Re: FSDG status of chromium

2018-09-25 Thread Marius Bakke
bill-auger writes: > On Tue, 25 Sep 2018 21:08:42 +0200 Marius wrote: >> Can you elaborate on what exactly the issue is? I am aware that >> Chromium bundles non-free sources >> That leaves "first party" source files. Admittedly I haven't audited >> all of those other than superficial grepping.

Re: FSDG status of chromium

2018-09-25 Thread bill-auger
On Tue, 25 Sep 2018 21:08:42 +0200 Marius wrote: > Can you elaborate on what exactly the issue is? I am aware that > Chromium bundles non-free sources > That leaves "first party" source files. Admittedly I haven't audited > all of those other than superficial grepping. Do you know whether >

Re: FSDG status of chromium

2018-09-25 Thread Marius Bakke
Brett Gilio writes: > On 09/25/2018 03:22 PM, Andreas Enge wrote: >> >> So at least it is apparently possible to get a working binary with only >> free sources. >> >> Andreas >> >> > > Hi Andreas, > > Can you verify that the debian package is only working with free > sources, and not simply

Re: FSDG status of chromium

2018-09-25 Thread Brett Gilio
On 09/25/2018 03:22 PM, Andreas Enge wrote: So at least it is apparently possible to get a working binary with only free sources. Andreas Hi Andreas, Can you verify that the debian package is only working with free sources, and not simply reiterating the misconception that the chromium

Re: FSDG status of chromium

2018-09-25 Thread Marius Bakke
Andreas Enge writes: > Hello, > > On Tue, Sep 25, 2018 at 09:08:42PM +0200, Marius Bakke wrote: >> That leaves "first party" source files. Admittedly I haven't audited >> all of those other than superficial grepping. Do you know whether parts >> of Chromium are considered non-free? I noticed

Re: FSDG status of chromium

2018-09-25 Thread Andreas Enge
Hello, On Tue, Sep 25, 2018 at 09:08:42PM +0200, Marius Bakke wrote: > That leaves "first party" source files. Admittedly I haven't audited > all of those other than superficial grepping. Do you know whether parts > of Chromium are considered non-free? I noticed a number of files are > missing

~/.guix-profile/manifest usage with "guix package -m [manifest]" / "guix pack -m [manifest]" etc..

2018-09-25 Thread YOANN P
Hi there, I was thinking than "~/.guix-profile/manifest" was a valid manifest file due to his name, but it seems not that is the case from the error i've got https://pastebin.com/Z7h2t5mL After some search , i've finally understand that the instantiated profile couldn't be used as source

Re: FSDG status of chromium

2018-09-25 Thread Marius Bakke
Hello Bill, bill-auger writes: > regarding the recent proposal of introducing chromium into guix; i have > done a lot of research and participated in much discussion regarding > it's fitness regarding the FSDG; and i am quite surprised to see it so > much as suggest into guix > > for the

Re: FSDG status of chromium

2018-09-25 Thread Clément Lassieur
Hi Bill, Thank you very much for letting us know about these issues! I'm glad Marius put it in a channel then, it was a wise decision. I hope we'll make it free at some point, so that it can be integrated into Guix. But there is Icecat 60 now (thanks to everyone involved!), so it's not that

Fwd: FSDG status of chromium

2018-09-25 Thread Brett Gilio
Forwarded Message Subject:FSDG status of chromium Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2018 09:29:22 -0400 From: bill-auger Organization: peers.community To: guix-devel@gnu.org regarding the recent proposal of introducing chromium into guix; i have done a lot of research

FSDG status of chromium

2018-09-25 Thread bill-auger
regarding the recent proposal of introducing chromium into guix; i have done a lot of research and participated in much discussion regarding it's fitness regarding the FSDG; and i am quite surprised to see it so much as suggest into guix for the benefit of anyone who does not not know, the