Puppy Linux Discussion Forum

Afternoon, all.

Keeping an older, 32-bit machine still alive & functional is getting to be something of a juggling act. If you wish to be able to use it as a "daily driver", then you are of course going to need a current, up-to-date web browser that is still under regular development. This drastically limits your choices.

Browsers can, broadly speaking, be categorized into two camps; the Chromium-based browsers - including what I call the 'clones'; browsers based on Chromium but modified by their respective dev teams - and the Mozilla-based browsers.

32-bit Chromium support has all but vanished. Rare people like AlienBob (of the Slackware community) still bother to compile a 32-bit package for 'vanilla' Chromium.....but these are few and far between, and I wouldn't like to say how much longer these will be produced.

Mainline support for 32-bit Chromium-based browsers dropped away several years ago. Given that

a) 64-bit has been commercially available & usable for over 20 years, and
b) 'Big Brother' (aka Google) has been pushing hard for everyone to go 64-bit only for a LONG time

.....this isn't really surprising. Add to this fact that Chromium is quite 'heavy' for a browser - uses mucho in the way of available resources - and it's not really recommended for the kind of low-resource machines we're discussing in this sub-forum.

So; the still-supported 32-bit browsers all belong to the Mozilla camp, for all intents & purposes.

===================================

These can be further sub-divided into 3 'brands':-

- Firefox
- Seamonkey, and
- Pale Moon.

Firefox is available in both 'mainline' and 'ESR' (Extended Support Release) 32-bit builds. These are still regularly maintained, and update quite frequently......but do bear in mind that Firefox isn't exactly considered to be lightweight, either. For lightweight, look to the other two mentioned here.

===============================

Seamonkey has been a Puppy 'staple' for a very long time. It's lightweight, fairly quick, responsive.....and has the distinct advantage that it's not JUST a browser. It's a web-browser, an e-mail client, an address-book, a chat-client AND an HTML editor.....all rolled into a single binary, and differing only in the name you call the binary by. Little wonder it was Puppy's default browser for years.

================================

Which brings us to contender no. 3 - Pale Moon. Ever since this was discovered several years ago, it's been a firm favourite of many Puppians. It's a home-brewed 'fork' from Firefox, around FF27.....some 100 major releases back, so it's been around for a fair while. This doesn't mean it's 'out-of-date', though, because the Pale Moon team - headed by Moonchild - have completely re-built and developed their own rendering engine, called Goanna. It's also regularly 'infused' with all the latest patches/workarounds & fixes from modern Firefox, re-coded to work with Pale Moon.

Do bear in mind, too, that there's also the huge "elephant in the room". Back in the summer of this year, Moonchild made the decision to move the goalposts again; having dropped 32-bit 'mainstream' builds nearly 3 years ago, he then further decided to re-jig the compile environment to make the need for AES & AVX CPU extensions MANDATORY. All modern 64-bit CPUs - with very few exceptions - have these instruction sets. Elderly 32-bit processors do not.

Hence, you not only need a 3rd-party 32-bit Pale Moon build, but it needs to be an SSE2 32-bit build. Very old 32-bit CPUs will need an SSE build.This is not insurmountable; several members at the Pale Moon forum regularly build & make available various esoteric builds for older hardware.....although these are not produced and kept up-to-date as often as the "official" build.

===============================

The days of 32-bit software are numbered. We'll help y'all as much as is humanly possible........but 32-bit machines will, eventually, turn into fancy doorstops.

===============================

I'm not going to make recommendations one way or the other. The choice, as always, will be down to the individual user. We have all of the above-named browsers available in "portable' format; self-contained directories which can be run from anywhere in your system. You'll find them all under 'Advanced topics -> Additional software -> Browsers & Internet'.

Any further questions, we're always happy to help.

Mike.

Peabee regularly posts 32 bit chromium sfs builds based on Alien Bob's work, not with each and every update of chromium, but enough
that it keeps my old Acer Aspire One AOA150 sort of current, right now along with Palemoon 33.4.01 via Steve Pusser's MX repos, I have
chromium 129 something or other! Just an FYI!

Debian still has a 32 bit port with many available browsers, including Chromium, Falkon, Epiphany and Firefox. A 32 bit dpup with apt provides many options, same selection of open source browsers as a 64 bit dpup. Closed source browsers like Chrome and Edge are unavailable, though.

@dimkr :-

Hm. Interesting.

I've used Epiphany under HaikuOS; for a Gnome-centric Firefox 'fork', it performs pretty well under the updated BeOS 'clone'. Certainly much better than Haiku's own, in-house WebPositive does, that's for sure.....though I suspect that's due to their developers still not getting things quite right yet (given that they've literally built the thing from scratch).

