General TC > General TC Talk
TinyCore: just a few steps left to the ultimate OS
Monobit.Fortrix:
--- Quote from: jur on November 02, 2010, 11:15:38 PM ---The only thing I can think of to make tcl more accessible to windoze refugees is to provide more GUIs to do configuration, and that is steadily increasing with each release.
--- End quote ---
That's one of the main tasks. Obconf, Tint2 configurations.. and there will be some custom GUI app when the number of files in MySystemSettings folder rapidly increases :)
--- Quote ---If you look at other distros that come pre-packaged with a choice of managers and apps, for each main one there is huge number of variations as each owl on a clod reckons this or that particular bunch of managers and apps is better. Ubuntu and puppylinux are good examples - for each main release there is a huge range of spinoffs to choose from.
--- End quote ---
...and there's a huge range of bugs due to their complicated structure. ;) I don't like the way Ubuntu developers went now - hiding the system structure from the user and making it nearly uncompatible with other Linux distro architectures even when having the same software packaging format. I could install a Debian package in Ubuntu 7.04 and it worked fine but now I can't even install it, and if I manage to do it the program will behave buggy. What's the point to use the Debian packaged software not compatible with Debian itself? :) Hiding the transparency is Window$ way, and it obviously can't lead to anything good. For instance, it's difficult to remove iptables in Ubuntu without damaging some upper-level applications already present in the system. (I had an occasion I had to remove iptables from the default Ubuntu installation) In TC, nothing systemworth depends on iptables so if I install it, I can safely remove it later. So, TC has the ability for easy userspace expansion (and later collapsion, if needed) while its structure remains clear to the user. That's a huge advantage.
--- Quote ---But now look at tinycore - there are no spinoffs. This is surely due to the extreme customization ability. I was looking at your iso, and you use very similar stuff to me - openbox, tint2, chromium rox and a few others. So by changing the background, the wbar position and a few other minors, it is almost identical to my favorite setup (except I use OnDemand extensively).
--- End quote ---
Note that wbar position wasn't changed from the base system :)
--- Quote ---So each time I toy with the idea of making the ultimate .iso, I very quickly run up against, "what's the point?" :)
--- End quote ---
The point is most computer users don't see any advantages in the extreme customization ability. I don't belong to them (otherwise I'd never give up Ubuntu) but lots of people are too lazy to think of the things they don't understand, and extreme customization ability makes them think of these things. They usually get lost in the amount of choice (e.g. OSS/ALSA/Pulseaudio/ESD or Chromium/Firefox/Opera/Epiphany-webkit), thay can't understand the starting absence of a simple taskbar panel and sound and finally get retired to some distros they call "user-friendly" (Ubuntu/Fedora/SuSE/Xandros/Sabayon etc) or - even worse - to Window$, ignoring all the advantages of TC architecture. The point of making such an ultimate .iso is to draw attention of the masses to the great capabilities of TC platform itself while offering some functional tasks from the start.
--- Quote from: tinypoodle on November 03, 2010, 02:20:25 AM ---There is 'flit' which is fltk native and only 20 Kb.
--- End quote ---
Thanx, I'll have a look on it but it seems handy to have a built-in battery monitor in such a nice panel :)
--- Quote ---The panel or pinboard of ROX could be used, if the goal is to minimize number of mouse clicks.
Also the 'bookmarks' feature in the filer.
--- End quote ---
Thanks for the tip. Btw, does Rox support kind of GUI theming?
--- Quote ---It's whatever I was in need of since last boot 23 days ago, as an indication I have 83 extensions mounted at this moment. And I would rather call it 'menu du jour' than build.
At current that would be opera10, which even could be considered a waste of space, as it has qt as a dependency, and including deps sums up to 21.73 MB, while opera (9.64) uses 9.25 MB of space.
On this occasion I did a quick test: Removing all locales from opera 10.62 which has hardly any dependencies (Looking at the binary with ldd it appears like it needs fontconfig and expat2 which I had already installed, a bit more than 200 Kb, I didn't test on a base boot), then make a squashfs from it ended up with 13 MB, so I could save another ~8.5 or 12.5 MB there by either down- or upgrading version.
