[sf-lug] Apparently yes, DFSG compliant: Re: Virtual Box running fine...

[Michael Paoli]

> From: "Rick Moen" <rick at linuxmafia.com>
> Subject: Re: [sf-lug] qemu-kvm? :-) ... Re:  Virtual Box running fine...
> Date: Wed, 13 May 2020 12:56:32 -0700

> Quoting Michael Paoli (Michael.Paoli at cal.berkeley.edu):
>
> [snip recommendation of qemu-kvm, with which I concur]
>
>> Although VirtualBox is (much) more cross-platform in terms of host
>> Operating System, and somewhat simpler install and setup, it does
>> leave one beholden to Oracle and non-free software (fails to meet
>> DFSG).
>
> The latter claim is incorrect.  VirtualBox is GPLv2.
>
> VirtualBox Extension Pack is under a proprietary licence (gratis for
> home users, etc.)  This optional extension adds these enhancements:
> "support for USB 2.0 and USB 3.0 devices, VirtualBox RDP, disk
> encryption, NVMe, and PXE boot for Intel cards".  Without it, USB
> speed is limited to USB 1.1 rates.

Ah, thanks, I stand corrected.
Hmmm, does that also apply to the required kernel module that
taints the kernel, if I recall correctly?  I believe that's
required for VirtualBox on Linux host.  Maybe it's some other
licensing issue?  Let me see if I can quickly find out ...
Let's see ... quick check on Debian ...
https://packages.debian.org/search?keywords=virtualbox&searchon=names&suite=all&section=all
it's in contrib, not main nor non-free.
So, that means it itself meets DFSG, but has dependency
upon non-free ...
interestingly too, it's not currently in stable,
but is in oldoldstable (jessie), stretch-backports (oldstable bacpoorts),
and unstable (sid) ... also not (yet) in testing.
So ... what non-free does it depend upon?
Well, not in stable, so can't check there ...
let's look at unstable/sid (hey, they "future" right, and most
current leading/bleeding edge) ...
https://packages.debian.org/sid/virtualbox
dep(endencies): ... skimming for likely suspect(s) ...
well, so much for my first guess ... let me check 'em all ...
Well, I was in the ballpark, ... looks like we starting hitting
non-free issues, somewhere on down from this set of dependencies:
dep: virtualbox-dkms (>= 6.1.6-dfsg-2)
or virtualbox-source (>= 6.1.6-dfsg-2)
or virtualbox-modules
Of those, the first two are in contrib,
but virtualbox-modules is not (neither contrib nor non-free, thus main)
So, yes, that would imply it can currently be installed (in unstable/sid)
from just main, and thus can be installed complying with DFSG.
Maybe I'll poke and try that at some point on my unstable+experimental
VM, to see if that in fact works.

So yes, Rick, it would appear you're (at least currently) correct on that.
Not sure if the module, etc. situation might've been different in past (or
maybe I somehow picked up one of those from non-free or some non-free
dependency)?  Anyway, maybe that's where I got incorrect presumption of
the current situation.