They've been working on a port of Firefox for almost the last year. I believe this is now just about ready for beta testing.....it must have been quite a project, especially since Haiku's file-system is totally unique. But HaikuOS IS another possibility for old 32-bit hardware. I've even had the 32-bit R2-beta running on the ancient P4-powered Inspiron 1100, several years ago......which shocked the hell out of me at the time!

32-bit Linux Chrome went the way of the dodo, all the way back in 2016. 48.0.2564.116 was the very last, final supported 32-bit build of Chrome...

Mike.

@Wiz57

Could you post your Puppy version and a name/link to the chromium .sfs file.

Thanks
wizard

wizard wrote: Fri Oct 25, 2024 10:48 pm

@Wiz57

Could you post your Puppy version and a name/link to the chromium .sfs file.

Thanks
wizard

My most often used Puppy is S15Pup32 240413 from 4-13-2024, BUT, I swapped the kernel and zdrv with an old ArchPup32 from like 2020, kernel 4.14.173.
I run with the LXDE desktop, PcManFM file manager, available from Peebee as a "ydrv". The chromium sfs I downloaded from peebee's link https://sourceforge.net/projects/lxpup/ ... s/download
I'm still on a mobile hotspot for my internet, with a data cap, so can't upload my S15Pup32 ISO or LXDE by ydrv but peebee usually has the LXDE download
available on the same thread as his announcements viewtopic.php?t=124&start=360. IF the Internet Archive ever
gets back online, those older S15Pups, ScPups and ArchPups are available there, here's a couple of links that may work
https://archive.org/download/Puppy_Linux_ScPup and here https://archive.org/download/Puppy_Linux_Spup
Note: ScPup32 from about Jan 2021 I think contains a similar vintage kernel, which I've used some.

@Wiz57

I swapped the kernel and zdrv with an old ArchPup32 from like 2020, kernel 4.14.173.

What advantage did the kernel swap have?

Thanks
wizard

I have been putting together a 32 bit "old computer" puppy as a personal project out of BionicPup32. I also like Seamonkey. It uses less RAM than the "Light" Browser that comes installed with BionicPup32.

I've been trying to remove Light Browser and replace it with Seamonkey but I've run into two problems.

One is that Seamonkey has something going on with it's security stuff. I cannot figure out for the life of me what it is. It just refuses to go to 90% of sites one the web and lists them all being insecure. I don't understand the mechanics behind it at all, but Light Browser is fine. Light Browser can go to any website. Seamonkey refuses almost all websites. Seamonkey even refuses to go to the Puppy Linux website. Meanwhile Light Browser right next to it goes to the Puppy website just fine. Please look at the screenshot I've attached. I keep scouring the settings, I thought maybe something is set by default to be...too secure? Or something? There's honestly not a lot of settings related to security that the use can change. I really don't know what to do here. If I can't find a fix the some sort of work-around is fine too.

The second issue is I can't figure out how to remove Light Browser. There's a tool called "Remove Built In Packages" and I have slimmed down this puppy a lot so the list is even shorter, and I still can't FIND Light Browser on the list. It's just not there. I can't figure out how to uninstall it.

The moment I can get around the Seamonkey security issue I want to remove it so there's no two whole browsers taking up space.

If anybody can help me here I would greatly appreciate it. I know all the help on here is free, but if there's a way I can send a few dollars your way anonymously, then I'd tip you for the help. I really want to fix this issue. I know ko-fi.com doesn't show payment information to the person getting paid. So if you have a ko-fi.com account I can tip you through that.

grey38 wrote: Sat Oct 26, 2024 4:55 am

The second issue is I can't figure out how to remove Light Browser. There's a tool called "Remove Built In Packages" and I have slimmed down this puppy a lot so the list is even shorter, and I still can't FIND Light Browser on the list. It's just not there. I can't figure out how to uninstall it.

Remove the adrv.sfs from the frugal install directory.

mikewalsh wrote: Fri Oct 25, 2024 9:17 pm

32-bit Linux Chrome went the way of the dodo, all the way back in 2016. 48.0.2564.116 was the very last, final supported 32-bit build of Chrome...

Chrome is closed source and Google only provides 64 bit packages. It doesn't provide the source code so you can't build a 32 bit package yourself. In contrast, Chromium is open source, therefore Debian still builds 32 bit packages.

If you want the widest compatibility, the largest set of available packages and don't want to take this package from here or that package from there, dpup is the way.

grey38 wrote: Sat Oct 26, 2024 4:55 am

It just refuses to go to 90% of sites one the web and lists them all being insecure.

