Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Valve's Steam License Causes Linux Packaging Concerns

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Valve's Steam License Causes Linux Packaging Concerns

    Phoronix: Valve's Steam License Causes Linux Packaging Concerns

    Valve's initial roll-out of their Steam client for Linux is all centered around Ubuntu. With Ubuntu having the largest market-share on the Linux desktop, Valve is focusing upon proper Ubuntu support as their first priority. In the days that the Ubuntu/Debian package has been available of the Steam Linux Beta, it's already been reported to work on other Linux distributions. Some Linux distributions have also begun to package the Steam Linux binary for their own platforms, but now there's some concerns about doing this, at least from the Arch Linux camp...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTIyOTI

  • #2
    edit:wrong thread

    Comment


    • #3
      What a FUD. You should mention "Arch Linux" in the title of the article, but it wouldn't be so scary, would it?

      Comment


      • #4
        can you PLEASE avoid to say in every Steam news that Gabe hates Windows 8?

        Comment


        • #5
          I tend to think that Steam has ZERO business being in Archlinux's Official repos. It should have been in the AUR, instead. By having it in the Arch User Repository, it could be downloaded directly from valve and then the .deb extracted, installed + any postinstall stuff via the PKGBUILD.

          I'm actually quite surprised Steam would even be considered for the official repos, What's next having AutoDesk Maya 2013 in the official repos? lol.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by ninez View Post
            I tend to think that Steam has ZERO business being in Archlinux's Official repos. It should have been in the AUR, instead. By having it in the Arch User Repository, it could be downloaded directly from valve and then the .deb extracted, installed + any postinstall stuff via the PKGBUILD.
            This is exactly what i thought when i first read the blog entry.

            Comment


            • #7
              goddammit i was in the middle of installing Arch and was excited to try out steam but i guess I'm too late.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by schmidtbag View Post
                goddammit i was in the middle of installing Arch and was excited to try out steam but i guess I'm too late.
                You don't need Archlinux to try Steam. chances are that you can just extract the .deb, have a look through it's contents (ie: look at the dependencies, as you will have to manually install them. look at where all of the files are placed on install and look at the postinst for post-installation commands that will need to be run) and install it yourself (on whatever distro you are using).

                I haven't bothered with Steam, but that is exactly how i got Lightworks to work (which like steam is being tested in Ubuntu and thus is using .deb). But getting it to work outside of Ubuntu took very little effort.

                Originally posted by glasen View Post
                This is exactly what i thought when i first read the blog entry.
                Ya, it makes no sense that Valve Steam would be in Archlinux repos. It obviously should be in the AUR (where it belongs!).

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by ninez View Post
                  I tend to think that Steam has ZERO business being in Archlinux's Official repos. It should have been in the AUR, instead. By having it in the Arch User Repository, it could be downloaded directly from valve and then the .deb extracted, installed + any postinstall stuff via the PKGBUILD.

                  I'm actually quite surprised Steam would even be considered for the official repos, What's next having AutoDesk Maya 2013 in the official repos? lol.
                  It was in the AUR, but since many people voted for it, so it came into the repos. Whats your problem?
                  btw it is still in the repos and imo it should be kept there.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    How dare commercial entities mess with the distribution specific, totally not the same as walled garden, approach to software distribution and packaging.

                    (the walled garden thing is meant sarcastically)
                    (Which means distributions are like walled gardens.)

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Nuc!eoN View Post
                      It was in the AUR, but since many people voted for it, so it came into the repos. Whats your problem?
                      btw it is still in the repos and imo it should be kept there.
                      Can you point me to any other software package in Archlinux's repos that meets the same criteria as Valve Steam;

                      1. Proprietary software / non-free
                      2. ...is in beta-testing (and thus #3)
                      3. not an official/stable release
                      4. ...that is designed/targeted for Ubuntu (not linux in general)
                      5. is pretty much useless to a very substantial number of Arch users (being as it is restrictive due to being pay to play, proprietary software)
                      6. has significant DRM
                      7. that says right in it's license (regardless of what valve employees may have said) that what they (archers) are doing (re-packaging/modifying it) violates Valve's license. (but hey, if Valve wants to re-write their license to allow this - then sure... but an email or two saying it is okay, imho does not invalidate the language used by Valve, in their license.)

                      if you can find me any other software in the Arch repos that falls into ALL of these categories, then i will retract my statements.

                      regardless, imho this is setting a new precedence as to what can be put in the Archlinux repos. ie: any alpha/beta-quality, heavy DRM, pay/non-free software should all be available in the official repos, without exception - regardless of legality.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by ninez View Post
                        Can you point me to any other software package in Archlinux's repos that meets the same criteria as Valve Steam;

                        1. Proprietary software / non-free
                        2. ...is in beta-testing (and thus #3)
                        3. not an official/stable release
                        4. ...that is designed/targeted for Ubuntu (not linux in general)
                        5. is pretty much useless to a very substantial number of Arch users (being as it is restrictive due to being pay to play, proprietary software)
                        6. has significant DRM
                        7. that says right in it's license (regardless of what valve employees may have said) that what they (archers) are doing (re-packaging/modifying it) violates Valve's license. (but hey, if Valve wants to re-write their license to allow this - then sure... but an email or two saying it is okay, imho does not invalidate the language used by Valve, in their license.)

