Duckstation(one of the most popular PS1 Emulators) dev plans on eventually dropping Linux support due to Linux users, especially Arch Linux users.
Duckstation(one of the most popular PS1 Emulators) dev plans on eventually dropping Linux support due to Linux users, especially Arch Linux users.
I see a few top level comments agreeing with the sentiment that users are being entitled or abusive, but what are they actually referring to? The linked image certainly has no evidence of such behavior. Someone who claims to be the developer filed a deletion request for the duckstation-git AUR package on the AUR and they say:
Every time, it turns into abuse towards me, as you can also see in the comments for the package.
I read through a few pages of the comments here and they're mostly people talking about fixing issues with the package, and what to do about the dev purposely breaking the build... I only found a single message that could be called abuse:
@eugene, not really but i suspect it's an uphill battle, check the commit message: https://github.com/stenzek/duckstation/commit/30df16cc767297c544e1311a3de4d10da30fe00c
FWIW, I'm moving to pcsx-redux, I rather run a little bit less advanced PSX emulator than software by this upstream asshat. Regardless, much thanks for maintaining the AUR package so far.
And even this is not a good example of what stenzek is describing. For one, it's obviously a reaction to stenzek's hostile changes and not the sort of user coming for support and being abusive that stenzek is talking about. The user is also explicitly moving to a different emulator and not expecting any change from duckstation.
The more I look into it the more it looks like the dev is being a jerk and demanding, doesn't understand what he's complaining about. And lying about getting abuse that appears to honestly be self inflicted.
It's his project and his right to do with it what he may. But this seriously just appears to be a self inflicted man problem he's complaining about.
Zero sympathy honestly. Just be a damn adult and do what you need to do. Don't shead crocodiles tears for sympathy points.
The answer for this guy and other people stretched by supporting Linux is to say it's flatpak or nothing. Stop trying to build for each dist because it's not sustainable. If someone on a dist wants to maintain a package then let them take the heat if it is broken.
I don't think you quite understand how this works. No distro ever asks third party programmers to create packages for themโthat's the job of the distro's own team, or of enthusiasts using the distro. All the distro packagers want or need from the original programmer is the source code and enough documentation to get it to compile. They take it from there.
If someone on a dist wants to maintain a package then let them take the heat if it is broken.
That's quite literally what happened and why this guy is moaning though. Nobody asked him for an Arch build, people distribute it themselves on the AUR and he's annoyed anyway.
Why should he get a say on how someone else installs the software on their own systems?
If I want to build an arch package instead, what business is that of his?
I use the Duckstation flatpak funny enough
Flatpak is dead, moving to appimage. Finally, an appimage that isn't broken.
No, you are harassing and bullying poor Stenzek.
Typical Linux user, using Linux and stuff.
/s
Linux pros: FOSS, free, private, secure, etc.
Linux cons: Linux users
Users are, in general, the worst part of making any user focused product.
This job would be great if it wasnt for the fucking customers.
Don't forget Linux devs are also Linux users. And they are just as much a con as the non dev users!
Sometimes devs are the most difficult users.
"Why is this not working the way it should? Ok, yes I did rewrite how the code manages save data in the filesystem, but that shouldn't have any impact, I just thought it should make sure it only writes in 8k chunks because I read a comment somewhere that says it would increase ssd life by 3%, but I promise you it's exactly equivalent to the original code and the problem must be elsewhere, not my patch. I patched dozens of other packages without issue with my 8k barrier strategy without any problems"
Devs come up with wild ideas, rewrite stuff, fail to mention it until you run into it, then explain why it doesn't matter and stubbornly refuse to at least try without their weird change.
this developer is a big prick. i had an issue (that turned out to be user error after getting help from another source) with the android version of duckstation so went to their discord for support. instead of offering any aid or insight, i was immediately stereotyped as "an android user" and told "we don't offer tech support for android" basically for no other reason than "because android users bitch too much and then give you a bad review," which is just kind of insane imo? there's no downside to bad reviews like you're not going to get delisted? anyways, completely not surprised to hear this from that ass. it genuinely seems like this guy hates developing duckstation at all and i am confused why he bothers. give it up man, sounds like you'll be happier
"I don't want to get bad reviews so I'm going to be a massive dick to my users"
Sounds like someone who uses Windows and is annoyed that anyone else uses anything other than Windows.