The problem is probably a super old, even several years old, ca-certificates package. Try to update it.

wizard wrote: Sat Oct 26, 2024 12:36 am

@Wiz57

I swapped the kernel and zdrv with an old ArchPup32 from like 2020, kernel 4.14.173.

What advantage did the kernel swap have?

Thanks
wizard

For me, having my Puppys installed frugally on an NTFS hard drive, the older kernel using NTFS-3G worked much quicker, and that really
showed up when opening a file manager (PcManFM or ROX) and looking at any directory on the HD. The other place I noticed it was anytime
the PupSwap file was accessed, primarily at bootup! I first saw this with the first release of Slacko 7 32 bit, with a 5.X kernel. The other
thing I experienced with Slacko 7 was no WiFi drivers for my Atheros onboard chip in the kernel, Swapping with an older beta of Slacko 6.9.9.9
fixed both issues. The newer 5.X kernels in peebee's latest S15Pup32 releases don't have these problems as bad, but they also use a tad more
RAM. My Acer has been up and running for 7 days, currently a bit over 100 kb RAM used, along with 3 kb swap, lol, leftovers from browsing!
IIRC, at bootup, my version of S15Pup32 only uses around 95 kb RAM.

@grey38 :-

Along the lines of @dimkr 's suggestion, I would guess that Light browser works okay for the simple reason it's the same vintage AS the installed ca-certificates. I would also hazard a guess that you're using the newest release of SeaMonkey, yes?

Naturally, a current browser expects to find the most up-to-date certificates, too...

Admittedly, I'm posting this from a highly-upgraded, customized build of Tahrpup64 - several years older than Bionic! - but the ca-certificates package is one I periodically upgrade anyway. I learnt to my own cost that you do need to keep on top of this one.

The up-to-date Seamonkey 'portable' works fine here.

Others will doubtless disagree with what I say. That's quite usual..!

Mike.

Pentium M CPUs and Chromium/Chrome
It should be noted that old computers with Pentium M CPUs will not run Chromium/Chrome browsers or any of its variants. The Pentium M does not contain the required CPU extensions.

wizard

dimkr wrote: Sat Oct 26, 2024 7:15 am

grey38 wrote: Sat Oct 26, 2024 4:55 am

It just refuses to go to 90% of sites one the web and lists them all being insecure.

The problem is probably a super old, even several years old, ca-certificates package. Try to update it.

Oh! Thank you. Okay then. How do I update that specifically? I found a thread here that mentions it as a related subject but not the exact same issue as mine, the thread is here
https://www.forum.puppylinux.com/viewtopic.php?t=6121

And one person there says to just

>Run update-ca-certificates.

Would that work on my version of Puppy? I just want to be sure before I mess anything up.

grey38 wrote: Tue Oct 29, 2024 2:52 am

And one person there says to just

>Run update-ca-certificates.

This won't work. This command builds a bundle of all installed certificates, and that's what the browser uses.

Use the package manager to install ca-certificates, then run update-ca-certificates.

@grey38

'Light' browser is provided in VoidPup64 as the default (initial) browser.

However, it does not have multimedia playback due a lack of codecs.

Not sure if this applies to the 32bit version as well.

viewtopic.php?t=12360

Jasper wrote: Tue Oct 29, 2024 5:28 pm

@grey38

'Light' browser is provided in VoidPup64 as the default (initial) browser.

However, it does not have multimedia playback due a lack of codecs.

Not sure if this applies to the 32bit version as well.

viewtopic.php?t=12360

Just a note...peabee includes the "Light" browser in all of his woof-ce builds, more or less as an HTML document viewer for the help files,
and other included documentation, plus links to various forums, etc. He also, usually, informs people of this in the information about downloading
his releases along with a note to use the "Get Web Browser" link in the Start Menu to choose a more full-featured browser.

Jasper wrote: Tue Oct 29, 2024 5:28 pm

However, it does not have multimedia playback due a lack of codecs.

It's based on a Firefox version from 2016, you can't expect it to work well today. TLS 1.3, webm, webp, QUIC, wasm ... it predates so many core technologies used by today's web. Even if you somehow add one missing codec, it's only one thing introduced in the last 8 years, and this won't fix 8 years of vulnerabilities and bugs.

I'm using Chromium 32-bit with Jammy 32 (which has become my daily driver) on my old desktop. I find it to be much lighter on resources than Chrome 64-bit with a 64-bit Puppy. It also works better for me than Firefox. Also running the browser as root and not spot.

@amethyst

Also running the browser as root and not spot.

