GNU/Linux users most read this!

You're not a package maintainer. Some people who aren't you are package maintainers. In my understanding, package maintainers build distro-specific bundles from binary or source tarballs supplied by the developer. A .deb is exactly that, isn't it? I really don't see how it's different from a "binary package" which you have to untar in "/" or somesuch.

The only additions with a packaging format are metadata for things like dependencies, blocks, a description, author etc. Package maintainers also have to make sure they fit with their distros way of doing things. For example Arch has it's KISS principle. The distributions themselves will provide help for people wishing to build packages by their own documentation, packaging mentors or whatever. It is also good of them to contribute upstream changes which may generally aid in building packages, for example mistakes in file structure, missed out dependencies.

A distribution can release packages for a commerical product but obviously not including the copyrighted code, that would just be piracy! If you look at Gentoo they have packages for games like Doom 3 which check for dependencies, install the latest Linux executable, add in all symlinks and then prompt for a location of the data files for you to copy them from disk. This system works pretty well but is underutilised.

And machine?!? You do know Mr Bougo is a moderator here and if anyone here understands anything it's Mr B!

And machine?!? You do know Mr Bougo is a moderator here and if anyone here understands anything it's Mr B!

Dude, I don't know "Mr B", I'm pretty new here, to me anyone here can be a troll, I don't know since I haven't been here enough time to learn you guys. I'm not saying it to flame him or anything, I were just asking. Mr. Bougo have helped me with compiling NetRadiant, he seem nice, but I don't know if he is knows anything about packaging and compiled binary's on different distros.

machine: I might have misunderstood something. In that case, please explain. I certainly am not trolling.
EDIT: FWIW I maintained xonotic-git in http://aur.archlinux.org (although I wasn't very meticulous at this, and it's nothing very special except from understanding the technical process of building a package and signing up on a website )

edh: Right! I had free software in mind when I was talking about binary packages. I guess the distros must get a license from the distributor in that case, like virtualbox-additions in Arch Linux. Or distribute a script (such as an ebuild or pkgbuild) that fetches the original binary package and builds the distro package from that...

Dude, I don't know "Mr B", I'm pretty new here, to me anyone here can be a troll

Then why do you willingly apply the troll lable to Mr Bougo and also myself in your pair of personal messages that you have sent me today? I'm not even going to bother replying to your latest message. It is clear you and I don't agree on somethings. That is fine. Just don't get worked up about it.

So let's reset this conversation and change this mindset to 'I'm pretty new here, to me anyone here can be a friend'.

Anyway, even if they do just release Ubuntu packages then I'm sure collaberatively the packages will be pulled apart and the major distros will offer their own ways of installing, whether by ebuilds, bkgbuilds, shell scripts, whatever.

Whoa, don't involve me in drama, pretty please!

Dude, I don't know "Mr B", I'm pretty new here, to me anyone here can be a troll

Then why do you willingly apply the troll lable to Mr Bougo and also myself in your pair of personal messages that you have sent me today? I'm not even going to bother replying to your latest message. It is clear you and I don't agree on somethings. That is fine. Just don't get worked up about it.

So let's reset this conversation and change this mindset to 'I'm pretty new here, to me anyone here can be a friend'.

Anyway, even if they do just release Ubuntu packages then I'm sure collaberatively the packages will be pulled apart and the major distros will offer their own ways of installing, whether by ebuilds, bkgbuilds, shell scripts, whatever.

I sent a PM beucase I did not wanna go further off topic in this thread! Also, I agree with 50 % of what you said, and I said that in my message. I don't get why you guys are so negative. GNU/Linux won't hurt by some games being released for it. And I also said that you can call Arch Linux whathever you want. I just told you that most mainstream what you call "Linux distributions" are in fact GNU/Linux distribution even if you can relpace the software on it! I understand what you mean and I agree in some parts of it, but why the hell are you so negitive against calling GNU/Linux distributions for GNU/Linux distributions? Don't even bother to answer, I'm sick of your negative answers!

Now let's smile and discuss packages instead

edh: Right! I had free software in mind when I was talking about binary packages.

Yup, and my earlier comment (as what I feel was the most of this whole thread) was about properietary stuff, that usually doesn't get neatly packaged in distros.

machine, you can't post such an opinionated comment and ask that nobody responds to it!

Why do you say Ubuntu instead of Ubuntu GNU/Linux? Why Gentoo instead of Gentoo Linux (the actual name), and why is it not Gentoo GNU/Linux? Why can these distros get away with such names, but people can't say they use Linux when they mean "a GNU/Linux distribution"? And why do you have to publish software "for GNU/Linux distributions", even if it works on GNU/Linux from scratch (which is not a distribution) or even on Linux without GNU?

EDIT: More importantly, why on earth does this matter and why are we even discussing this again in the first place :X

I'm done being off-topic here, I guess.

