-   Slackware (
-   -   Request of removal of xv (

Celyr 09-26-2012 05:44 PM

Request of removal of xv
While I think of stallman being a bit too much integralist, read:

As reference I think that xv is actually pointless, I don't think we need it anymore, so why not to remove it and be a little bit more free ?(even in the myopic gnu view).

jtsn 09-26-2012 06:44 PM

If xv keeps the fundamentalists away from Slackware, then Slackware should retain xv at all costs.

Slackware is a great operating system for me - not a political movement - let's keep it that way.

dugan 09-26-2012 06:53 PM

I don't use xv, but that doesn't mean I don't think anyone else does.

Why not add a poll to this thread? "Do you use xv? YES or NO"

sycamorex 09-26-2012 07:02 PM


Originally Posted by Celyr (Post 4790156)
I don't think we need it anymore, so why not to remove it and be a little bit more free ?

I find it rather funny bearing in mind that the above request was posted on MacOS (sorry, couldn't resist) LOL.

Back on topic: xv is not the only non-free piece of software that I use on Slackware so it doesn't bother me.

Didier Spaier 09-26-2012 07:06 PM

@Celyr: If you feel guilty to use it for free (which is allowed by John Bradley, as long as you don't make a professional usage of it), just purchase a license or don't use it.

Other than that xv have been part of Slackware for a so long time that it won the right to stay there for a some more years ;)

And if we were to remove a package from Slackware every time someone find it useless it would end up including only the Linux kernel.

Woodsman 09-26-2012 07:10 PM

A strict definition of "nonfree" means quite a bit of popular "free/libre" software is actually non-free:

There is one freedom "the four freedoms" do not address: the freedom to choose. Users are free to use free or nonfree software. If they choose the former then they accept the terms of usage of the respective license. If they choose the latter then they accept the terms of usage of the respective license.

In all, I believe free/libre software promotes a better planet, but to be free myself, I can't deny the freedom to choose for other people.

With that said, I suppose Pat needs to know how many Slackware users still use xv. Slackware is packaged with several image viewers and image manipulation programs, but perhaps xv continues to fill a specific void that non xv users are unaware.

/dev/random 09-26-2012 07:20 PM

I don't think anyone really listens to RMS and the GNU crew and takes their ideals.
I mean look at hurd, if GNU is so great why has it taken them 22 years just to get a functional kernel going?
FOSS is a great idea on paper, but by the time free implementations are available, the hardware that they were meant to run on is ancient. I mean Linux ran on my 386 and my 486... hurd runs on my i7... see the issue here?

I don't know who really uses xv anymore but if Pat has still included it, then their has to be some demand for it.

I like Slackware for home use, but in the environment I work in it is necessary to have a package manager that can fetch updates, apply them without any issue, up time is critical for me, we use SLES at work for most of our servers.

I have Slack boxes at work however, just because it's easy to hack and make it do what you want it to do. (I refuse for the most part to work in a windows environment)

Habitual 09-26-2012 07:24 PM


sudo removepkg xv

ljb643 09-26-2012 07:30 PM

I was leaning towards agreeing with the OP - I think xv could be dropped, if there was a good reason to do so. Then I followed the link to and read that Slackware has lots of company on this list. And that dropping xv alone won't grant Slackware their approval. And that they disapprove some distributions because "they make it too easy to install non-free software". Should software now be written to make it difficult to do things GNU disapproves of? That sounds like an awful idea. So - yes, keep xv.

D1ver 09-26-2012 07:58 PM

I don't think it is a good idea.. Removing xv alone wouldn't satisfy the 'completely free' requirements, and if we removed everything we needed too then Slackware just wouldn't be Slackware.

xv seems handy as a very light and fast image viewer for use from the command line. It also can handle displaying images from stdin (eg. 'cat foo.jpg | xv -'), which I don't think the other viewers included in Slackware can do.

FeyFre 09-26-2012 08:13 PM

Does it hurts anybody?
Does it makes Slackware unusable?
Does it nailed to Slackware itself so it cannot be removed?
Is there any better replacement for it?
Does it make any unrecoverable problems?
I don't think there is at least one positive answer.

rouvas 09-26-2012 08:30 PM

I use xv quite frequently and have been doing for the last decade or so.
In my opinion, nothing comes closer to the ease of use that xv provides for a quick pick at an image.
I would definitely do NOT want xv to be removed, especially based on some vague puritan views.

dr.trev 09-26-2012 09:21 PM


Originally Posted by D1ver (Post 4790224)
It also can handle displaying images from stdin (eg. 'cat foo.jpg | xv -'), which I don't think the other viewers included in Slackware can do.

There's 'display', part of image magick: 'cat foo.jpg | display'. It also has many of xv's other features.

ReaperX7 09-26-2012 09:46 PM

XV is shareware that can be legally redistributed as long as it retains the license agreement, source package, and does not exclude the option to purchase a license for commercial level usage.

Stallman and GPL have tons of fundamental flaws it's not even honestly worth arguing over.

Kallaste 09-26-2012 09:56 PM

For no practical reason, the Slackware team is supposed to remove a piece of software people use and allow GNU to set the standards for what they are allowed to include in the future?

If it were me, I'd say Stallman's freedom is too restrictive. :)

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:30 AM.