I dunno about anyone else, but that's a giant red flag for me when it comes to software devs
Eh, I use Linux and am annoyed at issues from users on other systems. I don't know Windows dev very well, so fixing issues on Windows is a pain for me. Likewise for macOS.
So I get it.
That said, the proper way to handle this is to make it explicit what platforms are supported and which are not, accept fixes for unsupported platforms that don't break supported platforms, close issues related to packaging and whatnot on other platforms, and leave open and ignore issues for unsupported platforms. Let the community support what they want, and focus on what you want.
instead of offering any aid or insight, i was immediately stereotyped as โan android userโ and told โwe donโt offer tech support for androidโ basically for no other reason than โbecause android users bitch too much and then give you a bad review,โ
This sounds like there were several users berating you, not (just) the developer?
It's a tricky one. You can't ban every user from your Discord just for being condescending.
The developer also had a massive drama with RetroArch because, wait for it... "RetroArch users complain too much!" so that's actually a common sentiment coming from them and it's absolutely not restricted to Linux. He hates Linux users, Android users, RetroArch users... at this point I wonder why even publish this as a public user facing project at all, he clearly hates users.
I've seen this, some server Admins and mods actually encourage the behavior via modeling. They do it once and that gives permission to the other users to act similarly. Becoming a cultural problem with the whole server. Then they don't ever correct or moderate the behavior, further encouraging it.
it genuinely seems like this guy hates developing duckstation at all.
I don't think you get it. He probably enjoys creating, and achieving something awesome. He has no obligation to deal with entitled users of what he gives away
Then he really shouldn't have a discord server where he offers tech support.
It's one thing to not give anyone lemonade, you're never obligated to do that for no reason, however it's another thing to set up a free lemonade stand and tell whoever tries to get lemonade that they're annoying and to go away.
If he only wants to create something and not deal with any user issues, he could just do that. Going out of his way to tell users to fuck off is extra work he could just not do and everyone would be happier
You mean "self-entitled". "Entitled" means that you actually are owed something. It's like the difference between righteous and self-righteous.
Sounds like hes just tired of dealing with idiots.
Which I can sympathise with.
Who forces him to respond to such messages on Discord? He can just not engage with people of whom he thinks are idiots.
If he doesnโt want to engage with users at all, maybe not set up a Discord in the first place.
I mean, he's not wrong, plenty of pre-release games allow you to download before it's out, then android users go and give it 1 star because the servers aren't open yet.
Dev here who also happens to support Linux, and while Linux has its own challenges (whoever came up with the libevdev API, should not allowed to come up with any other API's), I think it's good to support Linux natively regardless. GNOME devs however should stop forcing their UX ideas onto others sometimes even outside of Linux. One of them when I was asking about how to I make the Alt key on Windows to stop it trying to open the nonexistent menu bar, then they told me to "just add one". I'm developing games, not just desktop apps, where the alt key isn't expected to open a menu bar. I then got told that it's "expected behavior" (Hungarian here, I'd like to expect that both alt keys are for accessing a second set of gliphs, and one of them isn't a dedicated "menu key"), and that games like Unreal Tournament "did it already" (that one used the escape key for menus).
GNOME devs however should stop forcing their UX ideas onto others
And then break them with every major release
The gnome team is worse then apple and Microsoft.
At least they own the entire OS they force their changes on.
The gnome team just fucks with everyone everywhere and gives zero fucks otherwise.
I used to have this view but I've come around: change can be painful but it's also necessary. It's like a wildfire: it's destructive but it allows for new growth and it's a sign of a healthy, sustainable ecosystem. Suppressing change isn't healthy.
Do I think that every change from Gnome is a winner? Nope but I do think they're doing their best to move in the right direction, as they see it. And for that, I'll keep using Gnome and I wish them good luck.
One of them when I was asking about how to I make the Alt key on Windows to stop it trying to open the nonexistent menu bar, then they told me to โjust add oneโ.
FYI - if you haven't figured this out already (and useful info for other Win32 devs), simply block WM_SYSCOMMAND in your WndProc of your app if the pressed key is SC_KEYMENU.
