Retroarch might violate FSDG

DoneSubmitted by Nicolò Balzarotti.
Details
6 participants
  • Nicolò Balzarotti
  • Arne Babenhauserheide
  • Jesse Gibbons
  • Ludovic Courtès
  • Tobias Geerinckx-Rice
  • Mark H Weaver
Owner
unassigned
Severity
normal
N
N
Nicolò Balzarotti wrote on 24 Nov 2019 15:15
(address . bug-guix@gnu.org)
CAO7Ox=bkYoJXyGPNL_W5MqKd8=ULPojGTUSzkZ9Dy4zLuyn3vA@mail.gmail.com
Hello guix!
How I reported today on the IRC #guix channel:
We might have a problem on how retroarch is packaged. I've never used it,tried just now. There's the "core download" section where it downloads"$core.so.zip". Those are .so files:.config/retroarch/cores/atari800_libretro.so: file format elf64-x86-64.I think we should either compile them and ship them or remove the downloadsection or something.Also, when downloading cores there are no license info
nckx provided this [1] as a useful link. It seems that some of the pluginsare available for non-commercial projects only (so not compatible with theGPLv3, used by retroarch).
It is something we should investigate and address, both for licensingissues and for safety (and because we do not want to ship precompiledbinaries).
Thanks, Nicolò
[1] https://www.libretro.com/index.php/retroarch-license-violations
Attachment: file
L
L
Ludovic Courtès wrote on 26 Nov 2019 11:34
(name . Nicolò Balzarotti)(address . anothersms@gmail.com)(address . 38360@debbugs.gnu.org)
87d0df7wpv.fsf@gnu.org
Hello,
Nicolò Balzarotti <anothersms@gmail.com> skribis:
Toggle quote (7 lines)> We might have a problem on how retroarch is packaged. I've never used it,> tried just now. There's the "core download" section where it downloads> "$core.so.zip". Those are .so files:> .config/retroarch/cores/atari800_libretro.so: file format elf64-x86-64.> I think we should either compile them and ship them or remove the download> section or something.
We should definitely remove all binary files from the “source” tarballs.
Toggle quote (2 lines)> Also, when downloading cores there are no license info
That should be investigated, indeed, possibly looking at what Debian isdoing.
Toggle quote (4 lines)> nckx provided this [1] as a useful link. It seems that some of the plugins> are available for non-commercial projects only (so not compatible with the> GPLv3, used by retroarch).
We don’t provide those plugins though, do we?
Thanks,Ludo’.
N
N
Nicolò Balzarotti wrote on 27 Nov 2019 00:26
(name . Ludovic Courtès)(address . ludo@gnu.org)(address . 38360@debbugs.gnu.org)
CAO7Ox=aNu5AcxHVTm5puORCLf5aeJQ+MNdoRtbi7fnfG4g7aoA@mail.gmail.com
Hi Ludo, thanks for your response.
We don't provide them _directly_, but when loading the program the firstoption is "Load core". Then, first option again, is "Download core". Hereyou have a list of "proprietary" .so.zip downloads. Retroarch, as far as Iunderstand, is encouraging the download of those programs, with nolicensing information (see [1]). I don't know if this is ok or if we canpatch it (hiding the "Download core" menu maybe?).
Debian _does_ provide (from their package manager) some o the cores [2],two of them with the non-free tag.If we patch retroarch to hide the download menu, to make it functional weshould also package some free cores.
Thoughts?
Thanks again,Nicolò

[1] https://docs.libretro.com/guides/download-cores/[2] https://packages.debian.org/stretch/games/
Il giorno mar 26 nov 2019 alle ore 11:34 Ludovic Courtès <ludo@gnu.org> hascritto:
Toggle quote (31 lines)> Hello,>> Nicolò Balzarotti <anothersms@gmail.com> skribis:>> > We might have a problem on how retroarch is packaged. I've never used it,> > tried just now. There's the "core download" section where it downloads> > "$core.so.zip". Those are .so files:> > .config/retroarch/cores/atari800_libretro.so: file format> elf64-x86-64.> > I think we should either compile them and ship them or remove the> download> > section or something.>> We should definitely remove all binary files from the “source” tarballs.>> > Also, when downloading cores there are no license info>> That should be investigated, indeed, possibly looking at what Debian is> doing.>> > nckx provided this [1] as a useful link. It seems that some of the> plugins> > are available for non-commercial projects only (so not compatible with> the> > GPLv3, used by retroarch).>> We don’t provide those plugins though, do we?>> Thanks,> Ludo’.>
Attachment: file
J
J
Jesse Gibbons wrote on 27 Nov 2019 03:09
(address . 38360@debbugs.gnu.org)
b4c98b48fa52276ceb63708c5b7aff19f9c0a2f4.camel@gmail.com
On Wed, 2019-11-27 at 00:26 +0100, Nicolò Balzarotti wrote:
Toggle quote (11 lines)> Hi Ludo, thanks for your response.> > We don't provide them _directly_, but when loading the program the first> option is "Load core". Then, first option again, is "Download core". Here> you have a list of "proprietary" .so.zip downloads. Retroarch, as far as I> understand, is encouraging the download of those programs, with no> licensing information (see [1]). I don't know if this is ok or if we can> patch it (hiding the "Download core" menu maybe?).> > Debian _does_ provide (from their package manager) some o the cores [2],> two of them with the non-free tag.