Also I have links as a browser at the moment.
And yes, I have used getFlash10.tcz to install flash plug-in, and it works fine with alsa.
--- End quote ---
I understood the logic. However, I gave up Opera for the one reason - too many sites are not displayed properly. (Also, Opera is reported to have a poor anti-phishing service). When the situation changes the browser will change too (but I think at the moment it will change browsers' sizes will be similar, and version downgrading doesn't look like an idea I can agree with). From some version, ALSA stopped working on my hardware (and I saw some other different laptops that had the same problems). OSS4 works perfectly anywhere I've seen.
--- Quote ---I think a size of 300 MB would limit the usability of TC a lot when it comes to low spec PC's, personally I would not choose such to run on a box with less than 1.5 GB of RAM.
--- End quote ---
My laptop was bought in late 2007, and now it's already considered as a low spec laptop. According to the Conky indications, it has 883 MB of RAM. The 171-meg build now takes 141 in RAM with running Chromium (+monto, wbar, conky, tint2, OSS and NVidia drivers). Yesterday I loaded several Flash videos simultaneously and the amount of taken RAM didn't exceed 230 MB anyway. What do I do wrong? :)
--- Quote from: ^thehatsrule^ on November 03, 2010, 12:56:16 AM ---I did add an edit the first post, but it appears to have been changed since. Please don't ignore it next time.
I would like to remind everyone of the policy concerning specific remasters and their discussions. http://forum.tinycorelinux.net/index.php?topic=5543.0
Since there seems to be more general discussion generated, this thread will be kept open for now.
--- End quote ---
I promise I won't ignore the policy but is there any non-GPL compliant software in the build? It's built using the TC repos only, except for Monto, which AFAIK is GPL compliant too. And what does "A link to the site must contain full sources, including TC/MC's" mean? Can I just place the link to the original TC download on the site?
--- Quote from: Guy on November 03, 2010, 05:35:43 AM ---Do you plan to continue this?
By now you have probably read the link posted by thehatsrule.
If you are going to make this successful, you will need to make updated versions fairly often. With all of the improvements to Tiny Core, yours will become outdated if you don't continually make updated versions.
--- End quote ---
Surely I do plan to continue this and I'm going to track all the changes to the base system (stable versions of it).
--- Quote ---I did not download your iso, so I don't know what was on it. I see it being useful if you include all extensions people are likely to need when installing it in different situations.
--- End quote ---
That's the goal and that's why I'm asking what people need. Btw, if anyone wants to see what's already there before the site is ready, you can PM or mail me and I'll send the link to you within 24 hours.
--- Quote ---For example, include extensions for USB Install, include GParted and Grub for hard drive install, and include extensions needed by those using wireless internet, so they can connect to the internet without having to download anything extra. If you include all those things, those with little understanding of Linux will find this useful. If you really want to make is stand out, make a graphical installer.
--- End quote ---
Wireless support is already included, and I also think about partitioning and installing tools. GParted is really handy and I'll include it ASAP. Making a graphical installer is probably the most complicated thing (as soon as I learn FLTK, possibly - I can make it in Qt4 right now but the size of installer itself will be awful :))
tinypoodle:
--- Quote from: Monobit.Fortrix on November 03, 2010, 05:45:25 AM ---Thanks for the tip. Btw, does Rox support kind of GUI theming?
--- End quote ---
Not to my knowledge, apart from general gtk2 theming.
--- Quote ---I understood the logic. However, I gave up Opera for the one reason - too many sites are not displayed properly. (Also, Opera is reported to have a poor anti-phishing service).
--- End quote ---
Not to my knowledge, rather the opposite...
--- Quote ---When the situation changes the browser will change too (but I think at the moment it will change browsers' sizes will be similar
--- End quote ---
That's not what it looks like, when opera 10.62 after removing locales and then squashed as described in my former post results in ~13 MB, while chromium incl. dependencies as in repo is ~31 MB...