I've done this for a game mod I'm developing (it didn't have windowed mode originally) and I specifically blocked it only during active gameplay. Otherwise (e.g. during menus) it can be pretty useful to keep active.
Interesting. The only thing i knew is: the escape key is really important for Unreal Tournament.
The original Unreal Tournament (or UT'99, or whatever) is also one of the very few modern-ish full screen games that had a drop down menu bar like you'd expect on a typical Windows application. The other one I can think of off the top of my head is ZSNES, although in that case they rolled their own solution. Not least of which because the original ZSNES was a DOS program (with huge chunks of it written in x86 assembly!) so they kind of didn't have a choice.
If I remember right UT'99 actually did use Windows style accelerator keys in its menus, i.e. hold down Alt and press a letter to perform an action, which might just make all this malarkey peripherally relevant.
Refuse to build in Arch package environments. My license does not allow for packages
but it's not a package. On arch it downloads the source from his own git and it compiles it on the end user machine. He is a dev and doesn't know that? Or just pretending?
AUR is just (automated) instructions on how to compile (except -bin, in that case it's packaged)
A previous commit of the readme even said:
Linux users are encouraged to build from source when possible
yes, good luck building from source without documentation on what libraries do you need
He is a dev and doesnโt know that?
I think it's reasonable that he doesn't. He doesn't use Arch (or any Linux flavor), so isn't aware of how packaging for Arch works. I'm guessing someone submitted the PKGBUILD and he just accepted it, and now people come to him for support instead of the person who submitted it.
I 100% agree w/ removing the PKGBUILD, but he doesn't need to go out of his way to remove Linux support. Just state that the project doesn't officially support Linux, but is open to Linux-specific bug fixes. Then if anyone complains about a distro-specific issue, close the issue and move on. If someone opens what seems to be a legitimate bug w/ Linux, leave it open and move on.
That's really all the community should expect here.
They know. The PKGBUILD they provided is exactly the kind of thing that's in the AUR. The dev's PKGBUILD wasn't in the AUR because they didn't want it to be โ instead hoping arch users would go to the repository and use their maintained one. Arch users continued to try to use AUR instead, leading to the dev's frustration.
I don't expect this will help anything. If the AUR maintainer is active, they will probably just patch that restriction out.
While users can be demanding, this reads like a very immature response. Going out of your way to block support and prohibit packaging, which you can let others do with 0 seconds of your time, is kinda rude.
Author may have been harassed for all I know, but this is still an emotional response. They could have just said "yeah I'm not supporting this at all, figure it out yourselves if you want to" rather than actively blocking Linux functionality/packaging, which is what this sounds like.
Just because itโs open source
It's not open source. The maintainer relicensed the project from GPL to the current source-available license last year.
The AUR package uses the last GPL release before the change and thus does the current license does not apply.
So this is more like source available rather than open source...
Just because itโs open source doesnโt mean itโs necessarily open for all uses. His license explicitly denied using his code in packages. People did it anyway.
There exists pkgbuilds for arch and previously packages of the older GPL builds.
A pkgbuild is just a recipe for each users computer do do the stuff needed to fetch and or build publicly available software. It is copyright the writer of the recipe not the owner of the software thus fetched. That is to say the owner of foobar can't copyright the functional equivalent of a bash script which does git clone and make install foobar.
The older versions thereof are still available under the GPL and aren't subject to being removed.
Neither of these are actually subject to the authors whims. He doesn't own the pkgbuild and if he chooses to offer the file to users they can download it either by manually git cloning it or having a script do it.
So no they didn't "do it anyway"
He explicitly states that it is not 0% of his time due to being bombarded with support requests.
Are you volunteering to field the support requests?
What I'm saying is that a more reasonable stance is to say "package as-is or fork it if you want I will put 0 effort to accomodate".
Others have clarified that they are not as extreme as I thought though so maybe that's fine.
I just think that from a perspective this seems like a "people in X country keep writing gay fanfic about my book and asking if A and B characters are gay. so I'm gonna stop selling there and also destroy All copies left in their language. Because I'm a petty man-child".
But, once again, I hope this is not what's actually happening here and my reading was off.
