Conversation
pbsds
added
the
9.needs: community feedback
pbsds
force-pushed
the
drop-torzu-1747052726
branch
from
aaeafef to
e0828b8
Compare
|
A pretty good observation (link) by @nyanloutre:
|
github-actions
bot
added
10.rebuild-darwin: 0
emilazy
left a comment
emilazy
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It looks like we switched to a fork opened by the PR author in #388823 without any review scrutiny. Even that fork’s readme says:
A lot of fake Torzu websites have popped up. These are not mine. This project will not have a clearnet website for the foreseeable future! I highly advice against downloading anything from these websites, specially if their intention is clearly to make money through advertisements.
Regardless of the Nintendo side of it, I don’t think we can support packages without canonical clearnet upstreams in Nixpkgs, at least in the absence of a fetchtor or something. I agree that we probably shouldn’t package at least this specific software.
patka-123
left a comment
patka-123
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Fully agreed with the reasoning. We should definitely remove this.
Is there something we can do/document so we can learn from this? Maybe we can add a link to this PR in the doc addition in #405187 somewhere? It's always a risk to make documents too long, but simple links to examples might be beneficial.
|
Hi, sorry, but I don't really see why you want to delete my package, which is also an emulator that works very well. Best Regards |
Hi, I've clarified this change. Best Regards |
Hi, I'm neither really for nor really against this removal. Best Regards |
winterqt
left a comment
winterqt
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I've had opinions about this when I originally was made aware that we have this package, and those haven't changed: this needs to go, it's a liability. It's always possible to maintain out-of-tree if @liberodark wishes.
Regardless, the fact that upstream is (I guess) unresponsive and that we're just using a mirror provided by the maintainer is also... iffy at best.
I think the reasons given are plenty valid.
Sure. Nintendo is taking down and going after all Yuzu (adjacent) software. Torzu itself gets taken down all the time to the point they don't want a clearnet website. Just taking the software and putting a copy somewhere paints a massive target on your back, which nixpkgs should avoid. The risk itself is simply not worth it for nixpkgs as a whole. If you want to have the software you can keep it out-of-tree, and do with it as you please. |
|
Going to merge in 24h or so if nobody else objects -- will put out a call for opinions in #dev. IMO we should go as far as backporting, but given 24.11 has weeks to live, it's less of an issue. |
Thank you for your comment and explanation. |
|
Shouldn't we in the save vain remove ryujinx and ryubing too technically? |
|
Ryujinx is different in that legal action hasn't been taken against it or its forks, merely the author was compelled by Nintendo to delete the upstream. |
Yuzu code technically isn't 'illegal' (even in America courts) the settlement prohibited the Yuzu devs from using that code and developing it further. This I feel like its overzealous, I do agree with suyu drop though as that fork is dead. |
Except maybe invalidating Hydra caches, none. |
Pandapip1
added
the
1.severity: legal
9 participants
This PR was prompted by #403752. If this is merged then it makes sense to close #403752 and close #295587.
I propose to drop Torzu. It seems torzu was added to nixpkgs with little scrutiny despite the massive list of DMCA takedowns by Nintendo including followups addressing Torzu. The Switch 2 is about to launch and I predict more action is bound to come from Nintendo. As such I think redistributing torzu is a legal liability for nixpkgs.
It seems torzu was already asked to leave Codeberg, moving to NotABug. While it is still listed there it does not load for me. I take this as either the host choosing to shadow block it or it being subject to some denial of service. Torzu nixpkgs bumps in response seem to jump to whichever rehosted copy is available at the time.
I don't think Torzu will improve liability wise, and the developers has opted to evade future takedowns by continuing development using "Dark Git"/onion routing. This is in stark contrast to projects like Azahar which take drastic measures to address the legal concerns.
I can't find yuzu or citra mentioned in
aliases.nixanymore for some reason, this PR also re-adds the original entries to prevent future confusion.Any objections?
Things done
nix.conf? (See Nix manual)sandbox = relaxedsandbox = truenix-shell -p nixpkgs-review --run "nixpkgs-review rev HEAD". Note: all changes have to be committed, also see nixpkgs-review usage./result/bin/)Add a 👍 reaction to pull requests you find important.