GNU/Linux users most read this!

Well, I am quite happy now , most of you maybe already knew this but....

GAMING IS COMING FOR GNU/LINUX!

Some proof :

http://www.omgubuntu.co.uk/2012/05/elect...per-summit --EA's first games for GNU/Linux
http://mobile.theverge.com/2012/4/25/297...f-phoronix --Valve have started working on the steam port
http://blogs.unity3d.com/2012/07/03/linu...erefore-3/ --Unity 4 for GNU/Linux
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=ar...deln&num=1 -- Left4Dead 2 port
http://steamforlinux.com/?q=en/node/62 --GOG.com might publish GNU/Linux games in the future

There is probably more, feel free to post if you know about one !

So, well, isent this awesome?

I knew about some of it already, but it still makes me feel like
   

Dude, where have you been for the past 2 months? All those news are nothing new. This stuff was so hot that I doubt if anyone hasn't heard it yet...

On the other hand saying that because of Steam or EA 'gaming is coming to GNU/Linux' is a bit unfair to all the other ppl who made games for the penguin over the years, be it commercial ports or FLOSS. Even a Steam competitor - Desura is supporting GNU/Linux for a good couple of months now. Gaming is already here and has been for a long time thanks to the ppl like the Xonotic devs.

I know. But this is the first time we get the big AAA companies to target the GNU/Linux platform.

Just 1 thing...... hope it's the whole GNU/Linux world they're targeting and not just Ubuntu..

Just 1 thing...... hope it's the whole GNU/Linux world they're targeting and not just Ubuntu..

Yeah, that's something I'm afraid of too. The Ubuntu monster is growing more and more of a problem with each passing month. I've seen even some FLOSS apps that provided binary builds only for Ubu, or better yet - they say they got Linux binaries, and when you click download, you get a deb!

Why, of all the distros, did the one that's not compatible with Linux Standards Base got to be the most popular? ;-/

I don't see Ubuntu as becoming out of control and dominating the Linux market. What gets published in media gives the impression that it is sometimes but this is due to another few factors. It is an easy first Linux distribution so is worth pushing for new users. Before it was Mandrake and before that Red Hat and before that Slackware which was easy compared to SLS, MCM Interim, Bootroot et al.

You don't see more expert Linux distributions getting so much publicity but it doesn't mean they are not being used. There's just little to publicise them for because they already have their user base. Ubuntu also makes a 6 monthly release and each one has multiple flavours of desktop environments so there is a lot of 'release noise'. With distros like Arch and Gentoo there is never much celebration of a release as with a rolling release distro there is only a need for a new CD release when installation changes are needed or major breakage occurs in compatibility.

As for packages only being released for Ubuntu. I don't really care. I'd rather they released no packages, just the source and then it would be down to the distros to build their own packages. :-)

You don't see more expert Linux distributions getting so much publicity but it doesn't mean they are not being used.

That's why I hope they don't just release .deb files compiled for Ubuntu.

As for packages only being released for Ubuntu. I don't really care. I'd rather they released no packages, just the source and then it would be down to the distros to build their own packages. :-)

These companies will never release their source codes.

EA's first games for GNU/Linux -- Nope. Read again.
Valve have started working on the steam port -- Old news.
Unity 4 for GNU/Linux -- Yuck.
Left4Dead 2 port -- Old news again, redundant with valve news.
GOG.com might publish GNU/Linux games in the future -- Nope. Read again. Some people have asked, doesn't mean it will change a thing.

Gaming is coming to GNU/Linux -- Are you kidding me?!?! Gaming already exists for Linux, I guess just looking at the many indie bundles is enough to prove that, and that's hardly inclusive of every form of Linux gaming.

Also, how is ubuntu and .deb a problem? You know .deb is an open format that only contains files and metadata, right? It's not some obscure black box that is unusable outside of Debian-like distros. In fact, there are conversion tools, and if that's not good enough it can always be done manually. The potential problem is many many annoying and/or non-free dependencies, but we're already talking about proprietary software here so who cares.

Why, of all the distros, did the one that's not compatible with Linux Standards Base got to be the most popular? ;-/

Because Ubuntu had to become Windows and Mac OS to gain in popularity.

EA's first games for GNU/Linux -- Nope. Read again.

I know it's just like bookmarks for webbrowser games, but EA is actually releasing something for GNU/Linux which is quite cool.

Valve have started working on the steam port -- Old news.

Read my first post again, I said:

most of you maybe already knew this but....