EDIT: I'll also add that calling our answers "negative" is meaningless. From my perspective, you're the negative one. You can't ask to stop disagreeing with you, heh.

machine, you can't post such an opinionated comment and ask that nobody responds to it!

Why do you say Ubuntu instead of Ubuntu GNU/Linux? Why Gentoo instead of Gentoo Linux (the actual name), and why is it not Gentoo GNU/Linux? Why can these distros get away with such names, but people can't say they use Linux when they mean "a GNU/Linux distribution"? And why do you have to publish software "for GNU/Linux distributions", even if it works on GNU/Linux from scratch (which is not a distribution) or even on Linux without GNU?

You haven't even read what I sent to him, please, continue you package discussion instead GNU/Linux haters!

Let's not get into namecalling, okay? I read your public post in this thread and responded to it. I do not pretend to know what you told him in private, I don't even know why you're bringing this up.

Let's not get into namecalling, okay? I read your public post in this thread and responded to it. I do not pretend to know what you told him in private, I don't even know why you're bringing this up.

What? When why did you say this:

Why do you say Ubuntu instead of Ubuntu GNU/Linux? Why Gentoo instead of Gentoo Linux (the actual name), and why is it not Gentoo GNU/Linux? Why can these distros get away with such names, but people can't say they use Linux when they mean "a GNU/Linux distribution"? And why do you have to publish software "for GNU/Linux distributions", even if it works on GNU/Linux from scratch (which is not a distribution) or even on Linux without GNU?

And you guys already been off topic with your package & binary discussion!

Is it possible to mute/hide your posts? (Mr. Bougo, edh) cause im tired of this!

Well, you said I'm being negative about GNU/Linux in that post to edh, didn't you? Sorry if I got that wrong.

No, I'm not going to censor the posts above, sorry. I'll just strongly suggest that we stay on topic now, otherwise I'll act on further offtopic posts. (delete, split, whatever.)

EDIT: And of course, feel free to discuss this inside its own thread. I could also split the offtopic posts, but they are still somewhat on-topic so it will leave a hole in this topic...

Well, you said I'm being negative about GNU/Linux in that post to edh, didn't you? Sorry if I got that wrong.

Hmm, I didn't PM him anything about that, don't remember if I posted it here, if so, quote so I can explain myself please.

No, I'm not going to censor the posts above, sorry. I'll just strongly suggest that we stay on topic now, otherwise I'll act on further offtopic posts. (delete, split, whatever.)

Didn't mean that, I meant if I could mute/block or something, I'm tired of this!

So back to commercial games being ported to Linux. While not new, it is good that more companies are taking it up and more than just the standard FPS games that we have had for many years anyway.

Carmaggedon, one of my favourite games ever, is getting a new release in the francise and being partly fan funded by a kickstarter fund, there was a request for Linux support and with some constructive fund raising (break x amount of money, they port to Linux) this is happening! Wonderful news.

If Linux gets proper AAA game support and has open source drivers that can be tailor made, then I'm f***ing moving to Linux!!!

If Linux gets proper AAA game support and has open source drivers that can be tailor made, then I'm f***ing moving to Linux!!!

Or you can do it now, and buy a console for your AAA games

anyways ... ubuntu specific would be sad ...
they could easily release a binary like blender or xonotic
or a custom installer like world of goo or (evil) adobe reader



but then ... i dont even know what games ea makes (last I got from them was spore ... and the gameplay was way to thin ...

the only games on my to-get list are source (half-life portal) -- anything made bye nintendo -- or old things (like quake 1)

@hutty - you can play Q1 easily - there's an official port of glquake, but I dunno if you really want to use that, instead I'd recommend using Darkplaces, you only need Q1 game data (available on Steam) and it plays beautifully. The Source Engine games are already announced by Valve and most probably will be coming at the same time as Steam for GNU/Linux.

they could easily release a binary like blender or xonotic

Yup, but we don't know if they gonna do that, hopefully they make a custom installer that works on most distros.

you can play Q1 easily - there's an official port of glquake

The Linux GLQuake is about as bad as the Windows version was. Pretty terrible.

Although Darkplaces does offer many features, if you want to play Quake how it was supposed to be played then I would recommend Quakespasm, the ongoing fork of Fitzquake. This is more of a fixed GLQuake than an engine for the sake of it which means the game looks and feels like the original release. If you are particular into the retro look (I'm not) then try gl_texturemode 1 for nearest pixel mapping!

Many Linux releases before have not been included on the main installation discs. Instead someone like Loki has been seperately contracted to write an installer which installs the executable, libraries and symlinks and then you're expected to copy the files manually from the disk that are needed. I would expect this to continue being fairly common and does fit well with needs of distro packagers as they can repackage the Linux installer as a package and then require user intervention to copy across the data files.

you can play Q1 easily - there's an official port of glquake

The Linux GLQuake is about as bad as the Windows version was. Pretty terrible.

True, but back in the day when I had my Voodoo 1 it sure was way better than the software version ;-D.

Personally I prefer Q1 with DarkPlaces.