As an open source developer, Iโd love to have had contributors to help package my apps. It was killing me maintaining everything by myself. It sounds like the control issues I had when I first had contributors, where I didnโt want others to touch my babies too much when people actually started writing code.
Honestly as a dev, I just don't give a fuck. Is that a licence? MIT is close enough.
I let people pr and if it breaks something, oh well. It's not attached to my real name anyway. A good ci/cd saves time and mental energy so I don't have to publish and test. If I bother.
There's some things like onionos that I've helped out with thst I actually take pride in. But it's all for fun. Why not, it's my time. Code will come and go, but I left things a tiny bit better for all y'all.
Sometimes external packaging is a huge issue for certain projects, where their support gets flooded with stuff that isnโt in their control and their reputation gets tanked.
โฆThat being said, a PS1 emulator doesnโt seem so extreme to warrant that?
Valid points but the maintainer comes off as deranged.
If I give something for free, it's my rules. Simple as that. Don't like it? don't accept it.
Linus is often a dick. He even acknowledges it. Don't like it? Well, there are other OS.
I'm not like that, I like being helpful, I actually do many volunteer hours a week, but... I do hate entitlement. I don't see these people giving Microsoft as hard a time.
Lets keep the Karen constrained, please.
Yeah but you also don't get to be upset if someone calls you unpleasant. Both things can be true.
Linus is an ass, but he also doesn't make problems for other people then blame them for those problems he made himself.
Like this dev is doing. It's not remotely the same situation.
This guy is fucking with his users, then telling them to fuck off and then bitching people don't respect him or follow his rules.
While denying he is fucking with people and trying to claim he's being harassed.
That's /not/ how that works. It's your project your rules. But you also can't be a fuckwad and deny it. While expecting anyone to respect you or what you say.
No, Maintainer comes off as pissed off for dealing with a lot of headaches created by others creating a version he doesnt support, and doesnt want, yet is dealing with all the backlash and headache of.
and to try to stem the tide, he created a package just for those people.. and they refuse to use it, continuing to use the broken version, and bombarding him with headaches over something that he, again, does not control.
Only liars would say they wouldnt be pissed off dealing with such a situation.
While I understand and respect his feeling, in my limited experience, people that don't like when distributions package their software are often deranged.
Still, if you are using OS packages, your first stop should be OS fora / bug trackers, not upstream. Whoever is producing the distro/OS packages should engage with upstream if and when that's necessary. Upstream, especially small upstreams, really shouldn't be expected to deal with the craziness of Nix, Arch, Debian, and SteamOS all at the same time.
Users are, IME, mostly annoying. Sometimes (not often) I'm glad none of my software has any. At least at work I can point at the Teams / Slack / Jira conversation to prove they specifically asked for something completely different last week and I implemented that.
This is sad. Various programs have gone through the same type of situation with Debian stable. Debian is very conservative and doesn't ship upgrades quickly on their stable branch. Various authors have complained because they frequently get emails / bug reports from Debian users, who happen to be using a few-years-old version of their software.
I do understand the frustration, but it does feel a bit like throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
It's possible there are other solutions, like detecting whatever random issue is frustrating people and pop up a dialog.
For example, if he's upset with it being broken on Wayland, why not detect Wayland and start off with a dialog: "Wayland is beta and is not officially supported. See FAQ here: [........]"
Just blocking people feels over the top. But hey, it's his project, if he wants to go this way, it's his choice and right. Depending on the license he might get forked, but that's just how it goes.
As someone who used to use arch for years, I can't stand its users who go around acting like running it is some herculean task that takes serious knowledge.
In reality its not much more than a misbehaved pet that requires constant attention and a blog post to be read every month or so. Not because its hard, but because its updates are just kinda slapped together and tossed out in the name of speed.
One of the biggest indicators of this is the AUR. For what it was worth, the Gentoo crowd it replaced at least knew how to compile a program.
Maybe learn to use git, tar, and make like literally anyone else on any other fucking distro.
I don't use Arch but I have noticed a growing number of forums where people seem to talk about a lot of problems. I have used Gentoo, Debian, Ubuntu etc. But Arch stands out as the distro that seems to have the most helpless users. Or is it the most broken distro?
I use arch on a couple of machines and for a rolling release I find it surprisingly hassle free. So with a scientifically relevant sample size of one ;) - I declare that it's the people that are the problem.
