Discussion, talk and tips
https://forum.puppylinux.com/
First time this has happened: I click "Do it!" and nothing happens.
I wait at least five minutes from the last attempt, click again and it starts to install. Processing?
It no longer visibly calculates installation space requirements.
I see more package details upon selecting one.
I can't select more than one package to install at a time. Improved?
Are you talking about PPM offered here:
viewtopic.php?p=13209#p13209
hi JASpup & bigpup,
i also don't like the new PPM and raised an issue on github about it https://github.com/puppylinux-woof-CE/w ... ssues/2186
i rolled back to the last good version in both bionicpup64 & fossapup64 and have recently uploaded a pet of the older version to ibiblio http://distro.ibiblio.org/puppylinux/pe ... -2.1.2.pet
i've not tested the above .pet and it may not be complete ..... test and see 
Link version is older on a 64 system.
I'm wrestling 2.5, 32bit.
Kudos 666.
Don't fix not broken.
the PPM is noarch .... meaning that it will run on both 32 & 64bit
Good to know. I thought that just meant Slackware, Upup, Debian etc.
If PPM is how .pets are installed, how do we replace it?
Do you install the second (older) copy first, or remove the existing one and install by some other method?
just installing that .pet should work
People spend a lot of time/words on explanations here for various reasons, sometimes I imagine because they want to be helpful and think it's required.
I would just ask: trying to install a newer version of Pale Moon over builtin Pale Moon is almost tormenting without experienced knowledge.
How can we just install a replacement PPM and expect it to run instead of the builtin one without conflict?
I see it's faily sophisticated but wonder if we couldn't just make an .sfs of it, or run it standalone.
Installing a different version of a builtin program or file.
If you install by using a pet package of the different version.
Make sure to update the save.
Boot now using this updated save.
The version the pet installed should now be the one used.
A SFS package of a program will not load over a builtin program.
The built in program will still be the version that runs.
Well, maybe it would, if the SFS package was correctly put together, to do that.
But the builtin files/programs, need to be a permanent change, not a temp change, that a SFS package may do by loading it.
@bigpup I think what you're explaining is installing vs. loading .sfs is radically different, whereby installing an app essentially updates it and loading an .sfs doesn't, even if it's just for that session.
I could look for those newer Pale Moon .pet, but if memory serves that is contrary to my (limited) experience.