I can confirm that snes9x is nonfree because it is only for non-commercialuse. We should at least patch that out before the cores are available. Idon't know about the other one.Since retroarch offers a third-party repository to download nonfree sharedlibraries, we should blacklist it in order for GuixSD to remain FSDGcompliant.
Toggle quote (2 lines)> If we patch retroarch to hide the download menu, to make it functional we> should also package some free cores.
I don't know how retroarch works. What else would we need to patch out of orinto it so it recognizes the packaged cores?
Toggle quote (2 lines)> > Thoughts?
1. I think I can (eventually) compile an alist of cores, source locations,licenses, and descriptions, but I won't be able to do that until December.Anyone want to beat me to it?2. After we have an alist for each of these cores, we can quickly generatesome code to start packaging them, hopefully all at once. It will probablybe faster than adding them on demand. I'm guessing we would want them inemulators.scm correct?3. When we have some cores packaged, we can work on making retroarchrecognize them and not try to download its own binaries.I propose this order because I don't think I'm alone in wanting to keepretroarch usable during this process, and it will be easier to adaptretroarch after we have some cores packaged.
Toggle quote (8 lines)> Thanks again,> Nicolò> > > [1] https://docs.libretro.com/guides/download-cores/> [2] https://packages.debian.org/stretch/games/> >
A
A
Arne Babenhauserheide wrote on 27 Nov 2019 21:48
(address . bug-guix@gnu.org)
877e3lkpv9.fsf@web.de
Jesse Gibbons <jgibbons2357@gmail.com> writes:
Toggle quote (5 lines)> On Wed, 2019-11-27 at 00:26 +0100, Nicolò Balzarotti wrote:> I can confirm that snes9x is nonfree because it is only for non-commercial> use. We should at least patch that out before the cores are available. I> don't know about the other one.
Aren’t we overblocking here? This is not a case of a program restrictedto push someone into proprietary software, but a case of a programrestricted to not-for-profit for everybody.
It is a similar case as allowing to ship GPLv3 software in a ROM withoutthe option to modify it, as long as no one is able to modify it on thatmedium, including the propagator.
In the case of snes9x no one is able to monetize the software, includingthe creators, because many people have a stake in the non-commercialclause, but the software is freely modifiable and you can share itnon-commercially.
It is also not advertised (I just tried) but simply one in a long listof possible cores. A very long list. And you have to actively do theonline-lookup.
We’re not restricting software which displays non-free online comicseither.
Installing the fastest and most compatible free software cores bydefault (pre-installed) would minimize the effect of cores bound tonon-commercial use being available online without restricting the usersin using RetroArch — and it would make retroarch more convenient to use.
Best wishes,Arne--Unpolitisch seinheißt politisch seinohne es zu merken
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
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L675-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
T
T
Tobias Geerinckx-Rice wrote on 28 Nov 2019 01:02
Re: bug#38360: Retroarch does violate FSDG
(address . 38360@debbugs.gnu.org)
874kyoamwd.fsf@nckx
Guix,
This is not about Schrödinger's proprietary-until-proven-innocent binary. The Updater includes at least two cores explicitly marked as non-free in Debian:
libretro-genesisplusgx libretro-snes9x
Disabling the Updater seems like an open & shut case to me.
This is a shame, because I think these non-commercial clauses are silly and legally void. Core authors can't place arbitrary restrictions on derivative works of a GPL3 project. Unfortunately, that obvious fact is for a court to point out, and until then we must act as if it makes any sense.
Arne, to address your last point first:
Arne Babenhauserheide 写道:
Toggle quote (6 lines)> It is also not advertised (I just tried) but simply one in a > long list> of possible cores. A very long list. And you have to actively do > the> online-lookup.
For the purpose of this (FSDG) discussion, that's exactly what ‘advertised’ means.
I install Retroarch with Guix. When I run Retroarch, it prods me to (literally) ‘use the Updater if available’. When I do that, I can select from many cores, at least two of them non-free.
There is no way for me to know this important fact; I have to type the name of the core into a search engine and dig, possibly deep (not everyone knows the awesome power of a Debian copyright file :-).
You're not required to agree with any of the above, but Guix must.
Toggle quote (4 lines)> We’re not restricting software which displays non-free online > comics> either.
Indeed, that would be against our stated goal of user freedom.
Comics aren't software so don't count, but take Linux-Libre: the fact that it refuses to load non-free firmware supplied by the user is a *bug*, and even upstream acknowleges this. IceCat is another obvious example.
Same with Retroarch: if the user has a non-free core Guix's Retroarch must, IMPO, run it.
The difference is that at no point do Linux-Libre or IceCat ask me to ‘visit our cool firmware shoppe!’. Indeed, the FF ‘Get New Add-ons’ button that directly advertises non-free software is disabled for that reason.
Toggle quote (6 lines)> Aren’t we overblocking here? This is not a case of a program > restricted> to push someone into proprietary software, but a case of a > program> restricted to not-for-profit for everybody.
It's just as bad for the same reason. Like proprietary licences, this one restricts redistribution *and* use of the software:
“Permission to use, copy, modify and/or distribute Snes9x in both binary and source form, for non-commercial purposes, is hereby granted without fee […] Snes9x is freeware for PERSONAL USE only.”