Unity 4 for GNU/Linux -- Yuck.

You're boring!

Left4Dead 2 port -- Old news again, redundant with valve news.

Question answered above

GOG.com might publish GNU/Linux games in the future -- Nope. Read again. Some people have asked, doesn't mean it will change a thing.

Note that GOG.com sponoring the "Linux Action Show" podcast and several other sites related to FOSS and GNU/Linux. Also, many of GOG's constumers have ran most of their games in DOSBox under GNU/Linux for years now.

Gaming is coming to GNU/Linux -- Are you kidding me?!?! Gaming already exists for Linux, I guess just looking at the many indie bundles is enough to prove that, and that's hardly inclusive of every form of Linux gaming.

I know, I sound like a kid buying video games 24/7 and now glad I don't have to dual-boot. That's wrong, I've nevered had any Windows installation or gaming console. I love indie games, I love FOSS games, and that is the games I play and have always been. The truth is that I'm happy cause my friends don't like those indie games and FOSS games, and now I got the chance to play with them.

Also, how is ubuntu and .deb a problem? You know .deb is an open format that only contains files and metadata, right? It's not some obscure black box that is unusable outside of Debian-like distros. In fact, there are conversion tools, and if that's not good enough it can always be done manually. The potential problem is many many annoying and/or non-free dependencies, but we're already talking about proprietary software here so who cares.

My problem is not the .deb, it's that I hope they doesn't only compile the games for Ubuntu cause then it gonna be a pain in the ass installing it on other distros. For me it's no problem since I left the world of hardcore distros like Gentoo a while back ago, too lazy for working my ass off after when each updates come. I now use Ubuntu instead. I just care about the whole GNU/Linux community, that's all.

Why are you being so negative about this Mr. Bougo? I get that you don't want your box full of non-free software but this is games, they have no function except for entertainment. IMO games are different from regular software.

I'm just being negative for the sake of it, really. Also to warn you not to get your hopes too high.

I'm not saying I'm mad about non-free either -- nobody's forcing me to install these games so I'm fine.

The only thing I strongly disagree with is that you seem to imply that there is no gaming in Linux and that it is soon to come. That's just wrong, and you should realize this because you're posting on the Xonotic forum, Xonotic being based off Nexuiz which is not very young anymore.

I guess you meant to talk specifically about blockbuster/AAA games or stuff developed and published by the big names in the industry. I'm completely apathetic about this. I can't see it as either good or bad news for the FLOSS world and I have yet to come across convincing arguments to shift my (absence of) opinion.

Also, I don't see what you mean by "compiled for Ubuntu". Are Ubuntu binaries incompatible with other Linux distros? That's news to me.

Seems like GNU/Linux will be another platform where I will NOT play EA games =)

I'm just being negative for the sake of it, really. Also to warn you not to get your hopes too high.

Actually, I don't have any expectation other than it gonna be extremely laggy cause my GPU sucks anyway. xD

I'm not saying I'm mad about non-free either -- nobody's forcing me to install these games so I'm fine.

I will force you

The only thing I strongly disagree with is that you seem to imply that there is no gaming in Linux and that it is soon to come. That's just wrong, and you should realize this because you're posting on the Xonotic forum, Xonotic being based off Nexuiz which is not very young anymore.

Well, if I literally meant there is no gaming for GNU/Linux when how the h%#! would I post it here? I know GNU/Linux have lots of games, but not many mainstream ones.

I guess you meant to talk specifically about blockbuster/AAA games or stuff developed and published by the big names in the industry. I'm completely apathetic about this. I can't see it as either good or bad news for the FLOSS world and I have yet to come across convincing arguments to shift my (absence of) opinion.

Well, I know what you mean, but isen't this quite cool? We have come so far that even big mainstream companies is targeting it for their products. IMO this is an archivement for the GNU/Linux community, not that these games are coming, but that it's getting accepted as a desktop platform.

Also, I don't see what you mean by "compiled for Ubuntu". Are Ubuntu binaries incompatible with other Linux distros? That's news to me.

Can you run a binary compiled for Ubuntu on a GNU/Linux distro with different version of the kernel, different versions of the libs and dependencies, maybe even different directory structure in some few cases? Please tell me cause if it's that way, it's new to me!