That is with regular updates though.
I also have a gentoo box that is fine if you let it update every week or two, but tends to need more love and attention if you turn it on again after half a year. I wouldn't be surprised if that's the same for arch. Users who only update twice a year aren't really the target audience for rolling release.
It probably also depends on your hardware and what your usecases are; as always using the right tool for the job helps
I feel like I'd need to check the wiki less if pacman had flags that made more sense lol. Plus so many variations of commands the wiki warns "this will break your shit".
I really like Arch, I'm using CachyOS, it's been great. But I do miss apt lol. Maybe that's just because I was used to it though. Update and upgrade being two totally different things is also extremely counterintuitive.
Their right to do so, but the comment sounds like a whiny bitch.
I think this should have been anticipated after the license change.
Yeah. That's a pretty shitty license to move to for endusers and others. Disallowing derivatives, etc. is within their rights but, really a dick move but, considering this commit message, not surprising.
It's actually not within their rights (I am NOT a lawyer)
GPL code is still owned by the person who wrote it, that includes contributors who have made a PR. Unless they all signed CLAs (Contributor License Agreements) to hand over their copyright to the repository owner, the repository owner does not hold copyright for this code, and as such can't legally change the license. They can use and distribute it as specified in the license terms of the GPL, but that excludes changing the license.
It was if I remember right, just not by the dev
Just fork it lol
This is the dev that changed the license a while back from GPL to CC-BY-NC-ND because they got mad about forks.
The kicker here is that the AUR package they're whining about here is based on the last GPL version.
So he fucked his own packaging with the licenses and now blames the users for complaining? Common Windows Dev L
changed the license .. from GPL to CC-BY-NC-ND
oof. Good luck with that in FOSS world.
I can sympathize with being frustrated but that's silly
So couldn't someone just fork from the version on AUR?
Yeah im sure someone will fork and it will be named chickensation or whatever. Then we will move on.
Hope the developer feels better. Its easy to get burnt out on passion projects. If I were to guess, this is what is happening. They are going to say some pretty insane things in the next couple of weeks and then get a handle on their life.
Ive always liked: epsxe myself. Works well and no real drama. Its a very old console.
Would have to go back to before the license change in September 2024. The current license basically forbids forks, from my reading.
You can't fork it or redistribute it... but you can distribute patches for users to apply, and those are easy to add in a PKGBUILD. That's how a lot of game/ROM patches are distributed and they appear to be legal.
It's an emulator, lets be real, the majority of the users couldn't give a shit about license terms anyway.
You cannot forbid forking a public GitHub repository, per their terms of service
So how would that work? I know we say emulators are allowed...but Nintendo came knocking a while ago, Github removed the repos pretty quick. If they go and applies their fork-less license in a court of law....that would have very nasty consequences for them.
Year of the Linux desktop pushed out a year due to Linux infighting and intolerable advocates for the 33rd year. Clearly the fault of the other distros as I use Arch.
Imagine if Linux developers building the libraries this was built on where as petty.
This is so lame for the arch community, like I use arch btws are supposed to be the most hardcore power users and they bugged a dev that badly! I don't know how many tutorial I saw about compiling arch and building everything yourself into a minimal setup.
You can't give me shit for using Manjaro for as long as I did, GLAD I LEFT.
Most arch users are casuals that finally figured out how to read a manual. Then you have the 1% of arch users who are writing the manualโฆ
Itโs the Gentoo and BSD users we should fear and respect, walking quietly with a big stick of competence.
I donโt know how many tutorial I saw about compiling arch
2 things wrong with that:
You don't know what you're talking about.
I submitted a PR and bug report for something I was using recently to better help arch users install it in the future. I encourage other folks to do that. If you ever have trouble installing something, just submit a little PR with tweaks to the README that would've helped you. Oftentimes they'll accept them. It benefits everyone.
Manjaro was my first Arch distro and I enjoyed it until I found out about the issues with packages always being out of date. Switched over to EndeavourOS and have been loving it so far. It's been "just working" for like two years now and even my 70 year old parents don't notice a difference from Windoze when they borrow my laptop. In fact my dad is using it to do some Quicken work today (which was an adventure to get working. WineHQ community was super helpful though)
I'm immediately skeptical of developers who use Windows. At best, it makes me question their judgement.