That violates a fundamental software freedom (#0: the freedom to run the software as you wish, for any purpose).
Contrast this with the GPL, which places zero restrictions on use — I don't even have to share the software or my improvements with anyone!
Toggle quote (6 lines)> It is a similar case as allowing to ship GPLv3 software in a ROM > without> the option to modify it, as long as no one is able to modify it > on that> medium, including the propagator.
I don't see any similarities. With any GPL3 software, I am always allowed to copy the software and do with it what I want, no matter the underlying storage at some point in time.
Kind regards,
T (not a lawyer but talks to them at parties when no one else will) G-R
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
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g7+F-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
N
N
Nicolò Balzarotti wrote on 28 Nov 2019 01:35
Re: bug#38360: Retroarch might violate FSDG
(name . Arne Babenhauserheide)(address . arne_bab@web.de)
CAO7Ox=aBoDWbuo7T8syPw2R2-f-OAvyBhAC59Pom4jipvd3ULA@mail.gmail.com
Hi,
Il giorno mer 27 nov 2019 alle ore 21:48 Arne Babenhauserheide <arne_bab@web.de> ha scritto:
Toggle quote (12 lines)>> Jesse Gibbons <jgibbons2357@gmail.com> writes:> > On Wed, 2019-11-27 at 00:26 +0100, Nicolò Balzarotti wrote:> > I can confirm that snes9x is nonfree because it is only for> non-commercial> > use. We should at least patch that out before the cores are available. I> > don't know about the other one.>> Aren’t we overblocking here? This is not a case of a program restricted> to push someone into proprietary software, but a case of a program> restricted to not-for-profit for everybody.>
This is, by (some) definition, non free.

Toggle quote (17 lines)> It is a similar case as allowing to ship GPLv3 software in a ROM without> the option to modify it, as long as no one is able to modify it on that> medium, including the propagator.>
> In the case of snes9x no one is able to monetize the software, including> the creators, because many people have a stake in the non-commercial> clause, but the software is freely modifiable and you can share it> non-commercially.>> It is also not advertised (I just tried) but simply one in a long list> of possible cores. A very long list. And you have to actively do the> online-lookup.>> We’re not restricting software which displays non-free online comics> either.>
Comics aren't software. Free as in Freedom can apply only to software, AFAIK

Toggle quote (6 lines)> Installing the fastest and most compatible free software cores by> default (pre-installed) would minimize the effect of cores bound to> non-commercial use being available online without restricting the users> in using RetroArch — and it would make retroarch more convenient to use.>
If I understand correctly (i.e. shipping free cores with our retroarchdistribution, while still allowing non-free software download from thesoftware), I half-way agree with you. However, IMO, we should not encouragethe use of non free software, at all. Those non-free cores available in oneclick, and a user might not even know that 1. s/he is downloading some kindof software and 2. that this software is non-free (no license details). Iwas upset in discovering that I downloaded a non-free core, and I realizedjust because of the ".so.zip" name. If upstream they change the name to"core.zip", future users might not even understand what they are doing.Also, it might even happen that they will share non-opensource plugins inthe future. I don't know and I don't think it is fair.Finally, in a purely reproducible interest, having random softwaredownloaded is just bad.
Let me know what do you think,Nicolò
Toggle quote (8 lines)>> Best wishes,> Arne> --> Unpolitisch sein> heißt politisch sein> ohne es zu merken>
Attachment: file
A
A
Arne Babenhauserheide wrote on 28 Nov 2019 09:05
(name . Nicolò Balzarotti)(address . anothersms@gmail.com)
87eexs2zog.fsf@web.de
Nicolò Balzarotti <anothersms@gmail.com> writes:
Toggle quote (6 lines)>> Aren’t we overblocking here? This is not a case of a program restricted>> to push someone into proprietary software, but a case of a program>> restricted to not-for-profit for everybody.>>> This is, by (some) definition, non free.
Yes.
Toggle quote (19 lines)>> It is a similar case as allowing to ship GPLv3 software in a ROM without>> the option to modify it, as long as no one is able to modify it on that>> medium, including the propagator.>>>>> In the case of snes9x no one is able to monetize the software, including>> the creators, because many people have a stake in the non-commercial>> clause, but the software is freely modifiable and you can share it>> non-commercially.>>>> It is also not advertised (I just tried) but simply one in a long list>> of possible cores. A very long list. And you have to actively do the>> online-lookup.>>>> We’re not restricting software which displays non-free online comics>> either.>>> Comics aren't software. Free as in Freedom can apply only to software, AFAIK
It can apply to non-software, see for example the Wikipedia andStackoverflow. I experience that regularly since I’m writing aGPL-licensed roleplaying book: it uses graphics from Battle For Wesnoth,under GPL, and getting cc by-sa GPL-compatible was a major pain pointfor many years -> https://www.draketo.de/english/free-software/by-sa-gpl
Toggle quote (12 lines)>> Installing the fastest and most compatible free software cores by>> default (pre-installed) would minimize the effect of cores bound to>> non-commercial use being available online without restricting the users>> in using RetroArch — and it would make retroarch more convenient to use.>> If I understand correctly (i.e. shipping free cores with our retroarch> distribution, while still allowing non-free software download from the> software), I half-way agree with you. However, IMO, we should not encourage> the use of non free software, at all. Those non-free cores available in one> click, and a user might not even know that 1. s/he is downloading some kind> of software and 2. that this software is non-free (no license details).