--- Quote ---From some version, ALSA stopped working on my hardware (and I saw some other different laptops that had the same problems). OSS4 works perfectly anywhere I've seen.
--- End quote ---
My personal experience is rather opposite, having issues with OSS (e.g. flashplayer losing sound after a few seconds of playing). I guess that might be hardware dependent.
--- Quote ---The 171-meg build now takes 141 in RAM
--- End quote ---
That does not make any sense at all. Usage of RAM would be bigger than the iso as the compressed initrd is expanded, and also a bzImage type kernel always uses more RAM than its filesize.
--- Quote ---I promise I won't ignore the policy but is there any non-GPL compliant software in the build? It's built using the TC repos only, except for Monto, which AFAIK is GPL compliant too. And what does "A link to the site must contain full sources, including TC/MC's" mean? Can I just place the link to the original TC download on the site?
--- End quote ---
Please see following thread, and have a look particularly at the links contained in there about interpretation and practical implementation of the GPL:
http://forum.tinycorelinux.net/index.php?topic=7105.0
Monobit.Fortrix:
--- Quote from: tinypoodle on November 03, 2010, 07:36:38 AM ---apart from general gtk2 theming.
--- End quote ---
I've noticed that and that's why I'm asking if it has any theming at all.
--- Quote ---That's not what it looks like, when opera 10.62 after removing locales and then squashed as described in my former post results in ~13 MB, while chromium incl. dependencies as in repo is ~31 MB...
--- End quote ---
...and still operating faster than the latest Firefox and Opera versions in the same conditions.
--- Quote ---My personal experience is rather opposite, having issues with OSS (e.g. flashplayer losing sound after a few seconds of playing). I guess that might be hardware dependent.
--- End quote ---
Yes, that might. And probably might not. What's your sound card or chip?
--- Quote ---That does not make any sense at all. Usage of RAM would be bigger than the iso as the compressed initrd is expanded, and also a bzImage type kernel always uses more RAM than its filesize.
--- End quote ---
There are some extensions such as Xorg related. They don't load by default but you have no need to download them when installing your video adapter drivers and turning to Xorg from Xvesa.
--- Quote ---Please see following thread, and have a look particularly at the links contained in there about interpretation and practical implementation of the GPL:
http://forum.tinycorelinux.net/index.php?topic=7105.0
--- End quote ---
Thanks, very interesting and the idea is still very pointless. Hundreds of distributions are succesfully spread without the restriction to provide source code hosting and allowing just to put the links to it. Moreover, it's stated:
--- Quote ---3. You may copy and distribute the Program (or a work based on it, under Section 2) in object code or executable form under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above provided that you also do one of the following:
[...]
c) Accompany it with the information you received as to the offer to distribute corresponding source code. (This alternative is allowed only for noncommercial distribution and only if you received the program in object code or executable form with such an offer, in accord with Subsection b above.)
--- End quote ---
I did not receive the source code with the distribution, just the binary packages and "the information received as to the offer to distribute corresponding source code.". The custom distro will be non-commercial. The custom scripts are source code itself, and Monto source code will be placed as needed. But GPL _does_ allow just to place the links to the source code, and most GPL applications are distributed that way, including the license and the link where to look for the source.
If the problem is that...
--- Quote ---If the Tiny Core Linux Team decides to drop their work and remove all sources, you might not get access to all the source code used to build TCL, and therefore you can't guarantee that, if you don't host them yourself.
--- End quote ---
... I'm not going to modify base TC system and therefore can just host the source code of my personal additions to it. Anyway, even TC base can be remastered without having source code of all the components. And when the source is needed, it's much more likely to find the source on the authors' pages. For instance...if someone decides to change the Linux kernel used in TC base, where will he look the sources for? Obviously not on tinycorelinux.com but on kernel.org.
While seeing that plenty of other derivative distributions are developing succesfully, such rules had led me to a conclusion similar to that posted by SvOlli in that thread:
--- Quote ---This looks to me like applying double standards. I want to work with you guys, showing my work as a proof of concept for an open discussion, to see if there's anything in it that might be of value for you. But this way it feels like you're working against me. Sorry to say that, but it really does feel that way...