@shogun assassin
I didn't say I gonna play them

It would be pretty shortsighted for a commerical company to release a binary that could only be run on Ubuntu. I really don't see that happening. If you like at Linux (and they are Linux games, not GNU/Linux as they don't need anything from GNU but they do need Linux as they won't run on a BSD for example) games in the past like UT200x they will run on pretty much any Linux distro. They want to make things all inclusive library wise. Also with the GPL you couldn't build propreitary code against a library like this?

What would also happen when Ubuntu goes from w.x 'Useless Unity' to y.z 'Annoying Alliteration'? All the games would loose compatibility as the libraries would not be the same versions.

Ubuntu only binaries? That would be pointless.

It would be pretty shortsighted for a commerical company to release a binary that could only be run on Ubuntu. I really don't see that happening. If you like at Linux (and they are Linux games, not GNU/Linux as they don't need anything from GNU but they do need Linux as they won't run on a BSD for example) games in the past like UT200x they will run on pretty much any Linux distro. They want to make things all inclusive library wise. Also with the GPL you couldn't build propreitary code against a library like this?

True.

Ubuntu only binaries? That would be pointless.

Yes, but I've seen non-free comercial software which is only for Ubuntu.

not GNU/Linux as they don't need anything from GNU

Interesting, would like to see a game run on a kernel without a operating system...

Well, I know what you mean, but isen't this quite cool? We have come so far that even big mainstream companies is targeting it for their products. IMO this is an archivement for the GNU/Linux community, not that these games are coming, but that it's getting accepted as a desktop platform.

I frankly find it more exciting to see governments, schools and other public institutions moving from Proprietary_OS to FLOSS operating systems. Now that's in the spirit of FLOSS (with some financial advantage on the side, but spending less is also part of the spirit), not a strategic move from big money makers.

not GNU/Linux as they don't need anything from GNU

Interesting, would like to see a game run on a kernel without a operating system...

Not this again! It likely would run on BusyBox/Linux, but it would not run on GNU/Hurd or BSD.

Yes, but I've seen non-free comercial software which is only for Ubuntu.

That's what was written, but that's because the package is a .deb made for Ubuntu. i.e. it won't install on other distros. But that does not mean that it can't be made to work there.

I frankly find it more exciting to see governments, schools and other public institutions moving from Proprietary_OS to FLOSS operating systems. Now that's in the spirit of FLOSS (with some financial advantage on the side, but spending less is also part of the spirit), not a strategic move from big money makers.

Well, isent that where GNU/Linux is being used? I know lots of schools here in sweden run GNU/Linux and I think spain or some country over there run GNU/Linux on most of their government's systems. But yes, I get what you mean but that's another topic.

Not this again! It likely would run on BusyBox/Linux, but it would not run on GNU/Hurd or BSD.

What?

That's what was written, but that's because the package is a .deb made for Ubuntu. i.e. it won't install on other distros. But that does not mean that it can't be made to work there.

Nope.

Uh, yes, I find it exciting that these institutions now use FLOSS operating systems. I don't understand your response. It's not another topic, I'm just saying I find recognition and adoption of Linux and friends by these people to be much more gratifying and important than the big video game producers'.

I thought you were being snarky about the GNU/Linux vs. Linux thing. What edh meant is that GNU is not needed to run games, but a kernel is. BusyBox/Linux is an alternative to GNU/Linux.

Not this again! It likely would run on BusyBox/Linux, but it would not run on GNU/Hurd or BSD.

What?

So, without wanting to open another can of worms with GNU/__K, you can boot Linux without GNU. There are many replacements for GNU tools that fit better on smaller systems. Just look through the list of GNU packages and you can find valid replacements for all of them.

Are any of the GNU packages specifically required to run a game? Not likely. If you look at the dependencies for commercial or non-commerical Linux games then they need things like SDL, libjepg, zlib, curl, et al. None of these are GNU tools. The binaries however are always compiled to run on Linux. Hence these are Linux games, not GNU/Linux games.

What is RMS's view on open source games? He doesn't care as he doesn't see the FSF as involved in entertainment. He plays World of Warcraft and believe it or not met his WIFE in the game. So RMS isn't going to mind if I call it Linux and that games run on Linux, not GNU.

That's what was written, but that's because the package is a .deb made for Ubuntu. i.e. it won't install on other distros. But that does not mean that it can't be made to work there.

I would have to agree with you here if you can extract the .deb package. It would seem highly unlikely that the executable within the package will only run on one distro as then it would only run on ONE version of a distro. That would be just stupid.

