Puppy Linux Discussion Forum

The issue is why it works in Xenial and does not in Fossa which I believe is about os configuration changes.

The issue of why a build of Palemoon version 30 YOU MADE works under xenialpup and not under Fossapup is not the subject matter of a thread entitled "Palemoon 30.0.0 lost autofill logins HIGH CPU".

Please start another thread detailing step by step what you did and, if possible, where the files and folders of the build are located. What does trying it via a terminal report? What does running ldd on the binary report?

The problem may be related; but not likely. I updated MIke Walsh's portable-palemoon to 30.0.0 and ran it under Fossapup64.

MIke Walsh's portable-palemoon to 30.0.0

where is the download link? I'll search for it.......would like to use it for KLV-Airedale

UPDATE: Found out I just use the 29+ portable and update it!

Works very nicely on KLV and on the Puppy Linux's together, all on the same drive and partition.
Good stuff....

But instantly see lots of CPU loads and hearing many fans turn on (this machine has 12), and I am only typing this!! This I will keep an eye on to see if this remains the case.

Looks like there is a bugfix release 30.0.01 that is supposed to fix the performance and password issues.
Might try it later today and report back.

peppyy wrote: ↑Mon Mar 21, 2022 12:01 pm

Looks like there is a bugfix release 30.0.01 that is supposed to fix the performance and password issues.
Might try it later today and report back.

@peppyy :-

You may have problems actually getting hold of 30.0.1. Yes, the release notes say it's available.....but from the internal updater in v30.0.0, it reports there's nothing to download. The Linux download page on the main site shows only v30.0.0 is available.

I may have gotten hold of the wrong end of the stick, but I believe Tobin took the download server with him when he quit the project..!

See here.....posted around 3.30 this afternoon, GMT:- https://forum.palemoon.org/viewtopic.ph ... 6f1cd9#top

v30.0.0 is, to all intents & purposes, "on ice" ATM. So v29.4.4 will be the 'current' version for the forseeable future.

------------------------------------------------

Like xenial says - he's a long-term regular on the Pale Moon forums, and keeps up with all this more than I do - with Tobin gone, and many of the other devs abandoning the project, Moonchild himself is now the only dev remaining actively still working on the "core" code.....so point releases/major updates are going to take significantly longer to arrive. My guess is that Moonchild made the announcement when he did to try and stem the flood of dissatisfied users discarding Pale Moon left, right & centre.

(Even Steve Pusser, who provides the 3rd-party builds I've been using as a basis for the 32-bit portable, appears to have removed everything pertaining to Pale Moon from his repos. Perhaps biding his time, and waiting to see what transpires.....)

Mike.

I am running into video compatibility problems in 30 on Youtube and Vimeo. Reverting they play normally.

If you're not looking at an installation/distro issue, I would guess they rushed to get this out and 30 is not ready. Either that or they're complying with the tech behemoths and dropping compatibility with extant standards.

I have my Xenial .sfs up for it anyway: http://forum.puppylinux.com/viewtopic.p ... 846#p52846

Regular browsing in 30 so far seems normal.

Hi All!

Debian and Ubuntu packages created by Steve Pusser are back, based on v29.4.5 (2022-03-23).

Pale Moon by Steve Pusser opensuse.org
https://software.opensuse.org/download. ... e=palemoon

Morning, gang.

Portables built around the v29.4.5 release were built & uploaded last night. Please see the Pale Moon 'portable' thread for the download link:-

viewtopic.php?t=709

Mike.

The damning thing about the Pale Moon project is the esoteric understanding of what we're upgrading to.

28, 29, and 30 are all still Firefox 68?

JASpup wrote: ↑Sat Mar 26, 2022 8:39 pm

The damning thing about the Pale Moon project is the esoteric understanding of what we're upgrading to.

28, 29, and 30 are all still Firefox 68?

Er.....huh???

I completely fail to understand, OR to see the logic in this. Why must you look at every browser in terms of version release equivalents of other browsers? At best, it's a very imperfect method, but hey! if it helps you figure it out, well.....

Personally, I prefer to let each individual browser stand - or fall - on its own merits.

Mike.