One of the few pieces of non-free software I always needed on my system is a rar unpacker. Despite that there are very good free alternatives for high-compression archivers like 7-zip or tar.xz, many people seem to like relying on a proprietary format like rar and it's in widespread use.

Years ago, someone came up with a GPLed rar unpacker, but sadly, that was never updated to support the rar version 3 format. Its development is stalled.

For that reason, some time back I suggested to the Free Software Foundation to add a free rar unpacking tool to their list of high priority projects - they did so. Happily I recently read that they've removed it. There's The Unarchiver now, based on an old amiga library. It supports a whole bunch of formats - including rar v3. It's mainly a MacOS application, but it also provides a command line tool that can be compiled in Linux.

It needs objective C, the gnustep-base libraries and it took me some time to get it to compile properly. For the Gentoo-users: I already committed an ebuild, just run "emerge unar".emerge TheUnarchiver

Update: Changed ebuild name to unar, as that's the name upstream uses for the command line version now.

Some days ago it was reported that Microsoft declared it considers Linux on the desktop no longer a threat for its business. Now I usually wouldn't care that much what Microsoft is saying, but in this case, I think, they're very right – and thererfore I wonder why this hasn't raised any discussions in the free software community (at least I haven't seen one – if it has and I missed it, please provide links in the comments). So I'd like to make a start.

A few years ago, I can remember that I was pretty optimistic about a Linux-based Desktop (and I think many shared my views). It seemed with advantages like being able to provide a large number of high quality applications for free and having proven to be much more resilient against security threats it was just a matter of time. I had the impression that development was often going into the right direction, just to name one example freedesktop.org was just starting to try to unify the different Linux desktop environments and make standards so KDE applications work better under GNOME and vice versa.

Today, my impression is that everything is in a pretty sad state. Don't get me wrong: Free software plays an important role on Desktops – and that's really good. Major web browsers are based on free software, applications like VLC are very successful. But the basis – the operating system – is usually a non-free one.

I recently was looking for netbooks. Some years ago, Asus came out with the Eee PC, a small and cheap laptop which ran Linux by default – one year later they provided a version with Windows as an alternative. Today, you won't find a single Netbook with Linux as the default OS. I read more often than not in recent years that public authorities trying to get along with Linux have failed.

I think I made my point; the Linux Desktop is in a sad state – I'd like to discuss why this is the case and how we (the free software community) can change it. I won't claim that I have the definite answer for the cause. I think it's a mix of things, I'd like to start with some points:

• Some people seem to see Desktop environments more as a playground for creative ideas than something other people want to use on a daily basis in a stable way. This is pretty much true for KDE 4 – the KDE team abandoned a well-working Desktop environment KDE 3.5 for something that isn't stable even today and suffers from a lot of regressions. They permanently invent new things like Akonadi and make them mandatory even for people who don't care about them – I seriously don't have an idea what it does, except throwing strange error messages at me. I switched to GNOME, but what I heard about GNOME 3 doesn't make me feel that it's much better there (I haven't tested it yet and I hope that, unlike the KDE-team, GNOME learns from that and supports 2.x until version 3 is in a state working equally well). I think Ubuntu's playing with the Unity Desktop go in the same direction: We found something cool, we'll use it, we don't care that we'll piss of a bunch of our users. In contrast to that, I have the impression that what I named above – the idea that we can integrate different desktop environments better by standards – isn't seen as important as it used to be. (I know this part may provoke flames, I hope this won't hide the other points I made)
• The driver problem. I still encounter it to be one of the biggest obstacles and it hasn't changed a bit for years. You just can't buy a piece of hardware and use it. It usually is “somehow possible”, but the default is that it requires a lot of extra geeky work that the average user will never manage. I think there's no easy solution to that, as it would require cooperation from hardware vendors (and with diminishing importance of the Linux Desktop this is likely getting harder). But a lot of things are also self-made. In 2006, Eric Raymond wrote an essay how crappy CUPS is – I think it hasn't improved since then. How often have I read Ubuntu bug reports that go like this: “My printer worked in version [last version], but it doesn't work in [current version]” - “Me too.” - “Me too.” - “Me too” - no reply from any developer. One point that this shares with the one above is the caring about regressions, which I think should be a top priority, but obviously, many in the free software community don't seem to think so. (if you don't know the word: something is called a regression if something worked in an older version of a software, but no longer works in the current version)
• The market around us has changed. Back then, we were faced with a “Windows or nothing” situation we wanted to change to a “Windows or Linux” situation. Today, we're faced with “Windows or MacOS X”. Sure, MacOS existed back then, but it only got a relevant market share in recent years (and many current or former free software developers use MacOS X now). Competition makes products better, so Windows today is not Windows back then. Our competitors just got better.
• The desktop is loosing share. This is a point often made, with mobile phones, tablets, gaming consoles and other devices taking over tasks that were done with desktop computers in the past. This is certainly true for some degree, but I think it's also often overestimated. Desktop computers still play an important role and I'm sure they will continue to do so for a long time. The discussion how free software performs on other devices (and how free Android is) is an interesting one, too, but I won't go into it for now, as I want to talk about the Desktop here.

