[Dev] [RFC] Let's solve the Chromium freedom issues, definitively

[bill-auger]

On Tue, 2 Jun 2020 21:01:19 -0400 Megver83 wrote:
> you forgot to send this to the mailing list
> 
> El 02-06-20 a las 20:03, eliotreyna escribió:
> > Honestly, I'm using Chromium from Arch Linux (installed in
> > my netbook due to my wifi card that requires a blob to
> > work), 

that immediate (perceived) problem may be solved with a single
command:

# pacman -U https://www.parabola.nu/packages/libre/x86_64/iceweasel/download/

it is the general procedure for installing foreign packages -
alternatively, one could have run parabola, and installed the
blob packages and/or chromium - the difference would be an arch
system with a few parabola packages, vs a parabola system with a
few arch packages; but either configuration should be
functional, albeit unsupported, because parabola promises to be
compatible with arch 

all of #1167 is mainly a workload concern, of far less of
importance to users; because ideally, every parabola user would
know these essential things:

* hardware support does not prevent anyone from running a
  parabola system; though it is a common notion - almost any
  individual arch package, including the kernel and hardware
  blobs, could be installed onto a parabola system - no one is
  compelled to run a complete arch system, if only to gain
  hardware support

* for any software with a maintained PKGBUILD, the primary value
  is in the maintenance of the PKGBUILD - if the PKGBUILD is
  well-maintained, then anyone should be able to compile and
  install it easily - the value of the binary packages in repos,
  is mainly in the conveniences of having them pre-compiled, and
  having octopi managing them automatically

* if every parabola user becomes familiar with makepkg and a few
  pacman tricks, then most packaging decisions are rarely
  impose more than a matter of minor conveniences lost or gained
  upon users