Slacko64 -- FF-56.0.2 running fine (gtk+3 installed) but update past 57 fails. Another dependency issue or what?

Has any other linux user run into this? {Just curious, as the latest FF is not necessary to me.} Or is it just a one-off?

ALWAYS include your release info. For instance, the new release is Slacko64 6.9.9.9

I am not logged on to Puppy ATM and my new Puppy machine is getting a shoe-shine but I will try and help.

will tell you exactly where firefox is on your system. On Slackware it is /usr/bin/firefox so I will use that as an example.

This will list dependencies. You may be able to tell something from the result

Yes -- slacko 6.3.0, and yes, installed tarball /usr/local, but after update, all iibs and such are replaced by xhtml files and firefox wont execute. FF-34.x default works still. Went back to wget the mozilla http://ftp. . . site to 56.0.2 and installed it.

Just wanting to see if others have rxperienced problems with the new FF-58 on puppy. Functionality is main concern as most always.

SEE -- posted Jan 23

I'm not a FireFox fan, being a long-term Chrome (and clones) user, but I installed FF 57 to Tahr64 6.0.5 around 2 months ago, just to see what all the fuss was about.

I spend 90% of my time with the remainder of my kennel's 32-bitzers, but booted into Tahr64 just now for the first time in about 3 weeks, and fired up FF. The update to FF 58 went very smoothly; nary a hitch in sight.

Sorted. Stuff like this always seems to go more smoothly in the 'buntu-based Pups (at least, that's always been my experience.). The newer Slackos, from the 6-series onwards, seem to have had no end of annoying litle niggles; in my personal opinion, Mick Amadio (01Micko)'s 'masterpiece' was the classic 570.....the most stable & rock-solid Puppy it's ever been my pleasure to run.

Posting this from FF58 in Tahr64 right now.


Mike.

I use this on Slack, so maybe you can use it too, dl latest firefox and gives you the tz to install.

https://gist.github.com/ruario/9672798

1 members found this post helpful.

It does not work so easy on Puppy. I use it for Slackware all the time myself but with Puppy it borks the Firefox browser. I had to delete the savefile and start configuring from scratch to return to pristine Puppy Slacko 6.9.9.9

EDIT - Note to self. Keep a copy of the savefile and use it as a restore to previous situation in case an install goes wrong

@Gordie:-

Not really surprising when you think about it.

The 'buntu-based Pups (Lucid, Precise, Tahrpup, Xenialpup) are built using Ubuntu binaries.....but they are not Ubuntu.

The Slackware-based Pups (Slacko 5.2, 5.3, 5.5, 5.6, 570, 5983, 630, 632, etc., etc) are built using Slackware binaries.....but they are not Slackware.

Each is 'woofed' using the binaries of another distribution.....but not the file-system, structure, or layout of that distribution. So it's not, perhaps, so surprising that the script in question falls flat on its face.

Puppy is indeed based on other distros (when you think about it).....but in a very different kind of way to most which are based on another. Many of these clone the basic structure and layout, but add (or subtract) certain items or methods of operation to give the distro a sense of identity. In fact, with the early Pups (I'm thinking here of the 2- and 3-series Pups) it wasn't uncommon for them to be constructed using a mixture of binaries from multiple distributions, along with a fair smattering of stuff that was compiled from scratch, using the older T2 build-system. Nowadays, of course, they're all constructed using the 'Woof-CE' build-system.....and the binaries all come from a single distro.

With Pup, wherever the binaries, etc., are sourced from, it utilises the basic building-blocks.....but assembles them in a somewhat unique way. Which is why so much Puppy software has to be either compiled from scratch, re-worked and/or re-packaged in order to work with Pup. Certain directories that are common to most mainstream distros just aren't there; no /home directory, for instance...or /media, etc.

(Aside from all this, on the odd occasions I perform a manual install of FireFox for whatever reason, I usually tend to stick it in /opt; it's a useful 'catch-all' directory that neatly sidesteps many lib-related problems that invariably seem to crop-up when placing it anywhere within /usr.)


Mike.

2 members found this post helpful.

Clarification accomplished! Thank you Gordie, BW-userx and Mike Walsh form your input, the link and the info, respectively.

Hardware obsolescence is a concern here, too, due to various issues. Newer software's requirements not being the least.

@ sidzen:-

Glad to hear you've got it sorted. Well done!


Mike.