Looking at the interface *if you have some cores installed* it firstpresents those cores and only afterwards says "download core".
And for available cores there’s actually a license entry (but thatcurrently says N/A — which looks like a bug to me).
So while there is no license in the listing, you are presented with thelicense before running a core.
Toggle quote (5 lines)> I was upset in discovering that I downloaded a non-free core, and I> realized just because of the ".so.zip" name. If upstream they change> the name to "core.zip", future users might not even understand what> they are doing.
The .so file ending is already something that takes domain knowledge torecognize. But not from the domain of the program: The domain of theprogram are emulators and roms. For these "this uses a core for thespecified hardware" is pretty clear.
Toggle quote (3 lines)> Finally, in a purely reproducible interest, having random software> downloaded is just bad.
I agree in principle but not in practice, because we also ship npm, pip,gem, package.el, cargo, maven, …
Best wishes,Arne--Unpolitisch seinheißt politisch seinohne es zu merken
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
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V33r-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
A
A
Arne Babenhauserheide wrote on 28 Nov 2019 11:06
Re: bug#38360: Retroarch does violate FSDG
(name . Tobias Geerinckx-Rice)(address . me@tobias.gr)(address . 38360@debbugs.gnu.org)
87d0dc2u2z.fsf@web.de
Tobias Geerinckx-Rice via Bug reports for GNU Guix <bug-guix@gnu.org> writes:
Toggle quote (9 lines)> Guix,>> This is not about Schrödinger's proprietary-until-proven-innocent> binary. The Updater includes at least two cores explicitly marked as> non-free in Debian:>> libretro-genesisplusgx> libretro-snes9x
In non-free because they are non-commercial, not because theytreacherous to users.
This is a distinction the FSF used to make until 2010 but dropped since then:https://web.archive.org/web/20100126044451/http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/categories.html#semi-freeSoftware
Toggle quote (8 lines)> Disabling the Updater seems like an open & shut case to me.>> This is a shame, because I think these non-commercial clauses are> silly and legally void. Core authors can't place arbitrary> restrictions on derivative works of a GPL3 project. Unfortunately,> that obvious fact is for a court to point out, and until then we must> act as if it makes any sense.
Retroarch is not a derivative work of the cores. There is an API-layerbetween both.
This is similar to a PDF which can place restrictions on what I can dowith a PDF-viewer *while viewing that PDF*. For example I’m not allowedto charge money for displaying a PDF for which I don’t have commercialuse rights.
(since PDFs can have Javascript embedded, this even applies when we havea strict discussion about programs)
Toggle quote (17 lines)> Arne, to address your last point first:>> Arne Babenhauserheide 写道:>> It is also not advertised (I just tried) but simply one in a long>> list of possible cores. A very long list. And you have to actively do>> the online-lookup.>> For the purpose of this (FSDG) discussion, that's exactly what> ‘advertised’ means.>> I install Retroarch with Guix. When I run Retroarch, it prods me to> (literally) ‘use the Updater if available’. When I do that, I can> select from many cores, at least two of them non-free.> There is no way for me to know this important fact; I have to type the> name of the core into a search engine and dig, possibly deep (not> everyone knows the awesome power of a Debian copyright file :-).
Look at what happens when you have at least one core installed: It showsyou the core with a line for the license (but that says N/A for snes9x,which is likely a bug).
If we pre-install free cores, then these are what will be shown first.
And different from browser-add-ons, they are not run until you startthem — before which you see the license (barring the N/A bug).
Toggle quote (2 lines)> You're not required to agree with any of the above, but Guix must.
If the license-info line is fixed, then not: You are then clearlyinformed of the license *before* you run the core.
Toggle quote (7 lines)>> We’re not restricting software which displays non-free online comics>> either.>> Indeed, that would be against our stated goal of user freedom.>> Comics aren't software so don't count
I disagree, but that’s a personal opinion which is not mainstream in GNU.
Toggle quote (7 lines)>> Aren’t we overblocking here? This is not a case of a program>> restricted>> to push someone into proprietary software, but a case of a program>> restricted to not-for-profit for everybody.>> It's just as bad for the same reason.
It is not *just as* bad. If I can choose between aclosed-source-likely-spies-on-you-and-you-cannot-do-anything-about-ittool and ayou-can-see-and-fix-everything-but-noone-can-earn-money-with-it tool,the latter is clearly better.
Not sufficiently good for inclusion in a free distribution, but in myopinion also not bad enough to censor from lists.
Toggle quote (6 lines)> That violates a fundamental software freedom (#0: the freedom to run> the software as you wish, for any purpose).>> Contrast this with the GPL, which places zero restrictions on use — I> don't even have to share the software or my improvements with anyone!
This is not true for the AGPL, because that places the restriction thatyou have to provide the source you’re running.
That’s a restriction I like, because it prevents circumvention of theGPL, but it is a restriction.
The non-commercial clause for emulators was added because otherwisethey would have been struck down.
