From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Eric Bavier Subject: Re: [PATCH] gnu: Add cool-retro-term. Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2017 22:36:27 -0500 Message-ID: <20170425223627.47d5a3fc@centurylink.net> References: <20170423135526.5ed9d143@mykolab.ch> <87inlvhr0y.fsf@gmail.com> <20170423231207.4adb15e7@mykolab.ch> <87vapuwvj0.fsf@gmail.com> <20170424143026.53563696@mykolab.ch> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; boundary="Sig_/OdzI+c173nO6MgPij/LBkQa"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:44070) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1d3DlC-0004VZ-QV for guix-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 25 Apr 2017 23:37:00 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1d3Dl9-0002DS-J7 for guix-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 25 Apr 2017 23:36:58 -0400 Received: from mail.centurylink.net ([205.219.233.9]:30842 helo=smtp.centurylink.net) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1d3Dl9-0002C9-9H for guix-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 25 Apr 2017 23:36:55 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20170424143026.53563696@mykolab.ch> List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-devel" To: Petter Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org --Sig_/OdzI+c173nO6MgPij/LBkQa Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Petter, Thanks for the patch! And Chris, thanks for the review. =20 A few notes from my look through: On Mon, 24 Apr 2017 14:30:26 +0200 Petter wrote: >=20 > * gnu/packages/terminals.scm (cool-retro-term): New variable. > --- > gnu/packages/terminals.scm | 62 > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 62 > insertions(+) >=20 > diff --git a/gnu/packages/terminals.scm b/gnu/packages/terminals.scm > index 979278a53..e53062b16 100644 > --- a/gnu/packages/terminals.scm > +++ b/gnu/packages/terminals.scm > @@ -7,6 +7,7 @@ > ;;; Copyright =C2=A9 2016, 2017 Jos=C3=A9 Miguel S=C3=A1nchez Garc=C3=ADa > ;;; Copyright =C2=A9 2017 Tobias Geerinckx-Rice > ;;; Copyright =C2=A9 2017 Ricardo Wurmus > +;;; Copyright =C2=A9 2017 Petter > ;;; > ;;; This file is part of GNU Guix. > ;;; > @@ -49,6 +50,7 @@ > #:use-module (gnu packages xdisorg) > #:use-module (gnu packages xml) > #:use-module (gnu packages docbook) > + #:use-module (gnu packages qt) > #:use-module (srfi srfi-26)) > =20 > (define-public tilda > @@ -433,3 +435,63 @@ its embedding program should provide it to draw on > its behalf. It avoids calling @code{malloc} during normal running > state, allowing it to be used in embedded kernel situations.") > (license license:expat))) > + > +(define-public cool-retro-term > + (let ((commit "e48719fa44e5307df71dbd0fad234f8a6a53f863") > + (revision "1")) > + (package > + (name "cool-retro-term") > + (version (string-append "1.0.0-" revision "." (string-take commit > 7))) > + (source (origin > + (method git-fetch) > + (modules '((guix build utils))) > + (file-name (string-append name "-" version "-checkout")) > + (uri (git-reference > + (url (string-append > "https://github.com/Swordfish90/" name)) > + (commit commit) > + (recursive? #t))) The 'qmltermwidget' project that's bundled here is a fork of LXDE's 'qtermwidget' project, but it seems to be missing at least one patch from qtermwidget that might have security implications. E.g.: https://github.com/lxde/qtermwidget/commit/1727d921b2d99721b9a8493b15defc8f= 838baedd https://github.com/lxde/qtermwidget/commit/f9a7d4ac5de5224c15f5f9184525f81f= dcc8c23b As well as a couple memory leaks: https://github.com/lxde/qtermwidget/commit/08628fda19128b75248548357e416bc3= 