bug#38360: Retroarch does violate FSDG

2019-11-30 Thread Arne Babenhauserheide
Mark H Weaver writes: > Hi Arne, > > Arne Babenhauserheide writes: > >> Tobias Geerinckx-Rice via Bug reports for GNU Guix writes: >> >>> Guix, >>> >>> This is not about Schrödinger's proprietary-until-proven-innocent >>> binary. The Updater includes at least two cores explicitly marked as

bug#38360: Retroarch does violate FSDG

2019-11-29 Thread Mark H Weaver
Hi Arne, Arne Babenhauserheide writes: > Tobias Geerinckx-Rice via Bug reports for GNU Guix writes: > >> Guix, >> >> This is not about Schrödinger's proprietary-until-proven-innocent >> binary. The Updater includes at least two cores explicitly marked as >> non-free in Debian: >> >>

bug#38360: Retroarch does violate FSDG

2019-11-28 Thread Arne Babenhauserheide
Tobias Geerinckx-Rice via Bug reports for GNU Guix writes: > Guix, > > This is not about Schrödinger's proprietary-until-proven-innocent > binary. The Updater includes at least two cores explicitly marked as > non-free in Debian: > > libretro-genesisplusgx > libretro-snes9x In non-free

bug#38360: Retroarch does violate FSDG

2019-11-27 Thread Tobias Geerinckx-Rice via Bug reports for GNU Guix
Guix, This is not about Schrödinger's proprietary-until-proven-innocent binary. The Updater includes at least two cores explicitly marked as non-free in Debian: libretro-genesisplusgx libretro-snes9x Disabling the Updater seems like an open & shut case to me. This is a shame, because I