How?

Thanks
wizard

@wizard :-

Nic's probably doing summat similar to me. I use this exec line for a run-as-root version of Chrome-portable:-

"$HERE/chrome/chrome" --user-data-dir=$HERE/PROFILE/google-chrome --test-type --no-sandbox --disable-infobars "$@"

"--test-type" along with "--no-sandbox" is what enables running the Chromium 'clones' as the root user. Should work for any of them; just modify the $PATHs for "user-data-dir" and the executable to suit.

We can thank PhilB for unearthing that "--switch" 5 or 6 years back....

Mike.

wizard wrote: Sat Nov 09, 2024 10:42 pm

@amethyst

Also running the browser as root and not spot.

How?

Thanks
wizard

viewtopic.php?p=134459#p134459

Stumbled across this at the Pale Moon forum, GTK2 builds of latest release. I've downloaded the 32bit version but haven't installed
it yet. Will report any issues. I've been using a GTK3 build of latest release without any issues in my normal "daily driver" Pup (S15Pup32 22.12,
modified with kernel/zdrv swap with older kernel). I'll probably install this deb in my testing S15Pup32 frugal install.
https://forum.palemoon.org/viewtopic.ph ... 4f#p257031
https://wmlive.rumbero.org/repo/pool/main/p/palemoon/

Wiz57 wrote: Thu Nov 14, 2024 1:25 am

Stumbled across this at the Pale Moon forum, GTK2 builds of latest release. I've downloaded the 32bit version but haven't installed
it yet. Will report any issues. I've been using a GTK3 build of latest release without any issues in my normal "daily driver" Pup (S15Pup32 22.12,
modified with kernel/zdrv swap with older kernel). I'll probably install this deb in my testing S15Pup32 frugal install.
https://forum.palemoon.org/viewtopic.ph ... 4f#p257031
https://wmlive.rumbero.org/repo/pool/main/p/palemoon/

Well, didn't run in my testing installation of S15Pup32 from 11-1-2024, GLIBC required version 2.34, not sure, but I think S15Pup32 has 2.31
SO, might have to do some investigating, or try GLIBC tweak, etc.

I have not found any method of contacting the contributor for that 32bit GTK2 build I found, other than
joining the Palemoon forum, which I don't really want to do. SO, while this compilation may function
in Puppys based on distros that update their GLIBC regularly, I'll stick with using Steve Pusser's GTK3
builds which he maintains for more "stable, LTS" type distros such as Slackware! Not sure if there would
be much difference in the two builds, but if I remember correctly Steve was having issues with some of
the newer Palemoon sources compiling with GTK2, perhaps it was with GLIBC?? Anyhow, at least we do
have another 32bit option for Puppys based on sort of "rolling" distros.

The REALLY puzzling and aggravating thing about Palemoon is WHY, why change to AVX as the "official"
lowest security type protocol allowed?? They are already a sort of fringe player in the browser world, and
while Palemoon might not render all sites well, it remains very useful for my daily needs, and it makes some
sense to me to keep as broad a base as possible for attracting new users in regards to SSE.

dimkr wrote: Tue Oct 29, 2024 5:48 am

grey38 wrote: Tue Oct 29, 2024 2:52 am

And one person there says to just

>Run update-ca-certificates.

This won't work. This command builds a bundle of all installed certificates, and that's what the browser uses.

Use the package manager to install ca-certificates, then run update-ca-certificates.

I have tried this and its seems to have made no changes. Light browser can see visit any web site and Seamonkey still gives the same certificate issues.

# update-ca-certificates
Updating certificates in /etc/ssl/certs...
0 added, 0 removed; done.
Running hooks in /etc/ca-certificates/update.d...
done.
# 

mikewalsh wrote: Sat Oct 26, 2024 2:52 pm

@grey38 :-

Along the lines of @dimkr 's suggestion, I would guess that Light browser works okay for the simple reason it's the same vintage AS the installed ca-certificates. I would also hazard a guess that you're using the newest release of SeaMonkey, yes?

Naturally, a current browser expects to find the most up-to-date certificates, too...

Admittedly, I'm posting this from a highly-upgraded, customized build of Tahrpup64 - several years older than Bionic! - but the ca-certificates package is one I periodically upgrade anyway. I learnt to my own cost that you do need to keep on top of this one.

The up-to-date Seamonkey 'portable' works fine here.

Others will doubtless disagree with what I say. That's quite usual..!

Mike.

I still can't find a way to fix my issue with Seamonkeys certificates. You say your version works. What is this "portable" version you are running and where do you get the .SFS from to install it?