--- End quote ---
Of course I've already reached the http://ftp.nluug.nl/pub/metalab/distributions/tinycorelinux/3.x/release/src/ and am going to rehost everything I'll find there (in archived form, though) but I think its useless for the current UltimateTC versions (btw, I'm going to get rid of UltimateTC name, replacing it with current codename Cassandra). Furthermore, our team (Monobit developer team) will host Cassandra's own repository that will have the pool mirror of TC base version Cassandra is based on, all the extensions with sources and all the Cassandra-specific additions that don't belong to TC pool. I think that will be a correct solution, and if I find the appropriate file hosting to maintain all these things easily, the job will be done in a week. [removed 6] Before the site is ready (most probably it will be the English section of our team's site [removed 6], where our main and the only for now language is Russian) I'll write only about the changes made to the build here.
tinypoodle:
--- Quote from: Monobit.Fortrix on November 03, 2010, 05:33:12 PM ---
--- Quote ---That's not what it looks like, when opera 10.62 after removing locales and then squashed as described in my former post results in ~13 MB, while chromium incl. dependencies as in repo is ~31 MB...
--- End quote ---
--- Quote ---...and still operating faster than the latest Firefox and Opera versions in the same conditions.
--- End quote ---
--- End quote ---
The aspect discussed was size per se, taking up RAM.
When I tried chromium I didn't note that it would be significantly faster, but then I didn't give it too much of trying, the utilization of screen estate for toolbars without an obvious way of customization being enough of a criterium to give up on it (in addition to the resource usage).
--- Quote ---Yes, that might. And probably might not. What's your sound card or chip?
--- End quote ---
Intel card with Cirrus Logic CS4299 chip
--- Quote ---That does not make any sense at all. Usage of RAM would be bigger than the iso as the compressed initrd is expanded, and also a bzImage type kernel always uses more RAM than its filesize.
--- End quote ---
--- Quote ---There are some extensions such as Xorg related. They don't load by default but you have no need to download them when installing your video adapter drivers and turning to Xorg from Xvesa.
--- End quote ---
Perhaps then I haven't understood what you exactly mean.
What I am saying is that a gzip compressed initrd will take up more space when expanded in RAM than as a file.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'd suggest you split all the part regarding remastering, redistribution, GPL compliance etc. off from this post and use it as a post in that thread you essentially reply to, IMHO that would make much more sense ;)
Monobit.Fortrix:
--- Quote from: tinypoodle on November 04, 2010, 12:06:51 AM ---The aspect discussed was size per se, taking up RAM.
When I tried chromium I didn't note that it would be significantly faster, but then I didn't give it too much of trying, the utilization of screen estate for toolbars without an obvious way of customization being enough of a criterium to give up on it (in addition to the resource usage).
--- End quote ---
Chromium process (not the loaded extension itself) is now taking 10.49 MB in RAM. Opera takes not much smaller, about the same, Firefox takes less immediately after the start but much more when many pages are opened and then closed (yes, latest Firefox versions are reported to have the issue). And the way of customization is the same as with lastest Firefox - not so obvious, yes, but still very simple.
Of course, I think it's not the subject for discussion right here. ;)
--- Quote ---Intel card with Cirrus Logic CS4299 chip
--- End quote ---
Probably this is about the issue?
--- Quote ---Perhaps then I haven't understood what you exactly mean.
What I am saying is that a gzip compressed initrd will take up more space when expanded in RAM than as a file.
--- End quote ---
I mean that in fact image size is now bigger than the amount or RAM it takes in the loaded state :)
--- Quote ---I'd suggest you split all the part regarding remastering, redistribution, GPL compliance etc. off from this post and use it as a post in that thread you essentially reply to, IMHO that would make much more sense ;)
--- End quote ---
I think that would be wise but I'm going to stop the discussion regarding GPL compliance until I have the rehosting base for the project. :)
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version