AYANEO confirm their Linux-based AYANEO OS arrives this year

Quoting: fireplaceeverything else is not to be found

AFAIK you need a GitLab account to view some of the source:
https://gitlab.steamos.cloud/users/sign_in

Quoting: fireplace

Quoting: Purple Library GuyYeah, you're asserting that. But it doesn't jibe with anything else I've ever heard about the current SteamOS. So I'm asking you to provide a bit of chapter and verse about, in what sense, in what way, is Valve "keeping most of the distro closed source"? What is it you claim they are doing?

I seriously don’t know what that means. The opposite of providing source code, I guess? It’s not that hard. There is either source code or not. It doesn’t have to “jibe” with anything.

Valve uses their own packages and repo for Steam OS. And besides the very few packages that they rarely update in public, everything else is not to be found, but there are definitely plenty of other GPL programs. Maybe you know where they are :)

Quoting: Purple Library GuyDo you claim that they have made changes to Arch files they downloaded, but kept the nature of the changes secret? Do you claim they have re-licensed GPL Linux code they are using to some closed license? Do you claim they have bribed the FSF not to sue them for any of this? What exactly are you saying?

That’s literally… none sense. Only the copyright owner can do that, so they’re just violating it. They can only keep this up till one of them threatens vlave. See Trump’s Mastodon clone.

Gee. Three paragraphs without really saying anything. It would appear you don't actually know anything about whether your claim is true or what it would mean if it was.

So. The FSF, the Free Software Foundation, holds the copyrights for important chunks of Linux. You know how some people like to call Linux Gnu/Linux? So yeah, the FSF holds the copyright to the GNU part, and a few other things, and have I believe also been asked by some other copyright holders to help them out with copyright enforcement in the event of infringement. So if someone began to distribute a version of Linux in a way that violated the GPL, that would be General Public License, a copyright license used by Linux which does not allow non-free releases of it, it is very likely that lawyers from the FSF would be in touch with them. Initially to explain to them how the license worked and why their actions put them in violation and how they could go about complying with the license, but if that failed things would get sticky. They have done this before; it is one of the key functions of the Free Software Foundation.

For the non-GNU portions of Linux, or for KDE, there are other foundations, in the case of Linux with fairly deep pockets, which would be likely to take similar action. Then there's Linus himself, who wouldn't be amused, takes no shit, and who may be personally only moderately prosperous but if he felt the need to crowdfund some lawyer's fees to defend the GPL he would suddenly have many, many dollars. So, nobody can really release a non-free Linux distribution without getting in a heap of legal trouble (and having it hit industry headlines pretty damn fast).

Valve certainly wouldn't be stupid enough to try it. So in the absence of some fairly serious and specific information I am concluding you are mistaken.

Quoting: Purple Library Guy

Quoting: fireplace

Quoting: Purple Library GuyYeah, you're asserting that. But it doesn't jibe with anything else I've ever heard about the current SteamOS. So I'm asking you to provide a bit of chapter and verse about, in what sense, in what way, is Valve "keeping most of the distro closed source"? What is it you claim they are doing?

I seriously don’t know what that means. The opposite of providing source code, I guess? It’s not that hard. There is either source code or not. It doesn’t have to “jibe” with anything.

Valve uses their own packages and repo for Steam OS. And besides the very few packages that they rarely update in public, everything else is not to be found, but there are definitely plenty of other GPL programs. Maybe you know where they are :)

Quoting: Purple Library GuyDo you claim that they have made changes to Arch files they downloaded, but kept the nature of the changes secret? Do you claim they have re-licensed GPL Linux code they are using to some closed license? Do you claim they have bribed the FSF not to sue them for any of this? What exactly are you saying?

That’s literally… none sense. Only the copyright owner can do that, so they’re just violating it. They can only keep this up till one of them threatens vlave. See Trump’s Mastodon clone.

Gee. Three paragraphs without really saying anything. It would appear you don't actually know anything about whether your claim is true or what it would mean if it was.