Toggle quote (10 lines)>> It is a similar case as allowing to ship GPLv3 software in a ROM>> without>> the option to modify it, as long as no one is able to modify it on>> that>> medium, including the propagator.>> I don't see any similarities. With any GPL3 software, I am always> allowed to copy the software and do with it what I want, no matter the> underlying storage at some point in time.
In that case you cannot in practice do with it what you want, becauseyou cannot run a modified version on your device.
The important distinction is, that the creator cannot do so either.
And this is the symmetry which is also preserved with the non-commercialcores.
I’m not arguing to include snes9x in Guix, just that this isn’t a casewhere redaction of information is needed — if we package the free cores.
Best wishes,Arne--Unpolitisch seinheißt politisch seinohne es zu merken
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
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sjyx-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
L
L
Ludovic Courtès wrote on 28 Nov 2019 17:27
Re: bug#38360: Retroarch might violate FSDG
(name . Nicolò Balzarotti)(address . anothersms@gmail.com)(address . 38360@debbugs.gnu.org)
87zhggt186.fsf@gnu.org
Hi Nicolò,
Nicolò Balzarotti <anothersms@gmail.com> skribis:
Toggle quote (7 lines)> We don't provide them _directly_, but when loading the program the first> option is "Load core". Then, first option again, is "Download core". Here> you have a list of "proprietary" .so.zip downloads. Retroarch, as far as I> understand, is encouraging the download of those programs, with no> licensing information (see [1]). I don't know if this is ok or if we can> patch it (hiding the "Download core" menu maybe?).
Oh, that sounds pretty bad. In my view, it’s a problem:
1. from a user freedom viewpoint, because the user might unwillingly find themselves downloading non-free code, and thus Guix is not fulfilling its mission;
2. from a security and engineering viewpoint, because we certainly don’t want users to run code from arbitrary binaries downloaded from the net.
I think it definitely needs to be fixed.
Toggle quote (5 lines)> Debian _does_ provide (from their package manager) some o the cores [2],> two of them with the non-free tag.> If we patch retroarch to hide the download menu, to make it functional we> should also package some free cores.
That sounds like a plan.
Would you be able to help with that? Hopefully there are patches we cantake from Debian, no?
If nobody can work on it in a timely fashion, I would propose to removeretroarch until someone can do this work.
WDYT?
Thanks,Ludo’.
T
T
Tobias Geerinckx-Rice wrote on 28 Nov 2019 20:24
87wobj953k.fsf@nckx
Ludovic Courtès 写道:
Toggle quote (8 lines)> Would you be able to help with that? Hopefully there are > patches we can> take from Debian, no?>> If nobody can work on it in a timely fashion, I would propose to > remove> retroarch until someone can do this work.
I'm looking into this now.
Kind regards,
T G-R
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
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hLDk-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
T
T
Tobias Geerinckx-Rice wrote on 29 Nov 2019 16:21
(address . 38360@debbugs.gnu.org)
87h82m908a.fsf@nckx
Tobias Geerinckx-Rice 写道:
Toggle quote (2 lines)> I'm looking into this now.
So I've installed Retroarch on Debian.
They patch[0] it to hide the Updater by default but it's trivial to reënable (tested):
$ echo 'menu_show_core_updater = "false"' >> \ ~/.config/retroarch/retroarch.cfg
This does not appease me. I'm implementing more incisive measures.
Thoughts? Am I an anti-choice extremist?
Kind regards,
T G-R
[0]: https://sources.debian.org/patches/retroarch/1.7.3+dfsg1-1/01_config.patch/
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
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ffBx-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
T
T
Tobias Geerinckx-Rice wrote on 29 Nov 2019 16:24
(address . 38360@debbugs.gnu.org)
87fti6903l.fsf@nckx
Tobias Geerinckx-Rice via Bug reports for GNU Guix 写道:
Toggle quote (1 lines)> $ echo 'menu_show_core_updater = "false"'
^^^^^"true", of course…
Kind regards,
T G-R
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
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iw0y-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
A
A
Arne Babenhauserheide wrote on 29 Nov 2019 17:05
(name . Tobias Geerinckx-Rice)(address . me@tobias.gr)(address . 38360@debbugs.gnu.org)
87tv6mzn06.fsf@web.de
Tobias Geerinckx-Rice via Bug reports for GNU Guix <bug-guix@gnu.org> writes:
Toggle quote (10 lines)> They patch[0] it to hide the Updater by default but it's trivial to> reënable (tested):>> $ echo 'menu_show_core_updater = "false"' >> \> ~/.config/retroarch/retroarch.cfg>> This does not appease me. I'm implementing more incisive measures.>> Thoughts? Am I an anti-choice extremist?
I do not like to put people into boxes. I can judge actions, not people.

Implementing more extreme measures than changing the default usespractical power against users. It limits user freedom.
As committer to Guix you are in a position of power over users. You canuse that position to liberate them from shackles, or you can use it tolimit their freedom.

When I look into ethical decisions, I need a basic goal. The mission ofGNU is "to promote computer user freedom". This is too vague to use onits own to check an action, therefore I’m using the more actionabemission of the Hurd:
“Our mission is to create a general-purpose kernel suitable for the GNU operating system, which is viable for everyday use, and gives users and programs as much control over their computing environment as possible.“
Giving programs as much control over their environment is not relevantto the discussion (it is only relevant for a kernel with the assumptionthat the program acts on behalf of the user). For this ethical checkI’ll therefore simplify the mission to:
“Our mission is to give users as much control over their computing environment as possible.“

Does it give users as much control over their computing environment aspossible if you make it harder for them to re-enable the updater?
