Which Linux distribution to run QB64?

[George McGinn]

I didn't mention it, but I did a ton of COPY/PASTE between many different apps, including into and out of the QB64 IDE without any problems.

One thing I did notice was in the QB64 IDE, I could not access the 7 hard drives I have installed when going into FILE to load a program. It seems that in the IDE, I could go down as far as the boot's root, but when I checked the media and mnt directories, my drives were not there. This works fine in Ubuntu. In Q4OS' File Manager, I was able to access all my hard drives, so it wasn't the OS, unless something strange happens with using the LIVE version. I was able to open them, however, in Q4OS' notepad or its gedit equivalent.

Note for all who do not know, but the LIVE version of a Linux distro is basically its full version, but because you are running it from a removable media, not everything may work the way it will once to do a complete install. Some apps will not run from removable media, and some functionality of the OS may be limited. LIVE is a basic "Try before you buy" but in Linux case (except for RedHat) its all open source and free to install and use.

Great info @George McGinn.  Hats off to you for going through all that to help people out.  I've moved to Zorin OS, but I may put Q4OS back on another laptop to play with. It's a good little OS.  I was able to eliminate the COPY/PASTE issue I was having with it by not using the XPQ4 desktop enhancement.  With XPQ4 the issue appeared, without it all goes well.  Maybe it is just a problem with my setup, I dunno.   

About ReactOS -- I've played around with it a lot recently (current version).  I like it, really hope it continues to develop, but I couldn't get QB64 working on it, the GL, SDL, or @SMcNeill's special stripped-down QB64 version.  Compiled programs will start, but only show a blank screen (COSOLE only programs too).  That's just my testing, maybe others have better results. 

- Dav         

[Dav]

We are very fortunate to have someone with your experience here, @George McGinn.

My COPY/PASTE problem was that when QB64 IDE was running then doing COPY/PASTE in other apps would not work, but freeze the OS up when I right clicked to do a paste.  Closing the QB64 IDE would cure that however, and not using XPQ4 at all cleared it up for good.

Just out of curiosity I ran a QB64 compiled executable under a Linux install USB boot drive, and it ran fine without having to install any packages.  I tried running a 64-bit compiled QB64 program under a 32-bit linux and it didn't run.  I'm going to try the reverse and see what happens (run 32-bit compiled QB64 program on a 64-bit linux OS).

Edit: Wow -  'Wine' runs my QB64 compiled EXE's under Linux (win 32-bit ones). That's neat.   

- Dav     

[George McGinn]

Thanks @Dav -

That's what Wine is supposed to allow - you can run Windows .EXE from a Linux environment without having to leave Linux.

Wine isn't a Windows emulator or even a Virtual Machine. From Wine's website: https://www.winehq.org/

Wine (originally an acronym for "Wine Is Not an Emulator") is a compatibility layer capable of running Windows applications on several POSIX-compliant operating systems, such as Linux, macOS, & BSD. Instead of simulating internal Windows logic like a virtual machine or emulator, Wine translates Windows API calls into POSIX calls on-the-fly, eliminating the performance and memory penalties of other methods and allowing you to cleanly integrate Windows applications into your desktop.

Edit: Wow -  'Wine' runs my QB64 compiled EXE's under Linux (win 32-bit ones). That's neat.   

- Dav   

[johnno56]

Its kind of funny. For those of us that have dropped Windows for Linux, one of the first things we install, is either a VM or Wine to run Windows programs... Linux since 2005... But I still miss the old DOS and Windows games... Old habits... lol

[Dav]

About ReactOS -- I've played around with it a lot recently (current version).  I like it, really hope it continues to develop, but I couldn't get QB64 working on it, the GL, SDL, or @SMcNeill's special stripped-down QB64 version.  Compiled programs will start, but only show a blank screen (COSOLE only programs too).  That's just my testing, maybe others have better results.         

I need to correct my React-OS report there, for anyone interested in QB64 in ReactOS.  Although Steve's special QB64-SDL 2020 IDE version won't run in ReactOS (the IDE fails to work), I found that compiled EXE's that are made in that QB64 version WILL run under ReactOS.