Windows isn't exactly my cup of tea either, but at the end of the day an operating system is just a tool to do what you need to do on a computer.
Linux is my choice, but everyone's got their preference.
They might be on OSX..
Arch linux. Hmm. Could it be because of the users? Lately arch linux has become the most popular distro for people trying linux for the first time. Are they all congregating on duckstation's github to cry about it?
Its moments like this I'm glad to be a nixos user lol.
Slap that shit in a flake and forget about it. No matter what updates the dev has, or what system the user has, its always gonna compile.
Fuck I love nix.
If it had genitals I'd fucking date it.
Least obsessed nixos user
Slap those genitals in a flake and get those dinner reservations ready!
Nixos can be whatever your imagination wants it to be!
Sounds a lot like I would like Debian to stop shipping Xscreensaver.
Can't believe it's been 9 years since that drama
I think he should just drop linux support.
no need to whine or complain.
"not doing linux builds anymore, here is the source, build it yourself if you want", done.
So what other ps1/2 emulators are on Linux yall would recommend. I don't wanna support this dev
Were you supporting him before?
If you care about RetroAchievement support, this is what they support.
Beetle is the RetroArch core that's most often recommended. If you don't like RA (they have serious issues of their own), the Beetle core comes from the emulator Mednafen.
And the other main open-source option is PCSXR.
For ps2 there is pcsx2 and for ps1 you could try retroarch.
Mednafen is pretty great.
MAME also has PSX emulation. It's marked as not working, but I've heard it's actually pretty good, and I got good results on the few games I tried.
Just grep the source for "wayland" and you'll see what I mean.
and
# Refuse to build in Arch package environments
MATCHES ".*archlinux.*")
Not sure if there is more to this, but it seems like it screws over X11 users for no reason (I'm still using a 1050Ti).
Iโm on a mobile 1050 and wayland, thing rocks ๐
I waited a long while to try it
look inside
crash to login manager.
Not sure if you're using some non-proprietary driver or what, but I'm not worried about switching over. Maybe nice with AMD GPU, unlikely for me though.
I don't want GNOME or Plasma (I've had issues with Plasma on X11 when I tried it) so that could be it, too.
Can someone grep Wayland and tell us what you find?
IDK how I would do that on my phone.
Lmao welcome to the world of open source
Project doesn't have an issue tracker, wonder why
I don't know who the bad guy is here because closing the source a while back makes me distrust this dev yet also I 100% believe Linux users (or at least the power users) are almost certainly insufferable in ways that would drive a reasonable dev out of development for Linux.
Seems like a skill issue on the part of the dev. GitHub lets you create issue templates and even forms. He could have made it so that every issue creator is warned that packaging issues will be ignored and closed without comment.
"We tried nothing so far and are going for the nuclear option first"
People still don't care. They'll still open packaging related issues. And someone will still have to sift through those and close them individually.
Then explain to me how the bazillion other open source cross-platform Windows-first projects do it. Dropping support for Linux moving forward is fine, but actively going out of your way to remove the existing support is petty and just an asshole move. Especially when paired with a license that restricts 3rdparty packaging.
Also "this doesn't work" is a bad reason not to invest the 3 minutes it takes to make an issue template, and it will already decrease the amount of packaging related issues by at least something
Imagine if Linux developers building the libraries this was built on where as petty.
Petty is pretty harsh and reading this message I wish I'd paused and chosen a better word.
That said, the way the commit reads, the relicensing, the fact they seem to be upset the aur is locked to the GPL version to comply with the license but also poisoning the build scripts like it's somehow going to affect the old GPL code. It just does not sound like someone acting in good faith with the open source community they're clearly building on top of and that does rub me the wrong way.
What a whiny baby XD
Well, then fuck you too, buddy.
But then someone else would have to maintain it for Linux, and Arch Linux specifically. That's a lot of work, especially as things diverge from the features intended for an emulator (/s)
Ok. Back to Mednafen I guess.
ArchLinux users can be a pain sometimes, but we're also often right when calling out someone's broken software.