By making it harder, you limit the number of people who can take thedecision to re-activate the updater, therefore fewer people have thepractical freedom to do so, though they can still do so in theory.
But using a license like the GPL is all about practical Freedom. If wewere only talking about theoretical freedom, then any binary blob(without DRM) would give as much freedom as an AGPL program. Gamemodders have been demonstrating that for decades. Therefore theoreticalfreedom does not suffice: The goal must be practical freedom. Thefreedom to hack as easily as possible. Giving as many people as possiblethe freedom to change the operation of as many parts of the system aspossible.
Implementing measures to limit user freedom beyond choosing defaultsthat ensure that they do not accidentally fall into a trap they do notsee goes against that. It limits the practical freedom of users.
As committer to Guix you have practical power over every Guix user.When you use that power, it is your responsibility to further theirfreedom, not to create new chains.

That would be consistent with the mission to give users as much controlover their computing environment as possible.

Best wishes,Arne--Unpolitisch seinheißt politisch seinohne es zu merken
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
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SiZv-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
T
T
Tobias Geerinckx-Rice wrote on 29 Nov 2019 21:14
[PATCH] gnu: retroarch: Disable Online Updater [FSDG fix].
(address . 38360@debbugs.gnu.org)
20191129201439.3668-1-me@tobias.gr
Addresses http://issues.guix.gnu.org/issue/38360.
* gnu/packages/emulators.scm (retroarch)[source]: Add patch and snippet.* packages/patches/retroarch-disable-online-updater.patch: New file.* gnu/local.mk (dist_patch_DATA): Add it.--- gnu/local.mk | 1 + gnu/packages/emulators.scm | 17 +++++++++++++++-- .../retroarch-disable-online-updater.patch | 19 +++++++++++++++++++ 3 files changed, 35 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) create mode 100644 gnu/packages/patches/retroarch-disable-online-updater.patch
Toggle diff (85 lines)diff --git a/gnu/local.mk b/gnu/local.mkindex 88b0f98aa0..b0036a52a0 100644--- a/gnu/local.mk+++ b/gnu/local.mk@@ -1330,6 +1330,7 @@ dist_patch_DATA = \ %D%/packages/patches/rpcbind-CVE-2017-8779.patch \ %D%/packages/patches/rtags-separate-rct.patch \ %D%/packages/patches/racket-store-checksum-override.patch \+ %D%/packages/patches/retroarch-disable-online-updater.patch \ %D%/packages/patches/ruby-rubygems-276-for-ruby24.patch \ %D%/packages/patches/ruby-rack-ignore-failing-test.patch \ %D%/packages/patches/ruby-safe-yaml-add-require-time.patch \diff --git a/gnu/packages/emulators.scm b/gnu/packages/emulators.scmindex 7d3f7f019c..e622d2df4d 100644--- a/gnu/packages/emulators.scm+++ b/gnu/packages/emulators.scm@@ -1062,7 +1062,18 @@ emulation community. It provides highly accurate emulation.") (commit (string-append "v" version)))) (file-name (git-file-name name version)) (sha256- (base32 "0y7rcpz7psf8k3agsrq277jdm651vbnn9xpqvmj2in1a786idya7"))))+ (base32 "0y7rcpz7psf8k3agsrq277jdm651vbnn9xpqvmj2in1a786idya7"))+ (patches+ (search-patches "retroarch-disable-online-updater.patch"))+ (modules '((guix build utils)))+ (snippet+ '(begin+ ;; Don't suggest using the Online Updater if available: it never+ ;; is. This disables translation of this particular message.+ (substitute* (find-files "menu/drivers" "\\.c$")+ (("msg_hash_to_str\\(MSG_MISSING_ASSETS\\)")+ "\"Warning: Missing assets, go get some\""))+ #t)))) (build-system gnu-build-system) (arguments `(#:tests? #f ; no tests@@ -1074,7 +1085,7 @@ emulation community. It provides highly accurate emulation.") (etc (string-append out "/etc")) (vulkan (assoc-ref inputs "vulkan-loader")) (wayland-protocols (assoc-ref inputs "wayland-protocols")))- ;; Hard-code the path to libvulkan.so.+ ;; Hard-code some store file names. (substitute* "gfx/common/vulkan_common.c" (("libvulkan.so") (string-append vulkan "/lib/libvulkan.so"))) (substitute* "gfx/common/wayland/generate_wayland_protos.sh"@@ -1082,10 +1093,12 @@ emulation community. It provides highly accurate emulation.") (string-append wayland-protocols "/share/wayland-protocols"))) (substitute* "qb/qb.libs.sh" (("/bin/true") (which "true")))+ ;; Use shared zlib. (substitute* '("libretro-common/file/archive_file_zlib.c" "libretro-common/streams/trans_stream_zlib.c") (("<compat/zlib.h>") "<zlib.h>"))+ ;; The configure script does not yet accept the extra arguments ;; (like ‘CONFIG_SHELL=’) passed by the default configure phase. (invokediff --git a/gnu/packages/patches/retroarch-disable-online-updater.patch b/gnu/packages/patches/retroarch-disable-online-updater.patchnew file mode 100644index 0000000000..99af848f6a--- /dev/null+++ b/gnu/packages/patches/retroarch-disable-online-updater.patch@@ -0,0 +1,19 @@+diff -Naur retroarch.a/menu/menu_setting.c retroarch.c/menu/menu_setting.c+--- retroarch.a/menu/menu_setting.c 1970-01-01 01:00:01.000000000 +0100++++ retroarch.c/menu/menu_setting.c 2019-11-29 18:13:05.999578841 +0100+@@ -7292,6 +7292,7 @@+ &subgroup_info,+ parent_group);+ ++ /*+ CONFIG_ACTION(+ list, list_info,+ MENU_ENUM_LABEL_ONLINE_UPDATER,+@@ -7299,6 +7300,7 @@+ &group_info,+ &subgroup_info,+ parent_group);++ */+ #endif+ + CONFIG_ACTION(-- 2.23.0