- Dav

[mohai]

@mohai: Have you been able to get QB64 running yet in Q4OS?  Hope you can and start enjoying QB64.   I ended up replacing Q4OS with Zorin OS 15 Lite.  Using QB64 under Q4OS would result in COPY/PASTE not working system wide for me, and freeze my PC for about 10 secs.  It only happens when QB64 was running.  When it closed, things would go back to normal. Had some other issues too in Q4OS, so I tried a bunch of other distros - settled on Zorin lite.  I doubt Zorin would run on your laptop, but there are some lightweight 32-bit linux distros out there you could try.  By the way, just for info purposes, you can skip ReactOS (not linux), although it can run many windows programs it didn't' run any QB64 version I threw at it (on the current ReactOS).  Good luck...

- Dav

Thank you Dav.

My laptop is  running Zorin OS 15 Lite now.
It is not the fastest computer, nor the fastest OS, but it is enough to run QB64 (32bit) on it.
QB64 editor seemed to crash at the beginning, but now it looks stable. I wonder if it is a bug in the Linux 32 bit version ?
Informs seems to work too.
I was able to load some programs, compile and execute them.

Currently, I am working in some "dialog box" routines to open and save files, and I wanted to test in Linux environments.
I already have it working on Windows, but I need to adapt some routines to Linux.
My program has some Inform forms, so I needed a graphical desktop too.

Cheers !
Ivan

[Dav]

Woo hoo!  Glad you have QB64 running.  There is a very helpful Zorin forum if you need assistance with it.  Some good tutorials there as well.  I'm enjoying Zorin - have it running off a USB thumb drive instead of a HD.

- Dav

[wiggins]

@johnno56: Ok. But I'm so blown away with linux, I probably will wipe out windows all together on this laptop and end up trying Wine.   Q4OS plus the XPQ4 Desktop kit discussed here suits me perfectly, and I'm not missing windows at all.  Not saying I'm done using the windows version I own (Win7), but I'm sure done thinking of upgrading beyond that. 

Just to keep this on topic, QB64 works great in Q4OS.  _ICON isn't working in it however.  @mohai: If your laptop can run the Q4OS 32-bit trinity version, grab the XPQ4 for it too and it will look almost like running windows.   

- Dav

I followed that URL.  Those screen shots are amazing.  Thanks for sharing your experience.

[madscijr]

Has anyone tried QB64 with Puppy Linux?

I'm by no means a Linux expert, but I've been using Puppy Linux for a number of years, and had a mostly good experience with it.

I like it because it's small and you can run it off a thumb drive, and there are lots of different versions with different options (geared for older PCs, more compatibility with drivers, different kernels, different desktop interfaces, and for other specialized uses).

You can install it permanently on a PC, and it's small enough that you can install a number of versions on one PC without making a dent in the hard drive space.

Pictured are some of the versions I've tried.

I haven't tried installing QB64 on any of the Puppy Linux distros, and would be curious if anyone has had any success with it.

  [ You are not allowed to view this attachment ]  

  [ You are not allowed to view this attachment ]  

[johnno56]

Wow. At least 5 OS's... The most I have ever tried was 2... But, then that was a long time ago, when dual booting on Linux was a bit flakky at times... I was going to say that you must have several hard drives installed but then I remembered that Puppy has a small 'footprint'...

What kind of difficulties have you had with Puppy? I am always looking for a distribution that is the most stable...

[madscijr]

Wow. At least 5 OS's... The most I have ever tried was 2... But, then that was a long time ago, when dual booting on Linux was a bit flakky at times... I was going to say that you must have several hard drives installed but then I remembered that Puppy has a small 'footprint'...
What kind of difficulties have you had with Puppy? I am always looking for a distribution that is the most stable...

I just created a separate partition (ext3 format) on the hard drive - total HDD on this laptop was 250GB so I took 50GB of that for Puppy, and they all install nicely side by side in the same partition. I use the option where each distro had its own "sessions" where the data files and installed programs are saved to their own file (a sfs file, a kind of virtual partition), where I reserve anywhere from 512MB upto 8GB space for a particular "session". Each session has its own separate customizations and data files which you can back up or roll back by simply copying the SFS file. If you run out of space, you can always increase the size of the SFS. You can also share files between sessions by saving them to the parent partition (outside the session's local SFS partition) if that makes sense. There is also the option to install the OS "directly" to a disk or thumb drive and not use the SFS method, but I kinda like the separation and encapsulation of different sessions.