Okay, I've started the discussion, I'd like others to join. Please remember: It's not my goal to flame or to blame anyone – my goal is to discuss how we can make the Linux desktop successful again.

Maybe you've heared that some years ago, a story about a fake Disneyland amusement park in China made some rumors in the media. As I love good fakes, I obviously had to take a look. The amusement park in question is Shijingshan Amusement Park ( 北京石景山游乐园) and is located in Beijing. It can easily be reached, as it has its own metro station.

The park had the advertisement slogan "Disneyland is too far to go" some years ago and some images of Mickey Mouse and other Disney figures in the park boosted the story (see Wikipedia for details). Also, like all Disneylands, the Park has a Cinderella castle. It seems in the meantime things have changed - we didn't see any Disney charakters there. The only thing that still reminds of the story is the Cinderella castle - but as much as Disneys lawyers might want this, Cinderella is not a Disney invention after all.
I even found a fake Mickey Mouse (at least I think it was fake, it looked somehow wrong) in Beijing, but it was not in the amusement park, it was in the olympic village.

The story of a fake Disneyland seems highly exaggerated. The Cinderella is probably no issue at all, as I doubt there's anything that makes it a special "Disney-Cinderella". I'm not sure if there was a copyright violation at all: The fake Mickey Mouse and other figures in combination with the solgan could probably be considered parody - which is legally allowed in most of the world's copyright laws.

The park itself was kind of weird. Large parts of it were in really bad shape. Some looked like a construction site, many parts were not operational. On the other hand, other parts of it were really well-designed. One could hardly imagine that this was the same park.

A nice thing to mention: They had a dance dance revolution like arcade machine - but the game on it was StepMania - a free software game. I think this is the first time I saw a free software game in an arcade machine.

Unlike most european amusement parks, the pricing concept here is different - the entrance fee costs almost nothing (10 Yuan, approximately 1 €), but you pay for every ride.

Pictures from the park

Yesterday I was at a talk at the FSFE Berlin about free software and GSM. It was an interesting talk and discussion.
Probably most of you know that GSM is the protocol that keeps the large majority of mobile phones running. In the past, only a handful of companies worked with the protocol and according to the talk, even most mobile phone companies don't know much of the internal details, as they usually buy ready-made chips.
Three free software projects work on GSM, OpenBTS and OpenBSC on the server side and OsmocomBB on the client side. What I didn't know yet and think is really remarkable: The Island State of Niue installed a GSM-network based on OpenBTS. The island found no commercial operator, so they installed a free software based and community supported GSM network.

Afterwards, we had a longer discussion about security and privacy implications of GSM. To sum it up, GSM is horribly broken on the security side. It offers no authentication between phones and cells. Also, it's encryption has been broken in the early 90s. There is not much progress in protocol improvements although this is known for a very long time. It's also well known that so-called IMSI-cachers are sold illegally for a few thousand dollars. The only reason GSM is still working at all is basically that those possibilities still cost a few thousands. But cheaper hardware and improvement in free GSM software makes it more likely that those possibilities will have a greater impact in the future (this is only a brief summary and I'm not really in that topic, see Wikipedia for some starting points for more info).

There was a bit of discussion about the question how realistic it is that some "normal user" is threatened by this due to the price of a few thousand dollars for the equipment. I didn't bring this up in the discussion any more, but I remember having seen a talk by a guy from Intel that the tendency is to design generic chips for various protocols that can be GSM, Bluetooth or WLAN purely by software control. Thinking about that, this raises the question of protocol security even more, as it might already be possible to use mainstream computer hardware to do mobile phone wiretapping by just replacing the firmware of a wireless lan card. It almost certainly will be possible within some years.

