Duckstation(one of the most popular PS1 Emulators) dev plans on eventually dropping Linux support due to Linux users, especially Arch Linux users.
-
In his defense, a LOT of emulator maintainers have this sentiment about RetroArch, so I can't fault him too much for that one in particular.
I do get the sense this is more common with emulators in general.
In his defense, a LOT of emulator maintainers have this sentiment about RetroArch, so I can’t fault him too much for that one in particular.
Then release your emulator as a paid app for iOS with a closed source and go nuts. Otherwise it's like going out naked during a rainy day and shouting you're getting wet.
-
He's upset because people are bothering him for packages that are out of his control. A similar thing happened recently with OBS where a distro was packaging it in a non-standard way, iirc.
Nah man I maintain a few decently sized packages on github and refusing support etc is perfectly normal but generally you don't go on this toxic rant and just say "nah man I can't afford to maintain this" which is very well accepted.
-
Too many FOSS users are toxicly entitled... It ruins things for everyone.
What are they entitled to? And how is it toxic?
-
but really would feel bad for any packager maintainers.
It's already unpackageable because of the license anyway.
The only "legit" way to get the emulator is their provided AppImage bundle, and nothing else. The author also has a rant about Flatpak being broken and unreliable and refusing to support that, so...
wrote last edited by [email protected]I have some issues with flatpak, myself, but that mainly stems from having trouble finding documentation to clear up how to properly use extensions and non-standard dependencies that are easy to do with OCI images.
Ex. I had a really hard time trying to get Vega Strike built as a flatpak.
-
Refuse to build in Arch package environments. My license does not allow for packages
but it's not a package. On arch it downloads the source from his own git and it compiles it on the end user machine. He is a dev and doesn't know that? Or just pretending?
AUR is just (automated) instructions on how to compile (except -bin, in that case it's packaged)
A previous commit of the readme even said:
Linux users are encouraged to build from source when possible
yes, good luck building from source without documentation on what libraries do you need
They know. The PKGBUILD they provided is exactly the kind of thing that's in the AUR. The dev's PKGBUILD wasn't in the AUR because they didn't want it to be — instead hoping arch users would go to the repository and use their maintained one. Arch users continued to try to use AUR instead, leading to the dev's frustration.
I don't expect this will help anything. If the AUR maintainer is active, they will probably just patch that restriction out.
-
It isn't toxic* entitlement to seek tech support on the platform the developer offers tech support on.
Edit: added "toxic" for clarification
Why wouldn't I be entitled to tech support if they're offering tech support?
-
You cannot forbid forking a public GitHub repository, per their terms of service
Yes. The license doesn't technically appear to forbid forking, just sharing the fork.
-
The answer for this guy and other people stretched by supporting Linux is to say it's flatpak or nothing. Stop trying to build for each dist because it's not sustainable. If someone on a dist wants to maintain a package then let them take the heat if it is broken.
If someone on a dist wants to maintain a package then let them take the heat if it is broken.
That's quite literally what happened and why this guy is moaning though. Nobody asked him for an Arch build, people distribute it themselves on the AUR and he's annoyed anyway.
-
So what other ps1/2 emulators are on Linux yall would recommend. I don't wanna support this dev
Mednafen is pretty great.
MAME also has PSX emulation. It's marked as not working, but I've heard it's actually pretty good, and I got good results on the few games I tried.
-
itt: a bunch of entitled Linux youths that don't understand burnout or QOL.
dude has set a limit to what he wants or is willing to do. still gets called a bitch for defining the line and is still called an asshole.
some of y'all even bring up multiple cases of other foss devs doing/saying the same thing, continue to call them assholes.
There's a pattern here...but I'm just too blinded by the brilliancy of my distro to see it...You might want to look up the meaning of the word "entitled".
-
Normally you'd be right, but in this case the guy just actually does have a history of being an a****** to everybody. This is very much a case of a developer being the problem.
He has a history of starting s*** being an a****** and then complaining when everyone else is an a****** to him.
That's not even getting into. Basically every problem he is complaining about is of his own making or his own ignorance.
The whole aur problem is because of his own, very likely illegal license change
You know, you don't need to censor yourself on here. I don't think anybody's going to be offended if you just write "shit" or "asshole".
