Please recommend another light weight Linux version.
PuppyThis forum is for the discussion of Puppy Linux.
Notices
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Get a virtual cloud desktop with the Linux distro that you want in less than five minutes with Shells! With over 10 pre-installed distros to choose from, the worry-free installation life is here! Whether you are a digital nomad or just looking for flexibility, Shells can put your Linux machine on the device that you want to use.
Exclusive for LQ members, get up to 45% off per month. Click here for more info.
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.
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?
Distribution: Mainly Devuan, antiX, & Void, with Tiny Core, Fatdog, & BSD thrown in.
Posts: 5,506
Rep:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Uplawski
None will though solve the OP's unrelated problems.
I was referring to....
Quote:
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.
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.
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.
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'.
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...
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.
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.