Please recommend another light weight Linux version.
 

Have tried BionicPup32 and BionicPup64, both of them block the connections to the websites I usually visit everyday, YouTube, New York Times, NBC news etc. BionicPup32's reason for blocking the connections is "not secure" and BionicPup64's reason is "untrusted" as they say.

Please recommend one or two Linux versions that are light and easy to operate and can use Firefox or Google Chrome and can connect to most of the major websites.

Thank you.

Nobody really needs a lightweight distro. All they really need is a lightweight DE or window manager, most of which are available via the longest existing distros, such as Debian, Fedora, Mageia, openSUSE and several others. *buntu and Mint are Debian derivatives that add extras that increase weight.

Failure to access websites is not a function of any distro per se, but rather of the version of the web browser(s) it provides, or one it doesn't provide but you get elsewhere than from the distro's own repos. If you can't reach popular websites, you may only need a newer browser version, but it's possible a newer browser can't be used without a newer distro version as its foundation. BionicPup is old, so probably doesn't have new enough support libraries for the latest browser versions.

What browser versions are giving you those errors? Are you actually using 64 bit? What's stopping you from using a newer Puppy version with web browsers that don't cause such trouble?

Come on, some of have slow internet so lightweight is good IMHO ;)


OP

in addition to above firefox comes with its own cert database files under
/home</your-loginname>/.mozilla/firefox/<string>.default-release

so you can run firefox from unpack if your distro version plays up

AntiX, SliTaz, TinyCore, just some of the lightweight distros available, & all will run on 32bit computers.

None will though solve the OP's unrelated problems.

I was referring to....

:):hattip:

I know. And it is always a pleasure to converse with you. ;)

use SeaMonkey as browser

No one has asked. Is dillo the default browser on puppy? It used to be. Dillo still has problems loading some websites. It won't load many. Dillo can be fixed by compiling it with mbedtls instead of openssl.

I made a thread on that a while back.

Dillo won't load youtube at all. Youtube wants javascript to run. You can scrape youtube with python and youtube-dl or yt-dl.

Dillo compiled with mbedtls will load the others.
https://0x0.st/Hzu-.png

No.
I've seen Palemoon, Firefox ESR, Seamonkey but rarely Dillo.

Mm.....it used to be, but not for some years now. Mostly due to the issues you've just brought up. Although one of our community members re-compiled a new version of Dillo with many of the normally disabled flags re-enabled......modern Dillo actually supports 'https' now, along with Javascript and a couple of other things, including TLS 1.2 (or is that 1.3? I'm never certain).

Mostly it tends to get used in Puppy as an HTML 'viewer'.


Mike. :hattip:

https://www.dillo.org/

Dillo does not render javascript stuff. Dillo's development is a little stale. They have javascript on low priority.
https://www.dillo.org/Plans.html

Edit:
Dillo compiled with mbedtls will give you a working wweb browser, the way it used to work 5 or 6 years ago.

https://0x0.st/H-jD.png

Might help. Might not.

https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/for...-linux-corner/

My bad. Forgot to mention that the guy in question - one of our more illustrious coders - hacked the code-base, and added his own Javascript support. It's not perfect - needs more work! - but it's definitely a step in the right direction...


Mike. ;)

Would you have a link for that somewhere. I would like to see how that was implemented, and what javascript engine was used, how it was integrated etc. I am half way familiar with dillo's code tree.