Request of removal of xv

guanx · 09-27-2012, 04:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dr.trev

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

Simply "display image.jpg" is enough.

But the problem is that "xv" is two letters and "display" is seven -- not so convenient to use in the midnight commander command line.

Didier Spaier · 09-27-2012, 04:13 AM

@Hendri2201: You are spamming threads at random seemingly to draw attention on a non related problem you have. This is has been reported.

commandlinegamer · 09-27-2012, 04:42 AM

I don't have a problem with xv; I might not have used it in years, but if it ain't broke why remove it? If we're gonna get rid of duplicated software, what about the umpteen different shells, window managers, etc?

Anyway, people are free to install or not. One of the good things about Slack is you can roll your own version via the tagfiles.

Slackware may not be completely "free software", but until and unless that becomes policy I don't we need worry about it.

jprzybylski · 09-27-2012, 04:50 AM

Quote:

Slackware has the two usual problems: there's no clear policy about what software can be included, and nonfree blobs are included in Linux, the kernel. It also ships with the nonfree image-viewing program xv. Of course, with no firm policy in place, there might be other nonfree software included that we missed.

I don't think Slackware as a whole actually cares about any of these points. If that puts Slackware on The List, then so be it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by comet.berkeley

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

Try xpaint. Despite the name, it's actually kept up to date. Might not have ALL the features xv has (definitely not as much as gimp) but it's good for a quick draw.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Celyr

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).

Because people still use xv. It doesn't really matter if it has that new FOSS smell or not, although I would like to know the circumstances that got xv in as an image viewer - it seems to be a bit of a different choice for a Linux distro.

This has absolutely no hate towards GNU or rms - it's just simply an issue that I don't think matters much. Some other distro's care quite a lot about Free Software (Debian comes to mind, despite it making it to the same The List), but I think having an orthodox, usable system trumps licensing issues in this case.

For the record, I use feh.

BlackRider · 09-27-2012, 05:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Didier Spaier

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?

Sometimes you have not much room to spare.

Sometimes you have not the desire to keep additional software in the system, because it would mean having to update it every time a security flaw was discovered (well, it depends on your environment). Just recompiling the kernel and taking out undesired functionality of it has saved me lots of kernel upgrades, as many security defects affected modules I didn't compile.

Sometimes you want to reduce the size of your backups and the time it takes to make them.

Sometimes you absolutely know you are not going to use the software, so what is the rationale to install it?

Didier Spaier · 09-27-2012, 05:43 AM

@BlackRider: granted, I should have stated that there's no rationale doing that for me. I do admit that there can be one for others.

As a side note, as I use rsync for backing-up on an 1 TB external hard disk, that's not an issue here. Oh, and before somebody point it out: yes, I am aware that using an external HDD for back-ups can be considered unsafe.

Kallaste · 09-27-2012, 05:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jprzybylski

I don't think Slackware as a whole actually cares about any of these points. If that puts Slackware on The List, then so be it.

If PV and the rest of the Slackware team did care about the politics of this--at least enough to put it into practice--then xv wouldn't be there in the first place. And yet it is. So why discuss it? If a software developer feels the need to adopt FOSS principles to the degree that they can get all warm and fuzzy with the FSF and GNU and whomever else, then fine. They are free to write or adopt any program or code that makes that happen. But it is in my opinion in poor taste to come into an already highly established distro with principles of its own and say, Gee, guys, you need to stop using this code, because you are not conforming to my own extremely controversial set of moral principles. Keep your politics off my operating system!

With all due respect, I believe that if the OP wants to use a "free" distro, he is free to pick one off the list which GNU has so graciously provided.

bobzilla · 09-27-2012, 06:00 AM

I don't use it actively, but it proved usefull from time to time. It's low on dependencies and can be installed even on the most minimal X11 setups. And is probably and suprisingly one of the rare image viewers that can show X11 bitmaps correctly.

Anyway, that won't make Slackware GNU clean. So I don't see the point.

Btw, you can easily customize your installation from the install menu or with custom tag files.

kikinovak · 09-27-2012, 06:01 AM

There has been one 100 % libre Slackware derivative a couple of years ago: Kongoni GNU/Linux. Basically it was a Slackware + ports system. The whole distribution lasted less than a year, then it was more or less abandoned, and now exists in a semi-comatose state. As was to be expected, the same questions kept popping up on the Kongoni forum. How do I play Flash videos? How do I get my wireless NIC to work? It was only a matter of time before the vast majority of users decided to change their ideals in favour of a fully working machine.

H_TeXMeX_H · 09-27-2012, 06:07 AM

I don't really care, because I don't use it and don't install it. If I had to vote, I would remove it, because there exist FLOSS alternatives ... imagemagick, graphicsmagick, etc.

IMO, proprietary software should be avoided if equivalent FLOSS alternatives exist. Of course, if I really wanted to deny your freedom of choice I would somehow make it impossible to install xv ... which I would not do. You are free to install xv if you like, but I would say that to keep an OS secure, free, open, etc. you should avoid proprietary software if FLOSS alternatives exist. Is there any particular reason to use proprietary software over FLOSS ? I only see reasons to use FLOSS, and not proprietary software.