So. The FSF, the Free Software Foundation, holds the copyrights for important chunks of Linux. You know how some people like to call Linux Gnu/Linux? So yeah, the FSF holds the copyright to the GNU part, and a few other things, and have I believe also been asked by some other copyright holders to help them out with copyright enforcement in the event of infringement. So if someone began to distribute a version of Linux in a way that violated the GPL, that would be General Public License, a copyright license used by Linux which does not allow non-free releases of it, it is very likely that lawyers from the FSF would be in touch with them. Initially to explain to them how the license worked and why their actions put them in violation and how they could go about complying with the license, but if that failed things would get sticky. They have done this before; it is one of the key functions of the Free Software Foundation.

For the non-GNU portions of Linux, or for KDE, there are other foundations, in the case of Linux with fairly deep pockets, which would be likely to take similar action. Then there's Linus himself, who wouldn't be amused, takes no shit, and who may be personally only moderately prosperous but if he felt the need to crowdfund some lawyer's fees to defend the GPL he would suddenly have many, many dollars. So, nobody can really release a non-free Linux distribution without getting in a heap of legal trouble (and having it hit industry headlines pretty damn fast).

Valve certainly wouldn't be stupid enough to try it. So in the absence of some fairly serious and specific information I am concluding you are mistaken.

Why do you keep bringing the FSF up? How are they relevant here? If I own the copyright of a project I can do whatever I want with it even if I distribute it with GPL. I can get legal help from them, or my lawyer, or whoever I want. But fact of the matter is that it's my copyright, not the FSF's.

Quoting: Purple Library GuyValve certainly wouldn't be stupid enough to try it. So in the absence of some fairly serious and specific information I am concluding you are mistaken.

You got that right, there is some serious information missing that are called source code, and so far the only thing you've provided are words. But apparently I'm mistaken because
Purple Library Guy concluded so on the basis that "Valve wouldn't be stupid."

btw, it was right here all along. everything's back in order now :)

https://steamdeck-packages.steamos.cloud/archlinux-mirror/

Quoting: fireplaceWhy do you keep bringing the FSF up? How are they relevant here? If I own the copyright

Try reading for comprehension, like the bit where I explained how they hold some of the copyrights involved.


Last edited by Purple Library Guy on 23 January 2023 at 3:56 pm UTC

Quoting: fireplacebtw, it was right here all along. everything's back in order now :)

https://steamdeck-packages.steamos.cloud/archlinux-mirror/

So . . . you were completely wrong, there was no basis for what you said, I was completely right in assuming you had no such basis, and yet to the end of your comments you were still coming off all arrogant at me?

That's impressive, in a perverse way.

Quoting: fireplacebtw, it was right here all along. everything's back in order now :)

https://steamdeck-packages.steamos.cloud/archlinux-mirror/

Yeah, but... you still haven't explained how the OS itself is non-free...

All the bits that need to be free are. Immutable operating systems isn't a new thing. The AtariVCS uses a similar set up, and it is based upon apertis, https://www.apertis.org/

Slap on an open source operating system, slap on your own UI, and you have a system. Hell, Android does the same thing, and been doing it for years. Just because you are using a Linux kernel doesn't mean you can't have a closed source UI on top of it.

Also of note, the GamepadUI is not always running in the background on the Steam Deck, you can run in desktop mode without it.

Quoting: Purple Library GuyTry reading for comprehension, like the bit where I explained how they hold some of the copyrights involved.

You should try reading for comprehension. They had zero relevance in the discussion aside from the fact that they wrote GPL. And even then, not everything in steamos is GPL…

Quoting: Purple Library GuySo . . . you were completely wrong, there was no basis for what you said, I was completely right in assuming you had no such basis, and yet to the end of your comments you were still coming off all arrogant at me?

That's impressive, in a perverse way.

I stated what was available. You’re the one making claims that it’s free with no basis (no source packages). I kept looking everywhere to find these while you kept repeating the equivalent of “yeah valve is big, so we don’t question it.”

Quoting: slaapliedjeYeah, but... you still haven't explained how the OS itself is non-free...

Didn’t you see those source packages from the link? That’s free in my book.

Just putting this link here, for the sake of license:
https://store.steampowered.com/steamos/download/?ver=steamdeck&snr=

This conversation is not going anywhere, stop wasting your lives and move on.