73f14f91 https://github.com/lxde/qtermwidget/commit/ef451424d774feb23b42bdcda56ec09d= 1cc96e2a And performance improvements: https://github.com/lxde/qtermwidget/commit/3ce71a3650d93ff7ca10274c1b3056c7= c7494c61 Could you ping the developer about porting some of these fixes to their fork? I think we'd want to create a local patch for at least the first commit. The others could wait for a new release. > + (inputs > + `(("qt" ,qt))) Does this package need all of qt, or could we use the component packages instead? > + (synopsis "Terminal emulator mimicking old cathode ray tube (CRT) > +screens") I'd like to shorten this to "Terminal emulator" > + (description > + "Cool-retro-term (crt) is a terminal emulator which mimics the > look and +feel of the old cathode ray tube (CRT) screens. It has been > designed to be +eye-candy, customizable, and reasonably lightweight.") > + (home-page "https://github.com/Swordfish90/cool-retro-term") > + (license (list license:gpl2 license:gpl3))))) The license seems unclear: 1) there is both a gpl-2.txt and gpl-3.txt in $topsrcdir, but no mention of which actually applies in any of the source files, 2) $topsrcdir/packaging/debian/copyright claims GPL-3, while 4) $topsrcdir/packaging/rpm/cool-retro-term.spec and $topsrcdir/packaging/appdata/cool-retro-term.appdata.xml both claim GPL-3.0+, and 5) the qmltermwidget component appears to be under gpl2+. IANAL but this suggests license:gpl2+ to me. Does that seem right? It would not hurt to also list the SIL license, for $topsrcdir/app/qml/fonts/modern-hermit, and the X11 license for fonts/modern-pro-font-win-tweaked and fonts/modern-proggy-tiny. The fonts/modern-envy-code-r font probably needs to be stripped; it's license is non-free; from 'Read Me.txt': "Free to use but redistribution prohibited." and the fonts/1977-apple2, fonts/1977-commodore-pet, probably also needs to be stripped as non-free; from 'FreeLicense.txt': "1. The User may not sell copies of the Software for a fee." The fonts/1979-atari-400-800 font seems to be non-free license, which is not mentioned in the 'ReadMe.rtf' but only on the WayBack Machine at https://web-beta.archive.org/web/20080907111008/http://www2.bitstream.net/~= marksim/atarimac/fonts.html : "These fonts are freeware and may not be offered for sale seperately or as part of a collection." The fonts/1982-commodore64 font is licensed under non-free terms; see fonts/1982-commodore64/license.txt The only mention of a license for fonts/1985-ibm-pc-vga is at http://www.dafont.com/font-comment.php?file=3Dperfect_dos_vga_437 where the author says "The license is this: this font is free to use in whatever you want.", but that probably "doesn't count". I could not find license info for a few of the other fonts. OTOH I recall a discussion on IRC recently about fonts embedded in packages being treated as non-functional data, and thus OK from a FSDG perspective. But I would want verification on that. Sorry for the dump. I'd like to work these things out; it looks like a fun terminal to use. `~Eric --Sig_/OdzI+c173nO6MgPij/LBkQa Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQEzBAEBCgAdFiEEP6ffQNOS1+XjkicBHrvSBHgfliwFAlkAFbsACgkQHrvSBHgf lizElwf/QwREaTR5/pFwC4ykU1d/QORilSvqgrrQ2W2wlSkf9xQHqiqZkXsaCljE CmeJXq8H+CwWyh5vpGsH+UECc6DcZt3Xdrtp9m2Z3j+ker2P+R6z1fqUXJGwy4Hu e8DKeUQbDDhjY/S/OtZxm2J/gYmZaUhs+8pmpu+Eb91X9m1wQwQhhfmE66PxP3RI Oz5UYRdbNInbS+58rHE3Dx5ydAM7UpqLqKaOt9p6bsRtnsH14qExFIMYFGdPy+sj 1/zm4CRw/5nWcxLyJ5W+7ZfRp7fMB5pAKpudE1OFYMG098v3ffyYkshkKGe+LgGr ktbRNVT0RpQWozrO+JYq0OvaHStjUQ== =bM62 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/OdzI+c173nO6MgPij/LBkQa--