RMS is extreme in some of his statements and points of view, but without him there would be not GNU, and probably no Linux either. This does NOT mean that Slackware should strive to live up to his stringent standards, I don't think there is a point to that. However, one should favor FLOSS over proprietary software as long as they are relatively equivalent. As such, getting rid of xv is not a bad idea.

EDIT:
Imagine if proprietary software would be favored over FLOSS ... what will result is Window$ with a Linux kernel.

EDIT2:
See the below post, it seems that xv is actually FLOSS, I was just confused.

andrew.46 · 09-27-2012, 06:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by /dev/random

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.

As a sidenote: I use xv during the creation/conversion of subtitles:

http://www.andrews-corner.org/fist.html#subtitles

Didier Spaier · 09-27-2012, 06:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by H_TeXMeX_H

...I would say that to keep an OS secure, free, open, etc. you should avoid proprietary software if FLOSS alternatives exist.

You are mixing criteria for choice here.

As "secure" is high in my own hierarchy I tend to privilege "open source" over other features. As xv is open source I have no problem using it. The original author, John Bradley, go as far as request that you get the source *before* you buy a license.

H_TeXMeX_H · 09-27-2012, 07:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Didier Spaier

You are mixing criteria for choice here.

As "secure" is high in my own hierarchy I tend to privilege "open source" over other features. As xv is open source I have no problem using it. The original author, John Bradley, go as far as request that you get the source *before* you buy a license.

Ah, ok I was confused by the site and the payments.

Here's the license I found along with the source:

Code:

/* Copyright Notice
 * ================
 * Copyright 1989, 1994 by John Bradley
 * 
 * Permission to copy and distribute XV in its entirety, for non-commercial 
 * purposes, is hereby granted without fee, provided that this license 
 * information and copyright notice appear unmodified in all copies.
 * 
 * Note that distributing XV 'bundled' in with any product is considered
 * to be a 'commercial purpose'.
 *
 * Also note that any copies of XV that are distributed must be built
 * and/or configured to be in their 'unregistered copy' mode, so that it
 * is made obvious to the user that XV is shareware, and that they should
 * consider donating, or at least reading this License Info.
 * 
 * The software may be modified for your own purposes, but modified
 * versions may not be distributed without prior consent of the author.
 * 
 * This software is provided 'as-is', without any express or implied
 * warranty.  In no event will the author be held liable for any damages
 * arising from the use of this software.
 * 
 * If you would like to do something with XV that this copyright
 * prohibits (such as distributing it with a commercial product, 
 * using portions of the source in some other program, etc.), please
 * contact the author (preferably via email).  Arrangements can
 * probably be worked out.
 *
 * XV is shareware for PERSONAL USE only.  You may use XV for your own
 * amusement, and if you find it nifty, useful, generally cool, or of
 * some value to you, your non-deductable donation would be greatly
 * appreciated.  $25 is the suggested donation, though, of course,
 * larger donations are quite welcome.  Folks who donate $25 or more
 * can receive a Real Nice bound copy of the XV manual for no extra
 * charge.
 * 
 * Commercial, government, and institutional users must register their
 * copies of XV, for the price of $25 per workstation/X terminal or per
 * XV user, whichever is less.  Note that it does NOT say 'simultaneous user',
 * but rather, the total number of people who use XV on any sort of 
 * recurring basis. Site licenses are available (and recommended) for those 
 * who wish to run XV on a large (>10) number of machines.  
 * Contact the author for more details.
 *
 * The author may be contacted via:
 *
 *    Email:    bradley@cis.upenn.edu       (preferred!)
 *
 *    FAX:      (610) 520-2042
 *
 *    US Mail:  John Bradley
 *              1053 Floyd Terrace
 *              Bryn Mawr, PA  19010
 *
 * The author may not be contacted by (voice) phone.  Please don't try.
 *
 */

To me it seems that it actually is FLOSS, so I correct my previous statement, there is no reason to remove xv. Sorry for the confusion.

Kallaste · 09-27-2012, 07:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by H_TeXMeX_H

EDIT:
Imagine if proprietary software would be favored over FLOSS ... what will result is Window$ with a Linux kernel.

That is a distortion. We are talking about software that can be freely distributed as long as you do not directly make a profit from it. That's hardly Microsoft Windows.

Edit: just saw your newest reply, nevermind. I think we're on the same page about the licensing.

H_TeXMeX_H · 09-27-2012, 07:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BloomingNutria

That is a distortion. We are talking about software that can be freely distributed as long as you do not directly make a profit from it. That's hardly Microsoft Windows.

Edit: just saw your newest reply, nevermind. I think we're on the same page about the licensing.

You're right, it's similar to the creative commons non-commercial license, which is a good license IMO, I mean I would use it if I released software.