Another topic that was raised was frequency regulation. Even with free software you wouldn't be able to operate your own GSM network, because you couldn't afford buying a frequency (although it seems to be possible to get a testing license for a limited space, e. g. for technical workshops - the 27C3 will have a GSM test network). I mentioned that there's a chapter in the book "Code" from Lawrence Lessig (available in an updated version here, chapter is "The Regulators of Speech: Distribution" and starts on page 270 in the PDF). The thoughts from Lessing are that frequency regulation was neccessary in the beginning of radio technology, but today, it would be easily possible to design protocols that don't need regulation - they could be auto-regulating, e. g. with a prefix in front of every data package (the way wireless lan works). But the problem with that is that today, frequency usage generates large income for the state - that's completely against the original idea of it, as it's primarily purpose was to keep technology usable.

Today I faced an interesting Linux problem that made me learn a couple of things I'd like to share. At first, we found an issue on a Thinkpad X301 notebook that was fixed in a newer BIOS version. So we wanted to do a BIOS update. Lenovo provides BIOS updates either for Windows or as bootable ISO CD-images. But the device had no CD-drive and only Linux installed. First we tried unetbootin, a tool to create bootable USB sticks out of ISO-Images. That didn't work.
So I had a deeper look at the ISO. What puzzled me was that when mounting it as a loopback device, there were no files on it. After some research I learned that there are different ways to create bootable CDs and one of them is the El Torito extension. It places an image of a harddisk on the CD, when booting, the image is loaded into memory and an OS can be executed (this probably only works for quite simple OSes like DOS, the Lenovo BIOS Upgrade disk is based on PC-DOS). There's a small PERL-script called geteltorito that is able to extract such images from ISO files.
It's possible to boot such harddisk images with grub and memdisk (part of syslinux). Install syslinux, place the file memdisk into /boot (found in /usr/lib/syslinux/ or /usr/share/syslinux/) and add something like this to your grub config:

Or for grub2:

Now you can select bios update in your boot menu and it should boot the BIOS upgrade utility.

(Note that this does not work for all Lenovo BIOS updates, only for those using an El Torito harddisk image - you can mount your iso with mount -o loop [path_to_iso] [mount_path] to check, if there are any files, this method is not for you)

A couple of projects exist for alternative router firmwares. I used to work with Buffalo Routers combined with DD-WRT.

Now DD-WRT became quite unusable for two reasons. First there was a Cross Site Request Forgery reported on bugtraq a while back, where one of the DD-WRT developers answered in a way that clearly showed he doesn't really understand what CSRF is - so already from a security point of view, DD-WRT seems to be a no-go.

Beside, DD-WRT development more or less is stale at the moment - there are commercial spin-offs and there's been some controversy if everything they did was compliant to the GPL. Fact is there were no new releases since several months - with open security bugs.

Now I've been looking for alternatives. What I'm looking for should be

• a ready-to-use router firmware with easy web-interface configuration from the start, not something like OpenWRT
• free software
• obviously, a project that handles security-reports in a sane way

For now, Gargoyle the only one suitable. It doesn't officially support my Hardware, but it works anyway. I haven't looked deeper into it (e. g. didn't do any security analysis myself), but it seems to do the basic tasks. If you have suggestions of other projects, please leave a comment.

Ich habe, wie ich kürzlich bereits erwähnt habe, auf den Chemnitzer Linux-Tagen die erste LPI-Prüfung abgelegt. Die LPI ist eine Institution, die Zertifizierungen für Linux-Kenntnisse anbietet. Es existieren verschiedene Levels, nach Bestehen der zweiten Prüfung darf ich mich dann LPIC-1 nennen.

Zwar darf ich natürlich zu konkreten Inhalten der Prüfungsfragen nichts sagen (das muss man während der Prüfung unterschreiben), möchte aber dennoch einige allgemeine Anmerkungen dazu loswerden.