M
M
Mark H Weaver wrote on 30 Nov 2019 05:24
Re: bug#38360: Retroarch does violate FSDG
(name . Arne Babenhauserheide)(address . arne_bab@web.de)
87wobi3s9f.fsf@netris.org
Hi Arne,
Arne Babenhauserheide <arne_bab@web.de> writes:
Toggle quote (14 lines)> Tobias Geerinckx-Rice via Bug reports for GNU Guix <bug-guix@gnu.org> writes:>>> Guix,>>>> This is not about Schrödinger's proprietary-until-proven-innocent>> binary. The Updater includes at least two cores explicitly marked as>> non-free in Debian:>>>> libretro-genesisplusgx>> libretro-snes9x>> In non-free because they are non-commercial, not because they> treacherous to users.
Your words "In non-free because they are non-commercial" are unclear.I guess you meant to say "They are in non-free because they prohibitcommercial use". Is that right?
Toggle quote (3 lines)> This is a distinction the FSF used to make until 2010 but dropped since then:> https://web.archive.org/web/20100126044451/http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/categories.html#semi-freeSoftware
What distinction do you think was dropped by the FSF since 2010?
If you're suggesting that the Free Software Definition was changed in2010 to allow programs that prohibit commercial use, you are certainlymistaken.
The current Free Software Definition states:
“Free software” does not mean “noncommercial”. A free program must be available for commercial use, commercial development, and commercial distribution. Commercial development of free software is no longer unusual; such free commercial software is very important. You may have paid money to get copies of free software, or you may have obtained copies at no charge. But regardless of how you got your copies, you always have the freedom to copy and change the software, even to sell copies.
https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html
Moreover, the GNU FSDG states:
A free system distribution must not steer users towards obtaining any nonfree information for practical use, or encourage them to do so.
where "information for practical use" is defined as:
“Information for practical use” includes software, documentation, fonts, and other data that has direct functional applications. It does not include artistic works that have an aesthetic (rather than functional) purpose, or statements of opinion or judgment.
https://www.gnu.org/distros/free-system-distribution-guidelines.html
Toggle quote (2 lines)>> Disabling the Updater seems like an open & shut case to me.
Agreed.
Thanks, Mark
A
A
Arne Babenhauserheide wrote on 30 Nov 2019 13:10
(name . Mark H Weaver)(address . mhw@netris.org)
87zhgdr2d5.fsf@web.de
Mark H Weaver <mhw@netris.org> writes:
Toggle quote (22 lines)> Hi Arne,>> Arne Babenhauserheide <arne_bab@web.de> writes:>>> Tobias Geerinckx-Rice via Bug reports for GNU Guix <bug-guix@gnu.org> writes:>>>>> Guix,>>>>>> This is not about Schrödinger's proprietary-until-proven-innocent>>> binary. The Updater includes at least two cores explicitly marked as>>> non-free in Debian:>>>>>> libretro-genesisplusgx>>> libretro-snes9x>>>> In non-free because they are non-commercial, not because they>> treacherous to users.>> Your words "In non-free because they are non-commercial" are unclear.> I guess you meant to say "They are in non-free because they prohibit> commercial use". Is that right?
Yes.
More exactly:
They are in non-free, because they prohibit commercial use, not becausethey are treacherous to users.
Most proprietary programs are treacherous because they give theircreators power over their users. This is not the case for these cores.
Toggle quote (5 lines)>> This is a distinction the FSF used to make until 2010 but dropped since then:>> https://web.archive.org/web/20100126044451/http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/categories.html#semi-freeSoftware>> What distinction do you think was dropped by the FSF since 2010?
The distinction that was dropped is that non-commercial software whichprovides the source and allows non-commercial use, changing and sharingis less problematic that closed-source software.
The distinction to call that software semi-free.
Toggle quote (4 lines)> If you're suggesting that the Free Software Definition was changed in> 2010 to allow programs that prohibit commercial use, you are certainly> mistaken.
I’m not suggesting that. I’m saying that before 2010 it had a friendlierstance towards this non-commercial software.
I don’t know why that was changed, but I would assume that people abusednon-commercial licensing to trick people into using software for whichthey would have to pay to use commercially.
But this is not the case here: The non-commercial cores do not offeran option to pay for commercial rights. They are non-commercial becausethis used to be the only way how you could release them without beingsued by Nintento, Sega, Sony & co.
