Luke:
>https://wiki.parabola.nu/Emulator_licensing_issues
>
>This may prove useful in the event of further research/discussion.
this was mentioned, and it's missing crucial information.
let's add ndiswrapper to it.
it would be classified as "free + free use", but it is still rejected;
because [0]
On 4/9/16, Denis 'GNUtoo' Carikli wrote:
> alírio eyng wrote:
>> so mame is not just an emulator.
>> it is a emulator, disassembler and debugger.
...
>> is there a similar environment to a current architecture?
> community/qtspim 9.1.17-2
> New user interface for spim, a MIPS simulator.
not r
On Mon, 4 Apr 2016 22:23:17 +
alírio eyng wrote:
> Felipe Sanches:
> >MAME provides an interactive debugger
> so mame is not just an emulator.
> it is a emulator, disassembler and debugger.
> this is relevant information i can't see in official documentation,
> thanks.
>
[...]
> a interest
On 4/5/16, Denis 'GNUtoo' Carikli wrote:
>documentation (and packaging as you point it) can
> steer users towards free software.
...
> Which one to do would then depend on the context.
> For instance with qemu and libvirt, the software was modified not to
> steer users towards running non-free GNU
On Sat, 2 Apr 2016 08:48:58 +
alírio eyng wrote:
> On 4/2/16, Denis 'GNUtoo' Carikli wrote:
> > Why not just requiring some documentation along the emulator that
> > documents at least one fully free software that can run on it.
> this is missing some complexity:
> we don't want something
Felipe Sanches:
>On Mon, Apr 4, 2016 at 7:23 PM, alírio eyng wrote:
>> this development environment works for all architectures mame supports?
>Yes. The debugger dialog is generic
...
>mame/src/devices/cpu$ ls
...
>i386
the debugger works on all architectures
i can use i386
i can use z80 and read
The other situation when I was able to benefit from the automatically
generated custom debugger UI was when working on emulating the
(non-free) game Another World from the 90's. It was originally
executed on Amiga computers, so the debugger would let me see the
opcodes of the Amiga CPU. But the gam
On Mon, Apr 4, 2016 at 7:23 PM, alírio eyng wrote:
> Felipe Sanches:
>>MAME provides an interactive debugger
> so mame is not just an emulator.
> it is a emulator, disassembler and debugger.
> this is relevant information i can't see in official documentation, thanks.
>
> it seems even with a obso
Felipe Sanches:
>MAME provides an interactive debugger
so mame is not just an emulator.
it is a emulator, disassembler and debugger.
this is relevant information i can't see in official documentation, thanks.
it seems even with a obsolete executable format, it can be a
interesting development envi
On Mon, Apr 4, 2016 at 12:26 AM, alírio eyng wrote:
> Felipe Sanches:
>>I will try not to talk here any more, unless I
>>have something really new to say.
> i will probably continue replying while people are quoting me and
> making proposals or confusing general-purpose runtime dependencies
> with
Felipe Sanches:
>I think MAME is likely not compatible with the free sw distro
>guidelines.
ignoring the trademark; as a whole, mame is in the same category as
wine, which is allowed.
but most parts of it are in the same category as ndiswrapper; i don't
think this parts should be allowed just becau
I will attempt to stop posting to this thread because I think I
already presented all of my points here.
To summarize my conclusions:
I think MAME is likely not compatible with the free sw distro
guidelines. And I think shipping a prebuilt binary package of MAME is
not really useful for **most** o
Felipe Sanches:
>On Sun, Apr 3, 2016 at 3:36 PM, alírio eyng wrote:
>> Tobias Platen:
>>> Emulators can be useful for reverse engineering
...
>> emulators are the _result_ of reverse engineering, not tools to do it.
...
>I completely disagree!
>I have been actively using MAME to perform reverse en
On Sun, Apr 3, 2016 at 3:36 PM, alírio eyng wrote:
> Tobias Platen:
>> Emulators can be useful for reverse engineering
> reverse engineering is the action of understanding undocumented
> interfaces (mostly hardware).
> emulators are the _result_ of reverse engineering, not tools to do it.
> this r
Tobias Platen:
> Emulators can be useful for reverse engineering
reverse engineering is the action of understanding undocumented
interfaces (mostly hardware).
emulators are the _result_ of reverse engineering, not tools to do it.
this result is useless if there's no other interface implementations
i think i got the root of the controversy:
some people started to think of emulators as hardware (replacements)
hardware is useful to develop to
some people started to think of emulators as obsolete apis
obsolete apis are not useful to develop to
i still see emulators (like ndiswrapper) as obsol
On Wed, 30 Mar 2016 16:30:17 -0600
Isaac David wrote:
> Hi,
Hi,
> My view was that while useless in a 100% free environment just
> having them installed and inspecting their user interfaces wouldn't
> violate your freedom in any way. A free emulator with free
> dependencies wouldn't be unethical
On Tue, 29 Mar 2016 16:31:40 +
alírio eyng wrote:
> these are the approaches i can think:
> *extremely conservative (eliminating false positive errors)[1]
> removing all emulators
> *conservative (eliminating false positive errors)[1]
> make packages/executables like game1-emulator1, game1-
On 4/2/16, Denis 'GNUtoo' Carikli wrote:
> Why not just requiring some documentation along the emulator that
> documents at least one fully free software that can run on it.
this is missing some complexity:
we don't want something better done natively (we exclude ndiswrapper)[1]
but we still want
Hi,
Parabola does ship fully free emulators for which no free games
exist. At this moment the user has to opt-in for installing
your-freedom_emu to block those packages, so it actually falls
down somewhere between your "liberal" and "extremely liberal"
categories.
My view was that while useless
20 matches
Mail list logo