-
Interesting. The only thing i knew is: the escape key is really important for Unreal Tournament.
The original Unreal Tournament (or UT'99, or whatever) is also one of the very few modern-ish full screen games that had a drop down menu bar like you'd expect on a typical Windows application. The other one I can think of off the top of my head is ZSNES, although in that case they rolled their own solution. Not least of which because the original ZSNES was a DOS program (with huge chunks of it written in x86 assembly!) so they kind of didn't have a choice.
If I remember right UT'99 actually did use Windows style accelerator keys in its menus, i.e. hold down Alt and press a letter to perform an action, which might just make all this malarkey peripherally relevant.
-
Gamers can be the most entitled demanding assholes. Arch users can be the most annoying arrogant and conceited people to exist online.
I wouldn't dare imagine dealing with the unholy mix of arch gamers min-maxing social skills for inferiority complex.
I'd rather drop support too.
You mean "self-entitled". When you're "entitled", you are owed something.
-
Why wouldn't I be entitled to tech support if they're offering tech support?
I meant it's not "toxic entitlement" like the other commenter I replied to claimed. Edited my original comment to hopefully be clearer.
-
As a linux user myself (arch) I wish the community would just pick a package manager and stick with it.
They're not all identical in features and function though. Nix is different from Gentoo which is different from RPM. And they're all going to have drawbacks and in some cases, have complete showstoppers.
- Portage/Aur: Not everyone is gonna compile things and if you say use the pre-built options, then this isn't the right choice.
- Debian/RPM: You'll never get distro's to agree to release names or contents, like glibc and ssl versions
- Nix: Learning curve is murder. Not every app is made to be reproducible.
- FlatPak/Snap/AppImage: Loses almost all the advantages of a distro that we take for granted: CVE patching, tested updates, etc.
This is a brief, maybe even unfair overview but it's not as easy as "just pick one".
And this ignores the huge pantheon of "language package managers" like pip, gem, npm, cargo, cpan, maven, etc^infinity. Ideally these would just be build dep managers but you get a lot of apps packaged and distributed this way too. Some distro's/package systems bravely try to keep up but it's a losing battle.
-
No, but carrying the grudge this long and vocally leaves me to wonder if the story is as crisp as put forth.
And FOSS die hards put many people off of lemmy early on.
Seek? Yes. Expect? No.
Carrying a grudge? "This long and vocally"? Who? How?
And I'll say it again - it isn't toxic entitlement for users to expect to receive support on the platform they've been told to use to receive support. I'm not sure how you can argue differently, unless you twist words to the point of meaninglessness.
-
It doesn't matter what the license say, because GitHub TOS (that everybody agree on when registering their account) explicitly allows forking any project hosted on GitHub, regardless of the project's license.
Copyright is always about distribution. So yes, you are allowed to fork, but you are not allowed to distribute the copyrighted content to other people. And with the No Derivatives clause you are also not allowed to change it.
You might be able to stay in the gray are by telling everyone "build it yourself", but nobody would be allowed to package it either. -
As a linux user myself (arch) I wish the community would just pick a package manager and stick with it.
Seems contrary to the nature of the Linux scene tbh
-
this developer is a big prick. i had an issue (that turned out to be user error after getting help from another source) with the android version of duckstation so went to their discord for support. instead of offering any aid or insight, i was immediately stereotyped as "an android user" and told "we don't offer tech support for android" basically for no other reason than "because android users bitch too much and then give you a bad review," which is just kind of insane imo? there's no downside to bad reviews like you're not going to get delisted? anyways, completely not surprised to hear this from that ass. it genuinely seems like this guy hates developing duckstation at all and i am confused why he bothers. give it up man, sounds like you'll be happier
I mean, he's not wrong, plenty of pre-release games allow you to download before it's out, then android users go and give it 1 star because the servers aren't open yet.
-
The licence doesn't permit derivative works, so no forks and no downstream packages.
wrote last edited by [email protected]It's easy enough to fork the code as it existed under GPL3. Violentmonkey did that when they forked from Tampermonkey.
This dev also doesn't sound like he wants to put much effort into enforcing his license in the first place.