Toggle quote (5 lines)> Moreover, the GNU FSDG states:>> A free system distribution must not steer users towards obtaining any> nonfree information for practical use, or encourage them to do so.
Now the question is whether allowing them to obtain such information isencouragement or steering towards.
I agree that if there are no cores packaged, so users are forced to usethe online list to run retroarch at all is steering.
However when this is not the easiest way to use retroarch, it is nolonger steering them towards that.
And if there are cores available, retroarch presents the cores first,along with license information (or at least it should display licenseinformation, since there’s already a license-line shown).
Toggle quote (9 lines)> where "information for practical use" is defined as:>> “Information for practical use” includes software, documentation,> fonts, and other data that has direct functional applications. It> does not include artistic works that have an aesthetic (rather than> functional) purpose, or statements of opinion or judgment.>> <https://www.gnu.org/distros/free-system-distribution-guidelines.html>
I disagree with this, because I consider aestetics and and statements ofopinion or judgement as functional, too. They function on the mindinstead of computers, but they do function.
This is why what I write is copyleft licensed where I have that option.
But that’s another discussion.

For what I’m saying in practice, see my other longer email.

Best wishes,Arne--Unpolitisch seinheißt politisch seinohne es zu merken
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
iQIzBAEBCAAdFiEE801qEjXQSQPNItXAE++NRSQDw+sFAl3iXEgACgkQE++NRSQDw+sS1BAAivKLdXaFg8tjoA6n8vKU9bLiTXAYcboXaGtwq5p4mBQKAaox+4wUn2nyZ6DuusuE7jfpROdzSRTOWbyRwdX0vrpt/kQQfEzGDq3uWyf/UwLjr8fDXOo8KLOq/HymMYgCJXY7oOruGGv8bppRrX/C9t2uX7BUKLREDYVS0ShD2s+a2bkDABOoaLQKjXU8i/H7VW4BW0HSN5zBtJSWZ59Mdnwwi0rOCdGEj+W3qkuELhK3b0BbFoT80xtQQwiWgiUzc2b7o7CXWhrfwUG2mTYEuxji/QrzRK7TitcJ2/ua5AYlXlWI9UjC+0IEYkIXqmKoLuit179I7n3TOyAefujZNgzOJmaecWF37vkBp0q3k0hmeuqg6NBFogoJav04o/cAugpNwg/X8KWR0L8S3OckqO2XwyThn63iF+gKI97pg6iroFtU1rbk9+KtHzGcFNIByCK00adyrn+AKberVm4zwJklxnXgopAJFug0DjkjlKdFYbtTZwX3rMwue6ZmC8AElPWSB3Vz6yG08cLRwstMgpoNlcnBMKjwTdT5BjJhRN9VXKpsIXBuJnveUhKTUJ9VucgjI6+01Cqz1/JjNNUxidJ2IXDBOZ6w91Tjb1CplCdZHWr5Fk1keBbG4WnEFzIIGXLwBViUQXbE7umGs/OHVI2IIoe0cyjDhRp3pBQY1u6IswQBAQgAHRYhBN0ovebZh1yrzkqLHdzPDbMLwQVIBQJd4lxJAAoJENzPDbMLwQVIPJQD/2iERxgnjHYr0/rbzADCc61ebYDmrWRWw8SIT0CewHMsfgyDlOkTUQWudiHM5/lrtXsxnlaALvRc1Z4kx0Eung+D/v9pAnipLNyOavy8XnotuCrX5LcB4Sj44oDxcYsrGyo/lwUTK3FyA/mpLQ9kdUSXw0XHvEZqIEcmnHPTpjPl=xm3s-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
T
T
Tobias Geerinckx-Rice wrote on 30 Nov 2019 22:20
Re: bug#38360: [PATCH] gnu: retroarch: Disable Online Updater [FSDG fix].
(address . 38360-done@debbugs.gnu.org)
87a78dnjsj.fsf@nckx
Nicolò, Guix,
Tobias Geerinckx-Rice via Bug reports for GNU Guix 写道:
Toggle quote (6 lines)> * gnu/packages/emulators.scm (retroarch)[source]: Add patch and > snippet.> * packages/patches/retroarch-disable-online-updater.patch: New > file.> * gnu/local.mk (dist_patch_DATA): Add it.
That patch was incomplete, but I've pushed a similar fix as 775497549c6114ebdce57e787c94d5fedc368e49.
I'm marking this as done. Let me know if there's anything I missed.
Kind regards,
T G-R
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
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C4JJ-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Closed
T
T
Tobias Geerinckx-Rice wrote on 30 Nov 2019 22:58
Re: bug#38360: Retroarch might violate FSDG
(address . 38360@debbugs.gnu.org)
877e3hni12.fsf@nckx
Arne,
Arne Babenhauserheide 写道:
Toggle quote (2 lines)> Aren’t we overblocking here?
As of current master: very likely :-(
Regardless of (y)our opinions on commerce and freedom, downloading executables that violate GNU's own Free Software Distribution Guidelines is simply not an option.
However, it's very likely that I've now disabled more than strictly necessary.
Kind regards,
T G-R
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
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9zyD-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
?
Your comment

This issue is archived.

To comment on this conversation send email to 38360@debbugs.gnu.org