functionality that doesn't exist and that the existing foundation cannot support, but I cannot promise backward compatibility thus why we're doing this initially outside of the existing Tiny Core Linux name so there's no confusion, conflict, etc. If the project is successful AND backward compatible, we'll send an offer up the chain of command and see if the TCL brass wants to convert :) It's far from effortless, thus why we're doing this solo right now.
--- End quote ---
I haven't gone over them with a fine-toothed comb but I have taken a look at the Tiny Core scripts, primarily tc-config, and haven't found much of anything that I would change -as part of the base-. There are a few tweaks I would make for -my own purposes- and have determined that I can make whatever changes I want by placing slightly modified files in a third ".gz" file and loading modules.gz, rootfs.gz and my_own.gz - "remastering light".
--- Quote from: CentralWare on December 30, 2024, 02:12:20 AM ---@everyone: try to be patient! The entire TCL methodology is getting a conceptual refit based on what drove the TinyCore founder @roberts to start this project in the first place and the evolution necessary for it to step into the 21st century allowing more flexibility of what gets packaged under the hood and hopefully a lot less people quoting "if you don't like it the way it is, go somewhere else!" Tiny Core Linux is already, in my opinion, a reasonably unique variant to the Linux world. When we're finished, I assure you, this methodology and the tech we're implementing is going to create a class of its own!
--- End quote ---
I'm thinking that would be a popular thread on the forums?
--- Quote from: CentralWare on December 30, 2024, 02:12:20 AM ---
--- Quote from: nick65go on October 24, 2014, 10:10:52 AM ---Could be [tiny]core improved?
--- End quote ---
LOL... virtually anything can be improved upon - that's what society does... they point out flaws! (especially petty ones, it seems!) which leads to change when appropriate.
A decade later, you're still an active member of this forum. You, and everyone similar has spent their membership time offering ideas, bug reports, complaints and/or compliments... so of course it not only CAN be improved upon, but has been and will continue to be for as long as there are Admins willing to carry the torch and Users willing to make it worthwhile for them to do so.
Happy holidays everyone!
--- End quote ---
A sincere "Thank you" to all of the torch carriers, whether or not you are "officially" part of the "team". To you and the Tiny Core community at large, I hope you had a merry Christmas and will have a happy new year (and whatever other holidays you might celebrate).
Rich:
Hi yvs
--- Quote from: yvs on December 30, 2024, 03:15:28 PM --- ... at the same time tcz/squashfs is the reason (I suppose) of so slow TC booting (comparing to boot of uncompressed files)
--- End quote ---
The squashfs packages is one of the cornerstones of Tinycore.
Like all things in life, nothing is free. Every feature comes with a price.
It takes longer to boot:
That may be, but booting is not an activity I perform very often. I spend
most of my time performing useful tasks on my computer, not booting.
CNK:
--- Quote from: CentralWare on December 30, 2024, 02:12:20 AM ---Your comment has been stirring with me for a few thus begs to ask... how many TCL users are in fact using i386/486 equipment anymore?
. . o O ( Can I get a show of hands, please?? )
--- End quote ---
Hand.
OK, it's more practical to run older Linux which uses less RAM/CPU, but I like that the option exists for my i486 PCs. i386 isn't supported as it is.
People wanting performance will probably have x86_64 systems these days, so why push dropping i486 compatibility in binaries now (presumably in hope for slightly faster performance)? Such people can use the x86_64 kernel/extensions.
--- Quote from: CentralWare on December 30, 2024, 02:12:20 AM ---Most anyone who is going to use TCL is going to boot the downloaded ISO and either burn it to CD-ROM (640MB), DVD or FLASH. That said, there's a minimum of 640MB or so that we have as a foundation of the BOOT IMAGE. IN MY OPINION this image does not have to be as small as possible as we're completely wasting the remainder of that blank CD otherwise.
--- End quote ---
Actually on my limited internet data I really like that I can download the smaller ISOs. But like Leee I usually download kernel+modules.gz+rootfs.gz directly for upgrades from home, and leave the ISO download for some time I can leech off someone else's internet.
--- Quote from: CentralWare on December 30, 2024, 02:12:20 AM ---Functionality... somewhere around v4.x the current TCE/Repo foundation was solidified (and thereafter became stagnated/limited.)
--- End quote ---
But this is a big advantage of Tiny Core! Simplicity to me means it's easy to understand everything, and not changing things all the time like most other distros is a big part of that. I don't even like how PiCore swapped out some TCL shell scripts for Python (I changed them back for my own use). The only annoying thing about extensions is that I have to build lots of them myself because the repos are small. I gather you're working on a system to port software build scripts from other distro packaging systems, which is great. I played with this myself but don't have the motivation to work through debugging and maintenance of such a system. But I can't see how it would be impossible to make that "backward compatible" with the current extension system. It might be easier to change TCL to match parts of the other distro you're porting build scripts from, but then that's already been done with dCore where existing Debian packages can be converted directly without compiling them separately.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version