This is a bad advice and furthermore in the OPS's case it is useless as seamonkey-2.32 is already provided for Slackware versions 14.0 and 14.1.

In case someone would like to upgrade a package to a version not provided for one's Slackware version, the right way (not guaranteed to work but a least better) is to download the whole directory in /source for that packages from the file tree of a more recent Slackware version, rebuild the package in the downloaded directory then do an upgradepkg to install the new package, replacing the old.

Why is this bad advice? And I thought he was trying to instal 2.32? I respect your opinion, please explain.

Didier, is what is in source different/newer than the Slackware package in current? Wouldn't you end up with the same thing?

In the case of Seamonkey, the 64bit source is dated January 12 and the Slackware package is dated January 15 so I would think the Slackware package is based on the earlier source package.

I understand that building it for you system is ideal, but if you have a pretty much stock install I'm not sure what the difference is. But I am no expert, just sharing what has worked for me in the past.

It is bad advice, as it can fail because for instance the minimum requested version of some dependency could have been increased to a level not found in the older Slackware version[1]. If that didn't happen to you, you are just lucky.

And yes the OP was trying to install 2.32 in Slackware version 14.0 or 14.1, but for that he could have just either downloaded the new package for his Slackware version and typed "upgradepkg <new_package>", or if he uses slackpkg typed after "slackpkg update" either "slackpkg upgrade <new_package>" or "slackpkg upgrade-all".

[1]To be honest, in that case the build will probably fail anyway when building the package anew (at the configure step), but at least you will know from the inception that there is problem.

1 members found this post helpful.

Thank you for the explanation Didier, I see what you are saying. I have never used upgradepkg or slackpkg. I get what I need from current like I said or from SlackBuilds. Been using Slackware for 20 years now, back in the day everything was source and you hunted dependencies as needed, I always figured if I ran into an the "minimum requested version of some dependency" issue I would simply go to current and get the necessary updated dependency. I guess I have resisted the upgradepkg and slackpkg tools as it was never a big deal to manage things manually.

Thanks again, maybe I need to explore upgradepkg and slackpkg...

(Oh and yes, for those that noticed, I am running FreeBSD on this box, just playing, not giving up Slackware or anything )

You are welcome Fred. Well, your advice was not intrinsically bad after all, just bear in mind that most people posting questions here are way less experienced than you

Thanks Didier, I hope the OP got/will get it all sorted out in the end! I apologize if I added confusion and took this thread off track.

This is what I have done:

(1) removepkg seamonkey

now it is gone.

(2) slackpkg install seamonkey

It gave me the gui type display that you get
when you install slackware distribution.
I hit return to select this choice: seamonkey-2.32-x86_64_slack14.0.txz
and a block <OK> which I checked, then it installed it with these
messgages:.
So now it is installed, appears to be latest version 2.32, yeah, great!

I type in seamonkey on command line, and it runs, terrific, but
I am still logged in as root, Does it run as ordinary user?

So I exit su, and try as ordinary user:

Nope, this is my result of trying to run as ordinary user:
Also here is this item just done:

So what do you suppose is the problem, that I can't run it as
ordinary user?

Also if we ever figure out why I can't run it as an ordinary user,
I am also wondering why, seamonkey gave me the message that
I should update the browser because this version has security
issues. If I already had version 2.32 then why did I get that
message? I know we really can't answer that, but still that is
what brought on the whole problem.

Searching the error reveals an issue with dconf, but dosen't make sense that it works as root. Maybe try reinstalling it. File is here: http://slackware.cs.utah.edu/pub/sla...0-x86_64-1.txz, you can download it and install with pkgtool...

But maybe try upgradepkg first or removepkg and slackpkg like you did with Seamonkey.

Did you ever open Seamonkey as root while logged in as another user on your DE/WM? If you did, then you could've poluted your configuration files with root owned files, which can cause problems with packages opening up. The only two ways you should open a GUI app as root is 1. if you logged into KDE/XFCE/fluxbox/etc as root, or 2. use a program designed to escalate privilieges in GUI while a regular user is logged in, like kdesu.

If you did run it as root at some point, you can see if you have any files or folders in your home directory that are owned by root.

One more thought.... and I know this sounds wrong for a Linux machine, so don't beat me up... but did you reboot after uninstalling and reinstalling Seamonkey? With your weird issue it might not hurt.

I like bassmadrigal's idea, that sounds possible.

I uninstalled it again,
then installed again,
then exit su
then tried to run it as an ordinary user, same problem.

Also I rebooted and tried to rerun, still same problem.

Did you uninstall/reinstall dconf like I said in a couple posts back? And even more important... did you check into bassmadrigal's suggestion?

Try:

1) removepkg dconf

(2) slackpkg install dconf

EDIT: In hindsight this makes no sense... I was going off the error message you gave that I looked up in Google, listen to Didler below... he is on the right track. [Backing out before I embarrass myself anymore, forgive me, I have been sick all week, which might explain why I am using FreeBSD, or maybe using FreeBSD is making me sick ]

I suspect that you have some stale files lying around that cause troubles. This can happen when you don't use the proper Slackware tools or the proper packages.

At least this looks weird:as the file names should at least include the version of the removed packages.

So I'm just wondering what can have caused that...

But wait: probably you didn't copy/paste the full output as files not ending with -2* shouldn't be displayed at all by that command.

ls -l /var/log/removed_packages/seamonkey-2*
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 235653 Sep 12 2013 /var/log/removed_packages/seamonkey-2.12.1-x86_64-1
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 322441 Jan 30 10:37 /var/log/removed_packages/seamonkey-2.32-x86_64-1_slack14.0



ls -l /var/log/packages/seamonkey-2*
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 322441 Jan 30 11:49 /var/log/packages/seamonkey-2.32-x86_64-1_slack14.0
bash-4.2$

probably had the file names truncated by the limited screen size somehow,
maybe when I pasted it into my editor.


I did not do anything with dconf, somehow missed that entirely,
what is it?


..