Originally posted by fabioamd87
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Valve's Steam License Causes Linux Packaging Concerns
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by ElderSnake View PostArch devs are probably just excited like the rest of us. They'll figure it out, one way or the other.
Meanwhile I couldn't care less. I dont mind installing/upgrading from the AUR and Community/Multilib is certainly convenient, but either way is cool.
Comment
-
Originally posted by ninez View PostCan you point me to any other software package in Archlinux's repos that meets the same criteria as Valve Steam;
Originally posted by ninez View Post1. Proprietary software / non-free
2. ...is in beta-testing (and thus #3)
3. not an official/stable release
multilib/lib32-nvidia-utils
extra/nvidia
extra/flashplugin
NVIDIA's blobs are in extra and multilib and Flash is in extra. There's no hard requirement for free and open source. And when did x86_64 ever make it as a officially supported platform for Flash? Now that Adobe has dropped it except for security patches, it's essentially permabeta. Also there's plenty of software to be found with leading 0s in their version numbers (0.x.x is not rare).
Originally posted by ninez View Post4. ...that is designed/targeted for Ubuntu (not linux in general)
Originally posted by ninez View Post5. 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)
Also, there are free-to-play games on Steam. They even let you search for games in that category.
Originally posted by ninez View Post6. has significant DRM
Originally posted by ninez View Post7. 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.)
The real criteria (from my observation) for including packages is closer to:- Can be done legally.
- Maintained both in upstream and in packaging.
- Some demand by Arch users. (That doesn't mean a majority or even a set percentage. This is a relatively soft requirement.)
It is surprising that Steam was even briefly in the repositories given its questionable legality. Not that it seems like Valve cares, it's just you have to CYA.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Xilanaz View Postseeing 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.
Souce Topic
Installing Steam Linux Beta open suse forum
download media.steampowered.com/client/installer/steam.deb
open the .deb with ark
open the data.tar.gz with ark
extract the /lib/steam/bootstraplinux_ubuntu12_32.tar.xz file to any directory where you want, lets say Steam for now
execute ./steam.sh from that directory and let it update
enter your login
Some people had problems, because the did not have the needed32 bit libraries.
How to get these is discussed in that topic too.
If it is this simple to get it running on suse it cant be hard to get it working on other distros.
A friend of mine, had it installed on mint.Last edited by Gps4l; 15 November 2012, 07:05 PM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Jimmy View PostCan you point out to me the official documentation from ArchLinux that outlines all those points as being hard requirements?
Originally posted by Jimmy View Postmultilib/skype
multilib/lib32-nvidia-utils
extra/nvidia
extra/flashplugin
NVIDIA's blobs are in extra and multilib and Flash is in extra. There's no hard requirement for free and open source. And when did x86_64 ever make it as a officially supported platform for Flash? Now that Adobe has dropped it except for security patches, it's essentially permabeta. Also there's plenty of software to be found with leading 0s in their version numbers (0.x.x is not rare).
as far as Nvidia goes, i tend to think Archlinux IS most likely violating the GPL by shipping nvidia ~ because as far as i know, the reason nvidia ships their installer the way they do, is to avoid violating the GPL (since it concerns distribution, not what the user is doing locally - ie: running the installer compiling and linking against his/her kernel - as opposed to what Archlinux does which is distribute the actual kernel module). but i'm not 100% positive on the legalities, since i am not a lawyer. but again, i never made the claim that Archlinux has to be 100% OSS (that is just something you are making up).
Originally posted by Jimmy View PostThis is somewhat valid but if you RTFA, it would seem to be likely that this will not always be the case. Fear that it will always be the case is the strong point of your argument here. (FUD?)
Originally posted by Jimmy View PostWine practically only exists to use proprietary software that you pay for. So I suppose you should make the same argument against Wine, since you know for a fact that most Arch users only want to use free (in both contexts) software.
Originally posted by Jimmy View PostAlso, there are free-to-play games on Steam. They even let you search for games in that category.
Originally posted by Jimmy View PostLike Flash's DRM which is required to watch Hulu and the likes? Yes, DRM is horrible. Its absence is not a hard requirement for inclusion in Arch repositories and ultimately it's the user's choice to install it. No one is forcing you to install every last package in the repos. It's up to the user to decide if it's a good idea or not.
Originally posted by Jimmy View PostFinally! You make a worthwhile point.
The real criteria (from my observation) for including packages is closer to:- Can be done legally.
- Maintained both in upstream and in packaging.
- Some demand by Arch users. (That doesn't mean a majority or even a set percentage. This is a relatively soft requirement.)
It is surprising that Steam was even briefly in the repositories given its questionable legality. Not that it seems like Valve cares, it's just you have to CYA.
Anyway, it doesn't appear to be in the repos anymore (but obviously is available in the AUR - so apparently i am not the only one who thought that it didn't belong in there) - so it looks like the decision has been made by Arch-devs, for the time being... (i would assume).Last edited by ninez; 15 November 2012, 08:57 PM.
Comment
-
This seems trivial to fix.
Package a script that downloads the ubuntu .deb from valve, extracts the contents, and installs. This is already done for proprietary firmware, fonts, and other software that both forbids redistribution and is freely available from an official source.
Comment
Comment