How to run ChromiumUBB in Bionicpup32-8.0+21-uefi?
How to run ChromiumUBB in Bionicpup32-8.0+21-uefi?
Hello.
I have installed bionicpup32-8.0+21-uefi.iso on a usb key (8Go) with "Bootflash install puppy to usb" (tool available in the menu SetUp). It works but I'am not satisfied by the web browser Light. Hence I have tried to install ChromiumUBB through "Get Web Browser" but nothing happens. I have succeed to install Chromium 83 through Puppy Package Manager (PPM) but it doesn't launch. I have installed Firefox 77.0.1 through PPM and "Get Web Browser". It works very well except that there is no sound.
Any help please ?
I have installed bionicpup32-8.0+21-uefi.iso on a usb key (8Go) with "Bootflash install puppy to usb" (tool available in the menu SetUp). It works but I'am not satisfied by the web browser Light. Hence I have tried to install ChromiumUBB through "Get Web Browser" but nothing happens. I have succeed to install Chromium 83 through Puppy Package Manager (PPM) but it doesn't launch. I have installed Firefox 77.0.1 through PPM and "Get Web Browser". It works very well except that there is no sound.
Any help please ?
There was a problem with ChromiumUBB.sfs which has now been fixed - thanks for reporting.
You may find that chromium.sfs has been downloaded and can be installed by putting it into your frugal install folder and then clicking on it. (but it may have been deleted).
Firefox.sfs is also available via Menu -> Internet -> Get Web Browser
and shouldn't have sound problems.
You may find that chromium.sfs has been downloaded and can be installed by putting it into your frugal install folder and then clicking on it. (but it may have been deleted).
Firefox.sfs is also available via Menu -> Internet -> Get Web Browser
and shouldn't have sound problems.
LxPup = Puppy + LXDE
Main version used daily: LxPupSc; Assembler of UPups, ScPup & ScPup64, LxPup, LxPupSc & LxPupSc64
Main version used daily: LxPupSc; Assembler of UPups, ScPup & ScPup64, LxPup, LxPupSc & LxPupSc64
I just tried this and had the same result as @PUPYYP. It downloaded and installed as default browser ok, but no joy on the sound issue.peebee wrote:Firefox.sfs is also available via Menu -> Internet -> Get Web Browser
and shouldn't have sound problems.
Is it possible that it's looking for a PulseAudio driver?
- OscarTalks
- Posts: 2196
- Joined: Mon 06 Feb 2012, 00:58
- Location: London, England
BionicPup32 +21 fresh boot, created save-folder, rebooted, installed Firefox 77.0.1 from Menu>Internet>Get Web Browser. Posting from it now and it DOES have sound.
Sound problem may be as a result of the user having earlier installed a package which contains the libpulse pulse audio libs which could have overwritten the apulse libraries, since this Pup has these in /usr/lib rather than being in a sub-directory (which would necessitate use of the apulse wrapper script with Firefox)? Just a hypothesis.
Sound problem may be as a result of the user having earlier installed a package which contains the libpulse pulse audio libs which could have overwritten the apulse libraries, since this Pup has these in /usr/lib rather than being in a sub-directory (which would necessitate use of the apulse wrapper script with Firefox)? Just a hypothesis.
Oscar in England
@OscarTalks,
I repeated your test. Same results as you. The pulse audio components worked right.
Here is the "diff" between the "clean" pup and the one with some apps installed:
Now We just need a fix ..
I repeated your test. Same results as you. The pulse audio components worked right.
Here is the "diff" between the "clean" pup and the one with some apps installed:
Code: Select all
From clean:
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 21 Aug 11 2017 libpulsecommon-4.0.so -> libpulsecommon-5.0.so
-rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 10632 Apr 7 2019 libpulsecommon-5.0.so
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 20 Aug 11 2017 libpulse-simple.so -> libpulse-simple.so.0
-rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 6236 Apr 7 2019 libpulse-simple.so.0
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 13 Aug 11 2017 libpulse.so -> libpulse.so.0
-rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 86936 Apr 7 2019 libpulse.so.0
With installed apps:
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 21 Aug 11 2017 libpulsecommon-4.0.so -> libpulsecommon-5.0.so
-rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 10632 Apr 7 2019 libpulsecommon-5.0.so
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 20 Aug 11 2017 libpulse-simple.so -> libpulse-simple.so.0
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 24 Jan 22 2019 libpulse-simple.so.0 -> libpulse-simple.so.0.1.1
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 17716 Jan 22 2019 libpulse-simple.so.0.1.1
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 13 Aug 11 2017 libpulse.so -> libpulse.so.0
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 18 Jan 22 2019 libpulse.so.0 -> libpulse.so.0.20.2
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 362612 Jan 22 2019 libpulse.so.0.20.2
- OscarTalks
- Posts: 2196
- Joined: Mon 06 Feb 2012, 00:58
- Location: London, England
Hello jafa,
The fix is to use apulse with its libs in a sub-directory, but this introduces the requirement to ensure that any program (such as Firefox) which works via apulse is being launched via the apulse wrapper.