Given other drama around that project and the developer clearly being a Windows fanboy, they're probably doing a lot wrong and blaming the Linux fragmentation for it instead of doing things properly, getting called out on it, and then being pissed at the users for it.
Makes me want to write an intentionally buggy PKGBUILD with wildly unsupported patches out of spite.
Ffs.... I loved this emu.
After being on Lemmy, I have some kneejerk sympathy.
Seems harsh though.
[edit: I rescind my harsh comment. It was a classic didnโt read the article situation along with just wanting to mock arch dorks without starting a fight.
So instead: Stop being toxic and demanding arch users! I donโt care if the title is misleading or editorialized or totally false.]
Kinda reminds me of when Lizardbyte had a falling out with the Arch base re:Sunshine.
It sucks but I can understand considering how terminally online and entitled a lot of users are, plus thereโs an AppImage for this still so hopefully that covers the gap.
Sad news. This is the only PSX emu I've ever used because I always considered it the best.
I don't know, the PSX is old and well understood enough now that in my head it's in the bundle of "just do Retroarch" systems along with all the 8 and 16 bit stuff.
I don't even remember what core I usually run for it. They're all at least serviceable to great.
It's good to hear, but it's not only about emulator core itself, it's also about UI/UX of the shell. Duckstation's interface and options are quite intuitive and easy to use. I remember Retroarch being a bit confusing/unfriendly last time I tried it, but it was so long ago, that it might not be the case anymore.
DuckStation is the main PSX libretro core.
I'll still be using it regardless..its not like its going to dissappear
Since you made me go look wtf it was...
"Fast PlayStation 1 emulator for x86-64/AArch32/AArch64/RV64"
It sure would be a shame if his software was covered by the gpl because it's statically linked against Qt or FFMpeg or any other library... ๐
I really liked the widescreen option. Do any other PSX emulators have it integrated like Duckstation does?
I donโt know how Duckstation does it, but Retroarch cores (Beetle/Mednafen and PCSX) support widescreen?
I also don't see Swanstation going away any time soon, even if it gets no new features. It's pretty close to feature complete in the ways that matter anyway.
A dev with some sense.
Fuck Linux.
A dev with some sense.
I mean, youโre not wrong. The dev does have some sense, not a lot, not a little, just some a very broad some.
Fuck Linux.
Gamers can be the most entitled demanding assholes. Arch users can be the most annoying arrogant and conceited people to exist online.
I wouldn't dare imagine dealing with the unholy mix of arch gamers min-maxing social skills for inferiority complex.
I'd rather drop support too.
Is there a specific interaction that made them angry?
Stenzek's feeling got hurt when DuckStation was still proper open source software and people used the software fully in accordance with its license, i.e. they distributed modifications and not all permitted modifications were the most polished ones, so he felt that they give his name a bad reputation. Again: Stenzek released DuckStation under a license that explicitly allows this.
So he rage quit open source and released new DuckStation versions under a very restrictive "source available to look but not touch" license that's so insanely restrictive, Linux distributions are not allowed to make their own packages. So they ship the old version that works just fine because PlayStation 1 emulation was figured out very long ago. Stenzek feels that they should not ship the old version (which they are fully entitled to) and instead make a special exception for his software alone to point their users to DuckStation's website where instead of acquiring the emulator from their package manager (or "app store" in case you're not familiar with that term), Linux users should take extra steps to manually download and install DuckStation.
And since users may not know about this rift, they may post bug reports and feature ideas to Stenzek, even though these bugs may have been long fixed by non-open source DuckStation.
Basically: Stenzek did not read the license he picked for his software and then got mad when people made use of provisions explicitly allowed by the license.
It would be saner to drop direct tech support than to drop support for an operating system
รe maintainers are รฐe same. I don't know if it's รฐe chicken, or รฐe egg, but distro maintainers do tend to set รฐe tone.
And, yeah, I use Arch everywhere, because so far everyรพing else is worse.
Stop trying to make eth or thorn happen. You just make your comments harder to read
No idea what is going on with your comment, but whatever it is is not English. I typically only block spammers and trolls, but happily you definitely fall into one or the other (or both.)
Issue isnt so much the 12 arch users that actually know what they are doing, but all the fucking posers
You mean "self-entitled". When you're "entitled", you are owed something.