                        if you can find me any other software in the Arch repos that falls into ALL of these categories, then i will retract my statements.

                        regardless, imho this is setting a new precedence as to what can be put in the Archlinux repos. ie: any alpha/beta-quality, heavy DRM, pay/non-free software should all be available in the official repos, without exception - regardless of legality.
                        Adobe Flash Player 64bit met most of those criteria. It probably shouldn't go in [core] or [extra] but [community] is explicitly for popular aur apps with good packagers (who become 'trusted users'): https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php...ommunity.5D.3F

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Before anyone gets too bent out of shape thinking that Valve might be trying to cause some Ubuntu-lock-in for Linux gamers
                          seeing how the whole thing is full of ubuntu12_32 references, from the scripts to binaries to the directory structure, excuse me for being sceptical about that statement.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            I don't get the problem.
                            Steam was very popular in the AUR and received many votes in only a few days. A maintainer decided that he would willingly maintain it and so he did as he is allowed to.
                            It's proprietary, true, but it's not the only proprietary package in the repo.
                            The Beta thing is maybe something I most agree on though.
                            Why aren't you just happy that Steam released a linux version of their client? Linux users often see problems where none are present, seems to me. C'mon JUST CHILL OUT bro!!


                            One Love

                            EDIT: Seems it was just removed from the repos
                            Last edited by Nuc!eoN; 11-15-2012, 02:07 PM.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by TheCycoONE View Post
                              Adobe Flash Player 64bit met most of those criteria. It probably shouldn't go in [core] or [extra] but [community] is explicitly for popular aur apps with good packagers (who become 'trusted users'): https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php...ommunity.5D.3F
                              Really? You think that Adobe Flash falls into nearly all of those seven points? (afaik, it doesn't). it does fall into a couple but not 'nearly all'. Flash doesn't cost money/pay to play and isn't *crippled* by DRM. Adobe flash IS redistributable. Adobe provides a 'generic/linux agnostic' package and as far as i know, adobe flash 11.2.202.251 (aka: what is available in the official repos) is not a closed-beta.

                              I am aware of what the community repos are used for and what TU are, thanks (but note, i was told it was in Multilib, not community) but as i said before - please point me to another app that is actually in the same boat as Steam for Linux. I know of a few that will fall into a few of the laid out categories, but beyond that i am not seeing any that are as restrictive/DRM/crippled, beta-quality, pay to play, etc. I would tend to think that once Valve has an official release out, maybe then it may be suitable to have it in one of the repos (if Valve either A - puts it in writing 'officially' (ie: not some random email) that distributions can ignore their license requirements or B). do the proper thing, which is change your license to allow such things with ZERO grey-area... and while they are at it, make a generic-installer (which i am sure they will at some point).

                              Originally posted by Nuc!eoN View Post
                              I don't get the problem.
                              Steam was very popular in the AUR and received many votes in only a few days. A maintainer decided that he would willingly maintain it and so he did as he is allowed to. It's proprietary, true, but it's not the only proprietary package in the repo.
                              The Beta thing is maybe something I most agree on though.
                              That's the problem though, your not supposed just put software of this quality into the official repos (especially, when you consider all of the points i mentioned, and not just cherry-pick one or two - you have to look at the whole situation). I have no problem with Steam being proprietary - nor was that the crux of my argument. But we are talking about beta-quality, heavy-DRM, pay to play, etc.... it shouldn't be in the official repos ~ especially, since it is a beta for Ubuntu and isn't even 'officially supported' by Valve for Archlinux.


                              Originally posted by Nuc!eoN View Post
                              Why aren't you just happy that Steam released a linux version of their client? Linux users often see problems where none are present, seems to me. C'mon JUST CHILL OUT bro!!
                              Who said i wasn't happy about Valve for linux? Who said i was upset? (where did you even get that idea? ie: wtf are talking about?) please use your brain before making such idiotic comments. I think it is great that Steam is coming to linux (in a variety of ways) and even though i am not a heavy-gamer, i'll probably buy a few games, as i do play games every now and agin - i like to support companies that are willing to bring their apps to linux, as well... That being said, my comments had NOTHING to do with whether or not i was happy with Valve or not... they have to do with (generally speaking) how Archlinux' repos generally operate, legalities based on licensing/re-distribution, etc.

                              This isn't a case of seeing problems where they don't exist, they do exist.

                              and by the way - i just tried to install Steam and either none of my mirrors have been updated, nor has Archlinux' website been updated or Steam is not actually available in the repos and has been pulled (but is available in AUR still). I did read a few of the mailing list posts about Steam, but missed a couple / deleted them...

                              ...maybe it was decided Steam should stay in the AUR? (i don't know)
                              Last edited by ninez; 11-15-2012, 02:30 PM.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X