The GNU and GPL is not true freedom, it's more like socialism/communism in practice for software. You have to share sources when you have GPL with everyone. You can not use software that isn't compatible with the GPL like CDDL, and you the developer have no real control what goes on with your software such as ports and forks.

xv's license is restrictive because it does not allow modifications of source.

Also the developer does not seem to care about the outdated license. If the s/w has any use, then it should be dual licensed.

There is risk associated with unused s/w on any system as well ...
So xv should be dropped.

I agree with this and have been using xv for more than a decade.

I've used Gimp but it is not as simple to use as xv.

Is there a better simpler graphics editor than xv or gimp that does everything that xv does?

If it ain't broken don't fix it.

I like xv and have been using it just every now and then for over a decade. Keep it. Slackware is my os not my political platform. If stallman et al are unhappy, astonishingly enough, i can live with that

Using the Hurd's lack of mature development as a means to dismiss RMS and the GNU crew is unfair. It has been mentioned that advancing the development of the Hurd is basically useless - and has been for a long time - because at this point (and for a while...) it is simply impossible to have a free competitor to Linux. Imagine if the Hurd did mature a bit: who would contribute to it rather than to Linux? Nobody would; not because the Hurd is a failure, but rather because Linux boomed and became wildly successful. It was one or the other, and it was Linux.

Nobody is required to use GPL software and therefore nobody is required to agree unless they publicly distribute the changes they make to the code. Users are free to participate or free not to participate. Bottom line is nobody gets less than they bargained and some might get more. How more free can you get?

Off topic, I've read a bit of the 19th century socialist and communist writers. Their theories were based upon free association and voluntary exchange (just like the GPL BTW). The nonsense that is titled today as socialism or communism is nothing more than Yet Another Face of Statism --- a philosophy based upon violence, threat of violence, and the use of forcible coercion.

3 members found this post helpful.

I think there is a bit of irony in that the only "free" system the FSF would recommend is one that could possibly only be implemented when the system doesn't make it easy to install anything that doesn't fit in their narrow definition of free. That doesn't sound like a "free" thing to me.

I think the best software licenses do two things:
1) Builds trust
2) Doesn't restrict individuals use

Copyright law is a funny thing, but it makes sense to help promote creative producers. Of course, copyright is too abstract to fit all things perfectly, so licensing/law interpretation fits the gap. Unfortunately, some people infringe on the spirit of copyright and take it to extremes that violates trust or takes the usefulness out of an art.

I believe the xv shareware license and the added trust by providing the source makes it a good choice of a program. After all, after all these years, if there was no source, fewer people would have trusted it, and it would have likely been pulled from slackware because it likely would have stopped working by now. You also still have a choice in using it or not, and that is also just as important.

Now whether or not the usefulness/age of the program is one thing, but the other part of it not being free enough is ridiculous because my freedom has never been restricted. I also believe in a programmer's right to make money by his art too.

Didn't the author of XV allow patch submissions to be sent to him for inclusion?

I remember he allowed 3rd party patches to be maintained because 3.10a was the last official release, and since then many patches have been made, but none ever official.

display(1) has no equivalent to xv's -maxpect, visual schnauwzer, or color editor, all of which I use frequently (and I hardly ever use xv *without* -maxpect).. Until such a time that there is something that can actually replace xv, please, let us keep it.

Old is not necessarily bad (else why would we be using the world's oldest surviving linux distribution?).

3 members found this post helpful.

I tried to add a pool the the thread editing the first post but i was not able to. Do we need a moderator for that ?

It was iOS.

Actually I use every software I need to get the work I have to do done. The point it's a bit different. I consider xv a piece of outdated software that is fully replaced by other packages (but I may be wrong). What I want to say is, considering everything is it worth to keep ?


Gimp can't do that ?

Whether xv remains in Slackware or not is probably up to Pat. The kernel also includes the firmware blobs, so anyone who removes xv will presumably be rebuilding their kernel to remove those as well.

If you read the list on the previous page, even Debian's APT is listed... because the sample sources.list included some repos which point to non-free software... the most common usage for non-free in Debian is to get the kernel microcode blobs. Somewhat ironically, prior to the Debian project's removal of the firmware blobs from their kernels, most users were only adding non-free for stuff like the proprietary GPU drivers and flash, now most users just go for it by default, because 9 times out of 10, your GPU, wireless adapter or some other hardware requires something in there...

Whoa, for a second there I thought this was a thread about removing xz and I was about to rush in with a WTF, no way!

Anyway, now that my heartbeat has stopped racing on to the real question. Personally no I wouldn't remove xv. It is a handy tool that this nice to have in the default install and as others have pointed out removing it would not make Slackware 'free' in the GNU sense anyway. So you'll need another reason if you want it removed.

That all said, regarding this point:

I prefer feh.

When I install a new Slackware version and surf the packages menu removing stuff, Xv is one of the packages that never makes into the final install.

Those who want it can take it in. Those who want it not can leave it out. I don't think it is a big deal whenever it is included in the main distribution or not, as if there is demand for it, someone will find a way to install it, officially or otherwise.

When I install a new Slackware version I don't remove anything. I have enough room on my laptop's hard disk, so what would be the rationale?

1 members found this post helpful.