The apulse package has libs which have the same names as standard pulse audio libs, but are different in how they function.
The apulse README states that there are 2 options, you can install libs in the library path and not need the wrapper, or install in a sub-directory and ensure that you use the wrapper. When I started compiling and using apulse I tried the former option, but later changed to using the sub-directory method.
The BionicPup32 .iso contains the earlier apulse libs, but if the user installs something via PPM which drags in pulse audio libs as dependencies, that will overwrite apulse and stop it from working. Not sure how practical it would be to address this via a BionicPup32 update, but I think that if you install an apulse with the sub-directory configuration, that would work if the wrapper is being used where necessary and the libs in /usr/lib would be the libs which non-apulse programs would see.
http://smokey01.com/OscarTalks/apulse-0 ... 686-wz.pet
The fix is to use apulse with its libs in a sub-directory, but this introduces the requirement to ensure that any program (such as Firefox) which works via apulse is being launched via the apulse wrapper.
The apulse package has libs which have the same names as standard pulse audio libs, but are different in how they function.
The apulse README states that there are 2 options, you can install libs in the library path and not need the wrapper, or install in a sub-directory and ensure that you use the wrapper. When I started compiling and using apulse I tried the former option, but later changed to using the sub-directory method.
The BionicPup32 .iso contains the earlier apulse libs, but if the user installs something via PPM which drags in pulse audio libs as dependencies, that will overwrite apulse and stop it from working. Not sure how practical it would be to address this via a BionicPup32 update, but I think that if you install an apulse with the sub-directory configuration, that would work if the wrapper is being used where necessary and the libs in /usr/lib would be the libs which non-apulse programs would see.
http://smokey01.com/OscarTalks/apulse-0 ... 686-wz.pet
Oscar in England
@OscarTalks,
ThxU dude. It turns out the wrapper was already present in /usr/bin, however there was no /usr/lib/apulse directory.
I simply copied out the apulse directory from the .pet you linked, over to /usr/lib, and everything now seems to work.
Thanks muchly for your assistance and insights on this.
ThxU dude. It turns out the wrapper was already present in /usr/bin, however there was no /usr/lib/apulse directory.
I simply copied out the apulse directory from the .pet you linked, over to /usr/lib, and everything now seems to work.
Thanks muchly for your assistance and insights on this.
- Mike Walsh
- Posts: 6351
- Joined: Sat 28 Jun 2014, 12:42
- Location: King's Lynn, UK.
.....and this is why I prefer the way Fred & I have done things with his portable-Quantum and my portable-FF68esr; the necessary apulse libs being in a sub-directory within the main 'portable' one, and called via LD_LIBRARY_PATH in the launch script.
And I still say portables are "the way forward" as far as browsers in Puppy are concerned....despite, to some folks, unnecessary duplication of certain dependencies. (And definitely when running multiple Pups, since they're super-easy to share.) But, hell; when your hardware is up in the 16-32 GB RAM territory (as I now am!), you tend to develop a somewhat different outlook on the space problem.....and am, dare I say it, no longer really living in the 'Puppy' "world" any longer..!
I could install, and run, any OS I wanted to now. But I don't want to run anything other than Puppy..... (*sigh*)
And I still say portables are "the way forward" as far as browsers in Puppy are concerned....despite, to some folks, unnecessary duplication of certain dependencies. (And definitely when running multiple Pups, since they're super-easy to share.) But, hell; when your hardware is up in the 16-32 GB RAM territory (as I now am!), you tend to develop a somewhat different outlook on the space problem.....and am, dare I say it, no longer really living in the 'Puppy' "world" any longer..!
I could install, and run, any OS I wanted to now. But I don't want to run anything other than Puppy..... (*sigh*)