Re: [GNU-linux-libre] [Trisquel-devel] FSDG question: extension of bleachbit patch for Trisquel

[Luke Shumaker]

On Tue, 26 Dec 2017 14:09:01 -0500,
On 12/25/2017 07:59 PM, Pablo Correa Gómez wrote:
>       Basically, Bleachbit is a program able to remove temporary
> files from different other programs. Unfortunately, it mentions and
> supports some non-free programs that are not supported by Trisquel, but
> that could be installed from source or from Ubuntu repositories. It can
> also run in Windows.
> 
>       We have patched the program in a way that a regular user will
> not be suggested non-free software while running Bleachbit, as all
> references have been removed.

In what way is it suggesting non-free software?  I'm not terribly
familiar with the program, but it seems to me that the default is for
it to "Hide irrelevant cleaners"; by default it won't show you
anything mentioning any non-free software.  But, I accept that there
could be something here that is worth patching.

>                               In addition, the functionality of
> Bleachbit with non-free programs that could be installed in Trisquel
> has also been removed. For example, Chromium functionality has been
> removed, so if someone installs it, grabbing it from Ubuntu's
> repositories, Bleachbit will not be able to clean its temporary files.

I don't see this as necessary for FSDG compliance; and I see it as harmful,
as this is useful for users switching to free software.  Parabola
actively supports converting an existing Arch install into a Parabola
install; and this type of functionality would be useful for users
cleaning the remnants of non-free Arch bits from their system.  And
while I don't believe that Trisquel supports such migration from
Ubuntu, I do know that back in my distro-hopping days, it was common
to keep your home directory between installs of different systems, so
I believe it's useful for Trisquel users too.

>       However, if some more advanced user downloads the source code
> of Bleachbit found in Trisquel's repositories, it will be able to find
> Windows' related files and references to non-free programs inside those
> files, as well metadata of non-free programs that can only be installed
> under Windows.

I would say that such measures are absolutely unnecessary.  You can
find plenty of Windows-related files in the Emacs source code!

>       I hope I have made clear myself, and I'm sorry if my English is
> not good enough. Please ask for any clarifications about the issue if
> you believe it hasn't been properly explained.

I though your English was pretty good :)

On 12/26/2017 01:43 PM, bill-auger wrote:
> i will add again what i said at that meeting - i think it is safe to
> assume that the FSDG has no suggestions against the deletion of files
> created by non-free programs - the the FSDG's intention is merely not to
> suggest using non-free programs in the first place - but if these files
> are already present i dont see any reason why bleachbit should be
> prevented from deleting them - surely that is preferable to leaving them
> on the *nix filesystem if present - my suggestion to change the labels
> in the GUI to not mention the brand names of the programs that created them

I agree.

> even the windows .DS_Store files are already labeled simply that:
> '.DS_Store' with no mention of 'Windows'

.DS_Store is a macOS thing, not a Windows thing, isn't it?

> >                                          - surely that is not condoning
> > or even suggesting the use of Windows by noting it will delete any files
> > named *.DS_Store - it is really only suggesting that any such files are
> > unwanted

I think that's a good example for another reason: It's common to run
in to unwanted .DS_Store folders on thumb drives and tarballs and zip
files.  Sometimes not even tarballs from macOS users; sometimes a
GNU/Linux user will receive work from a macOS user, and they will
accidentally pass along the .DS_Store to others.

> >          - removing the cleaners for non-free programs entirely greatly
> > reduces the usefulness of the bleachbit program - 'Chromium' and 'Google
> > Chrome' for example, if you have ever used bleachbit, are among the
> > largest set of files to be deleted - it is the very purpose of that
> > program to delete files you do not want in order to free up disk space
> > and deleting the caches of those two program along with firefox are by
> > far the ones that will free up the most disk space if used regularly
> >
> > perhaps you could just change the labels where they read 'Chromium' and
> > 'Google Chrome' to 'Non-Free Browser' so that bleachbit would still be
> > allowed to delete their files without mentioning them by name

I don't really see the point of that change; it just seams a little
bit of a knee-jerk to me.  If seeing that files were created by
"Google Chrome" suggests that Google Chrome usage is acceptable, then
surely seeing that files were created by a "Non-Free Browser" suggests
that Non-Free Browser usage is acceptable.  Either way, the program is
admitting that there was something non-free going on; I don't see why
giving the user slightly more information is harmful.  I don't see
this type of information hiding as useful to the FS movement.

> >                                                               - if i am
> > not mistaken i think that bleachbit will only show programs that it has
> > actually detected traces of so this would have the added effect of
> > pointing out clearly to the user that the use of non-free programs has
> > been detected on the system

Fiddling with bleachbit a bit, there is an option to have it show all
cleaners; but by default it seems that you are correct.

-- 
Happy hacking,
~ Luke Shumaker