Does NVIDIA release it's drivers in packages? No, it does a very nice self extracting, self building, self modprobing driver and is all the better for it. They do however have the option part way through to download a kernel module for your specific kernel: I have never had a kernel that worked straight away with this!

Uh, yes, I find it exciting that these institutions now use FLOSS operating systems. I don't understand your response. It's not another topic, I'm just saying I find recognition and adoption of Linux and friends by these people to be much more gratifying and important than the big video game producers'.

I haven't said that! Why even argue about this? I love GNU/Linux & the Free Software community and been a part of it since my first computer, I aprove what you say! Still I'm happy that I will be able to play games with my friends!

As for the GNU/Linux busybox thing..
In fact i don't really know what Linux is, some says it's an operating system other it's a kernel. Well I've always thought that GNU were the OS and Linux the kernel. But I dont really know what a kernel do except that it's a very small part of the OS.

edh: Check your sources on that WoW thing. April 1st. RMS would NEVER touch WoW, it being proprietary and all.

EDIT: @machine: yes, you're right. But you can build a Linux-based OS without GNU software. So the GNU/ prefix is non-inclusive and useless in this context.

@machine: yes, you're right. But you can build a Linux-based OS without GNU software. So the GNU/ prefix is non-inclusive and useless in this context.

Okey, but what I mean by GNU/Linux is the most common distros, like Ubuntu, Arch, Fedora etc.

But let's keep to the topic, we can discuss the use of Linux in other operating systems in another thread!

That's what was written, but that's because the package is a .deb made for Ubuntu. i.e. it won't install on other distros. But that does not mean that it can't be made to work there.

If I pay for the stuff I expect not to have to tinker with it to make it work, don't you?

No, it does a very nice self extracting, self building, self modprobing driver and is all the better for it. They do however have the option part way through to download a kernel module for your specific kernel: I have never had a kernel that worked straight away with this!

I bolded the important part ;-).

Anyway - generally the package management is a great thing, but only as long as you keep to the distro that the packages are made for (nowadays you can't even expect for a deb for ubuntu to install & work on Debian). Converting, tinkering, etc - it only gets ugly - different file locations, different file names, lib versions, etc (lib versions are not that much of a problem, but locations are). If any packages were to be made I'd prefer a LSB compliant rpm, as aiming at LSB does make an app working on all distros that support it (that are compliant with LSB, on Debians you need to install some packages to make it compatible and then use alien to install rpms).

Apart from that, for compiled binaries, I usually see either a compressed archive (like Xonotic), or some kind of binary all-distro-graphical-install-to-home-dir installer. I even do this myself for my small apps. Maybe if an easy, graphical tool existed to make all kinds of distro specific packages existed then it would be different. (Making packages is HELL from what I've seen&tried.)

If any packages were to be made I'd prefer a LSB compliant rpm, as aiming at LSB does make an app working on all distros that support it (that are compliant with LSB, on Debians you need to install some packages to make it compatible and then use alien to install rpms).

I used to have a lot of involvement in OpenOffice.org and things used to always be distributed officially as RPMs. This was a sensible thing to do based upon the LSB being in existence and Mandrake being the dominant new users distro of the time. The trouble this then caused when people came on demanding that packages were then made for their distro... There were long time slackware users saying that the only packaging standard for Linux was a plain .tar.gz package, there were people demanding .debs, complaints from those RPM users who couldn't get it installed properly because they didn't know how to work around the cyclic dependencies induced if you didn't RPM it with a wildcard, people complaining it didn't replace the distro supplied packages that they had, you just couldn't please everyone. Now they also have .deb packages too so you have twice the mess.

RPM remains special in that RPM based distros are not all Red Hat derived (eg. SUSE) and the R in RPM no longer stands for Red Hat, it has been 'RPM Package Manager' for some years, whereas .deb remains a Debian centric system with all distros using .deb packages being Debian based.

The .zip distribution for Xonotic makes sense as it is multiplatform. A .tar.gz would most likely be larger in size, a .tar.bz2 might be a little smaller but they would not be so readily accessible for Windows users.

That's what was written, but that's because the package is a .deb made for Ubuntu. i.e. it won't install on other distros. But that does not mean that it can't be made to work there.

If I pay for the stuff I expect not to have to tinker with it to make it work, don't you?

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.

That's what was written, but that's because the package is a .deb made for Ubuntu. i.e. it won't install on other distros. But that does not mean that it can't be made to work there.

If I pay for the stuff I expect not to have to tinker with it to make it work, don't you?

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.

Lol, trolling or do you not understand?