Zunächst mein Haupt-Kritikpunkt: Die Prüfung bezieht sich auf alte Inhalte, und zwar auf sehr alte. Eine Frage bezog sich auf Spezifika eines 2.0-Kernels. Ich erinnere mich noch dunkel, dass zu der Zeit, als ich gerade mal anfing, mich mit Linux zu beschäftigen, gerade das Neuerscheinen von Kernel 2.4.0 ein heißes Thema war. Das ist nun schon knapp 10 Jahre her. Das war sicher das extremste Beispiel, aber es zieht sich durch mehrere Fragen durch. Nehmen wir jemanden, der sich sehr kompetent mit Linux auskennt, aber sich vielleicht erst seit 3 Jahren mit Linux beschäftigt. Er hätte schlicht das Problem, dass ihm xfree86 einfach nie begegnet ist. Bei den nicht gerade günstigen Preisen der Prüfung hätte ich schon erwartet, dass sie halbwegs dem aktuellen Stand der Entwicklung entsprechen.

Ein weiterer, sicher schon oft genannter Kritikpunkt, ist die Frage der (nicht vorhandenen) Distributions-Neutralität. Im Flyer des LPI wird explizit damit geworben wird, dass die Zertifizierungen Distributions-übergreifend seien. Das ist, um es deutlich zu sagen, schlicht gelogen. Es handelt sich nur um einen kleinen Teil der Fragen (bzgl. rpm), die man auch einfach weglassen könnte, es würde der Prüfung nichts nehmen.

Jenseits dessen noch eine eher grundsätzliche Anmerkung: Große Teile der Prüfung beziehen sich auf das mehr oder weniger Ausweniglernen von Befehlen und Parametern. Das ist natürlich komplett realitätsfern. In jeder realen Situation, in der meine Linux-Kompetenz gefordert ist, habe ich natürlich die Möglichkeit, mir die man-Pages und Dokumentationen von Programmen anzusehen. Insofern sollte man sich klar sein, dass ein LPI-Zertifikat auch nur sehr beschränkt Auskunft darüber gibt, wie fähig man tatsächlich mit einem Linux-System umgehen kann.

Ich bin mal wieder, wie in den Vorjahren auch schon, auf den Chemnitzer Linux-Tagen. Die Linux-Tage in Chemnitz gehören inzwischen zu einer der zentralen Veranstaltungen der freien Software-Community.

Morgen werde ich mich zum ersten Mal an einer LPI-Prüfung versuchen. Habe mich kaum vorbereitet und bin mal gespannt ob man das auch so schafft. Wenn es nicht klappt werde ich mir evtl. entsprechende Literatur zulegen und es erneut versuchen.

Bilder gibt's hier: http://pictures.hboeck.de/clt2009/

The free software projects for media playing did a good job in the past on supporting a wide variety of formats. From the common to many very obscure formats, current versions of the free software mediaplayers were usually able to play them. Today it's even common to suggest vlc for Windows users if they can't play unusual media formats.

Though there were a few exceptions, the most notable probably the long-time missing support for many of the Real formats. While these are rarely used today, many archived videos in the Internet still rely on it. For example, many german television stations provide real video files on their webpages.

Recently and without much public notion, ffmpeg first got support for RV40, some weeks later also for RV30. This fills a long time gap in free software support for video formats. ffmpeg is used by all major free software video players (vlc, xine, mplayer), so you should get the support within some time in all of them. For now, it's quite easy to checkout mplayer from subversion and build it on your own.

Want something to try out? Here's a video from Desert Planet in real format.

The only gap I know of a format that really got usage in the wild and that is not yet supported by free software is WMA3.

As an FSFE fellow, I got interviewed for their webpage.

You can read it here.

The Free Software Foundation Europe has recently started a campaign promoting free PDF readers. The idea is to replace the tons of »Get Adobe Reader to view the PDF«-Buttons with ones that don't promote a proprietary product for viewing PDFs. On the page, they list a couple of free PDF readers for various operating systems.

While I fully support the intention of this campaign, I think there's a big strategic misconception. As a small sample, let's take this PDF (an old advertisement for a Linux installation party). It's created with Scribus, based on a transparent SVG tux image I got from Wikipedia. On the right, you can see the PDF rendered with Evince (one of the three Linux-based solutions listed there). The others (kpdf and okular), although based on the same poppler-libarary, show a different rendering, though it's not better.

Loading the same PDF in the only listed Windows program SumatraPDF (which will, sad but true, probably the one most people will look for) gives an even more interesting result (see on the left). Though, after resizing the window, it changes it's opinion and renders the PDF, although still broken as you can see on the right (results may be false as I only tried it in WINE).

