- cross-posted to:
- linux@lemmy.ml
- linux@lemmy.ml
- cross-posted to:
- linux@lemmy.ml
- linux@lemmy.ml
We are excited to announce that Arch Linux is entering into a direct collaboration with Valve. Valve is generously providing backing for two critical projects that will have a huge impact on our distribution: a build service infrastructure and a secure signing enclave. By supporting work on a freelance basis for these topics, Valve enables us to work on them without being limited solely by the free time of our volunteers.
This opportunity allows us to address some of the biggest outstanding challenges we have been facing for a while. The collaboration will speed-up the progress that would otherwise take much longer for us to achieve, and will ultimately unblock us from finally pursuing some of our planned endeavors. We are incredibly grateful for Valve to make this possible and for their explicit commitment to help and support Arch Linux.
These projects will follow our usual development and consensus-building workflows. [RFCs] will be created for any wide-ranging changes. Discussions on this mailing list as well as issue, milestone and epic planning in our GitLab will provide transparency and insight into the work. We believe this collaboration will greatly benefit Arch Linux, and are looking forward to share further development on this mailing list as work progresses.
I’m just waiting for some FOSS purist to find fault in this.
FOSS purists are too busy malding over systemd, and Steam being proprietary DRM, and games being closed-source.
Better not tell anyone about DRM-free open source games on Steam then. Wouldn’t wanna burst anyone’s bubble.
I want to give the perspective that from a technical standpoint, even free games on steam require the steam client to install and while the license to play the game is free steam is licensing your account to own the game. The game doesn’t require steam after that and usually this means the game is available elsewhere, but for the specific case of “free games on steam”, steam is still acting to manage digital rights.
That’s not exactly DRM though, that’s just only supporting one distribution method.
You have to use GOG’s servers to get games you purchased from them as well, that doesn’t make that DRM, it just means that’s the only distribution method they support.
To me, DRM has absolutely nothing to do with delivery, it’s all about use once you have it.
If we’re talking about Digital Rights Management, steam is acting in that role to manage your digital rights on the steam platform. They could allow you to download games without requiring an account login or client download, and they instead do not. They could allow you to download free games from the client or the website without requiring a login, and they do not.
GOG’s website is also DRM for the same reason. It won’t allow you to download games that aren’t licensed digitally to your account, including free games. GOG has DRM-free games and installers fairly universally beyond that first check, and that means you can download them from alternative sources, but downloading from GOG 100% requires interacting with DRM.
To be direct: I don’t care that Steam is DRM because it’s minimally invasive and I currently trust Valve enough to use an operating system made by them as a daily driver. There are very few companies I’d say that about.
The Steam client is DRM at its core, even if it’s acceptable DRM. I think it’s important not to allow your thinking to shift from the reality that it is DRM just because it’s personally acceptable.
I don’t mind it, I will simp for Valve all day long, and if a company requires you to log in to an account with their server to check whether your account has the digital entitlement to then allow you to access a file or not, that’s digital rights management.
When people say “DRM,” they almost always mean the check when the game launches, not the one-time license check when you download a game. Whether they use their Steam platform or a webpage, I honestly don’t see much of a difference, provided you end up with a DRM-free product at the end.
But yes, technically Valve is verifying that you own the game, but it’s not really what is meant when the average person says “DRM.”
Means you can also zip the folder and archive it for later.
They do still have some basic protection. Steam’s default, loose, DRM requires you to launch Steam when you open a game’s executable.
No, definitely not. When games don’t integrate SteamWorks features such as friends lists (or were written by people who accounted for the features to just not be available instead of outright failing), they don’t need Steam.
When the games use GPLed engines, Steam integration may not be legally possible anyway.
Off the top of my head I can immediately name Krita, the painting app by KDE whose Steam release has no Steam integration and runs just fine without.
Yesnt. I certainly played games on school pcs (Like HL2, Hotline Miami 2. Other students played Binding of Isaac and other smaller or rogue-like) and only with executables I got from Steam.
That may have been earlier than Steam’s DRM. Nowadays you need to copy a steam emulator (a few DLLs) into the executables folder as well before sharing.
I use OpenRC, and play OpenTTD, OpenRA and Tux Racer.
OpenTTD is on Steam, btw
Don’t you play cdda?
Not really, I might give it a go.
Though I’m not sure it’s a game for me.
Leaving the others aside, the last one is quite unsurprising considering the meaning of the acronym…
systemd controversy was never about purism. It was about some piece of software unasked for by the majority of users, including absolute majority of desktop users, being pushed with juvenile means and those disliking that being called words like “luddite”.
It still is, believe me or not, I probably wouldn’t find anything wrong in systemd (or pulseaudio, or Gnome 3) were it not pushed with that arrogant Apple or MS like approach of “we’ve rolled out this new feature in our system, and you’re a weirdo”.
Same reason I liked the very theoretical idea of something like Wayland, but Wayland itself I don’t want to even try. Except for the possibility of something like CWM existing for it, that I can set up in 15 minutes with 20 lines of config file without levels of brackets etc (there is actual research as to how many levels various primates can process, chimps can’t go above 3, and I’m apparently as intelligent as a chimp, because neither can I in practice, but so is Linus Torvalds with his famous quote about more than 3 levels of indentation ; the issue is that I don’t want to strain my mind with that either when with a few X11 window managers I don’t have to). There’s none I’ve found yet.
Their politics trouble me. The technical parts may be sometimes arguable, but what isn’t, our world is created with mistakes as building blocks. But I’ve started using Unix-like systems for the feeling of freedom and patience, and while RH stuff doesn’t take away the former, it infringes on the latter.
While I agree with the politics part (especially the notorious suspend-then-hibernate thing), I do see why a lot of devs would ask for systemd-init: to just bundle 1 kind of service instead of a gazillion. Same thing with Flatpak and not needing to build a gazillion binaries for every distro that hasn’t packaged you, even though FLatpak’s sandboxing away from native libraries is something I just don’t like.
How would that work? There were N init systems with one “main” one, now there are N+1 init systems with one “main” one, just different.
Anyway, init systems for developers being problematic seem for me a nonexistent problem. Writing a systemd unit takes less time than writing this comment with tea and buckwheat with milk as a distraction. Writing a sysvinit script takes something like that too. Same with BSD inits. Same with openrc.
While combined they take some time, packagers can do that. And even if they can’t, time spent trying to persuade others that systemd makes things easier is orders of magnitude bigger than time spent writing service scripts\templates\units.
As per Arch wiki
If you’re a FOSS purist, you shouldn’t run Arch ethier way, because providing proprietary software for those who want it is one of the core principles of Arch.
You can use Parabola instead, which is basically FOSS-only Arch. This funding would likely also benefit Parabola indirectly.