Subject: [bug#52109] [PATCH] gnu: Add unrar-free.

From: Maxim Cournoyer <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 04 Jan 2023 15:21:53 -0500

Hi,

Liliana Marie Prikler <[email-masked]> writes:

> Am Mittwoch, dem 04.01.2023 um 00:32 -0500 schrieb kiasoc5:
>> On 1/3/23 19:57, Maxim Cournoyer wrote:
>> > 
>> > While I appreciate your concern, I don't think it is a problem to
>> > have unrar-free in GNU Guix; it is free software and respects the
>> > GNU FSDG, as far as I can tell
>> Debian and Fedora, whose package guidelines are generally free-
>> software friendly (with some exceptions), include unrar-free.
>> 
>> https://repology.org/project/unrar-free/versions
> Neither Debian nor Fedora are recommended GNU distros.  As for
> Trisquel, which is, note how severely outdated the version there is.

That it is present in Trisquel says a lot about its standing with FSDG.

> More importantly,
>
> Am Dienstag, dem 03.01.2023 um 19:57 -0500 schrieb Maxim Cournoyer:
>> Since the program uses libarchive, it would think it supports the
>> same features as libarchive itself.  Its value is in providing a
>> simpler to use front-end CLI.
>
> Yes, the supported features are exactly the libarchive feature set. 
> However, I would argue that the value of providing this "simpler to use
> front-end" is in fact a negative one.  For one, bsdtar's CLI is not
> that complicated, but what's more, some programs like file-roller
> (which let's be honest, the uninitiated user is more likely to use than
> either CLI) have an escape hatch for non-libarchive implementations of
> unrar.  Using this escape hatch to sneak in libarchive is plain silly
> :)

I think arguing about how complicated alternatives are to use or whether
users should use such alternatives is beside the point.  Guix contains
free software packages contributed by its contributors, not a curated
list of software that have been deemed useful or worthy based on the
opinions of the Guix committers/reviewers.

-- 
Thanks,
Maxim