Continuing with the problems, SumatraPDF is unable to fill in PDF forms. Luckily today Linux-based PDF readers are able to do that, though one of the listed programs (kpdf) is not.

In fact, those are no reasons not to start a campaign for free PDF readers. But it should start with a completely different focus, like »we have some coders wanting to improve free PDF readers, send us your wrong rendered PDFs« or something like that. And then start improving the free PDF readers. And then promote them. Doing it the other way round with a »there is no problem, just take a free PDF reader« message and then giving them ones with grave problems is just lying to people. There's a good reason why for example the Scribus project promotes the Adobe Reader.

Oh, and before you ask, yes, I have reported the bug about the misrendered transparency a long time ago.

Recently there were some News that Lenovo does not like Linux any more. This was supported by comments like this at Lenovoblogs (by a Lenovo engineer):

»Again, what’s the incentive for us to start providing all of this intellectual property for free to the Linux community? You may say it drives support for Linux on ThinkPads and people would buy more ThinkPads as a result. I think that’s a dubious assertion at best.«
(the subject was driver support for switchable graphics on modern thinkpads and brings up some common urban legends about linux and driver support)

Sadly, I experienced one more place where Lenovo seems to shift away from a Linux friendly viewpoint: I tried to return the windows license of my new Thinkpad with a pre-made form by Lenovo itself (I got this from someone else by eMail, not from Lenovo directly). In the net, you can find tons of reports that it was easy for people to get money back for their windows licenses by Lenovo.

Though what I got was this:
»Leider können wir Ihrem Wunsch nach Rückerstattung der Kosten für das auf Ihrem Lenovo Produkt vorinstallierte Microsoft-Betriebssystem nicht entsprechen, da das Betriebssystem aus unserer Sicht einen integralen Bestandteil des jeweiligen Lenovo Produkts darstellt.«
(rough translation: We won't refund your windows-license, because we think it's an integral part of the product)

I find it hard to understand why Lenovo makes this shift. When running around on linux conferences in recent months, the number of thinkpads is hughe. While many other vendors shift to a much more free software friendly behaviour (think of AMD/ATI), Lenovo seems to go the different direction. It's especially strange because Lenovo is probably one of the few vendors that has a notable market share in the linux community.

By the way, I welcome any hints how I should continue with the windows refunding. I'd prefer not to capitulate yet (like I did with my last laptop by Samsung), and I assume the law is clearly on my side.

Update: As some of you asked, here is the form by Lenovo, though you'll probably just get the same reply I got.

Probably interesting, here you can find all EULAs from Microsoft. They are quite clear on the subject and say that you MUST return the windows license to the vendor if you don't agree to the EULA.

In the meantime, I wrote several messages about the issue to various people and instutitions. The FSFE is also working on the subject.

If you didn't know it, today is Software Freedom Day.

Just noticed that, when you surf to http://cgi.softwarefreedomday.org/map.shtml to look if there's something happening around you on SFD, you'll get a proprietary google map.

It seems that the organizers of the SFD can't look beyond one's own nose. I often saw this behaviour in parts of the free software movement (being ignorant about proprietary stuff if it's not software), but found this example especially frightening, as we have a well working alternative.

Recently I was asked by a friend for a linux tool to extract ressources from windows exe files, especially icons. He used a windows tool in wine till then.

I said that this shouldn't be so hard and already started writing my own parser (I came to the point where I could extract headers and content separately), when I found that there already is an appropriate tool called wrestool. It's part of the icoutils package.

wrestool -o . -x filename.exe
will extract all ressources (icons, cursors etc.) to the current directory.

Today I played around a bit with the stuff done by the Wii homebrew/hacking community, which is far more advanced than I had expected.

I had the game Twilight Princess borrowed by a friend. For those who don't know, using this game you can run homebrew software on the Wii without the need of a modchip.

The way this works is that first you install a modified savegame for Twilight Princess, afterwards you can install the Homebrew Channel. The Homebrew Channel will stay in the main Wii Menu and you'll be able to run various stuff from there. While looking around the various webpages covering the topic, I found that wiibrew.org is a good place to find documentation and links to the appropriate projects. So look there for the details.

The gc-linux project (originally porting linux to the gamecube) has a simple Linux image available.

A warning: Nintendo released a new firmware that stops this method to work, so if you wanna have fun, don't update your Wii. And the obvious warning: Everything you do is at your own risk.

Update: Seems the Firmware update is no longer a problem.