As for difficulties, certain versions don't work on particular computers - maybe they don't have the right drivers or settings out of the box. I don't have the knowledge or a lot of time to mess with such low level details, but if you know Linux or are good with that kind of thing you can probably troubleshoot. I just deal with it by having a bunch of different versions on bootable thumb drives, and I just try throwing them all at a given PC to see what "sticks". I've been able to get some version of Puppy to work on just about every computer EXCEPT my Microsoft Surface Pro 3, which runs Win 10 Pro and uses bitlocker for its system drive. I tried turning off secure boot and a bunch of other BIOS options, but could never get any version of Puppy Linux (or any other portable OS) to boot on it from a thumb drive. Oh well.

I mainly use Puppy to do utilitarian stuff like repartition drives and just play around with Linux. To be honest, I am not crazy about the interface for any Linux I've tried. I have tried different desktops, but compared to Windows, the behavior and "feel" of the GUI - stuff like clicking / grabbing / resizing Windows, selecting files, etc., is just hard. It's much easier to control the mouse and grab things with it in Windows. That and the lack of all the familiar Windows keyboard shortcuts in the file explorer, really makes it less comfortable for me. I bet that stuff can be tweaked, and I have tried over the years, but haven't found settings that really replicate the feel and ease of a Windows desktop (any version from Windows 9x upto 10).

I have also tried Ubuntu, Mint, Zorin OS, and others. Zorin was supposed to be as close to Windows as Linux gets, but it wasn't even close, and I spent hours and hours just trying to tweak it to replicate the Windows Start Menu / search bar behavior with no luck. That was a few years back, maybe they've improved it, but I don't have a lot of time to mess with that stuff (and besides I much prefer the portable/small OS format like Puppy over a permanent install).

Anyway that's been some of my experience with Puppy and Linux in general. I'd be interested in trying QB64 with Puppy, which would definitely make Linux more useful to me...

Hope this helps.

[Dav]

I think I will try puppy linux, since I'm on a distro install binge.  Reviews are good.  Will try to install QB64 in it.
 
- Dav

[George McGinn]

Curious - why ext3? Why not ext4?

Yes, indirect block mapping for small files is better, but you can't: use larger filesizes; undelete/recover files; no defragmenting; no directory indexing; multi-blocking is very basic, limit on file sizes due to the blocksize is 32bits, and sub directories limited to a little under 33,000, just to name a few items (I think system journaling is affected too).

I guess it is great for small file systems, but may give you problems if you need features that became available after 2001.

I just created a separate partition (ext3 format) on the hard drive ...

[johnno56]

  [ You are not allowed to view this attachment ]  

J

[madscijr]

Curious - why ext3? Why not ext4?

At the time I was getting into Puppy Linux (Obama was in his first term, if that gives you an idea) I recall reading EXT4 was still new and somewhat experimental. I tend to be conservative with infrastructure technology features, and dealing with a potentially buggy filesystem and catastrophic failure just ain't my idea of fun, lol. By now EXT4 is probably stable, but the prompts in the Puppy Linux formatters used to say something like EXT4 faster and better but kinda beta. And I'm not up on that stuff, and am like if it ain't broke don't fix it, yadda yadda. LoL

Yes, indirect block mapping for small files is better, but you can't: use larger filesizes; undelete/recover files; no defragmenting; no directory indexing; multi-blocking is very basic, limit on file sizes due to the blocksize is 32bits, and sub directories limited to a little under 33,000, just to name a few items (I think system journaling is affected too).

I guess it is great for small file systems, but may give you problems if you need features that became available after 2001.

It's good to have someone who knows their stuff! I'll set one up with a normal filesystem eventually, to get those benefits, was just describing my own personal setup. The sad thing is I haven't yet really missed any of those features from after 2001, in my experiments with Linux, lol. But thanks for explaining all that!