citron-emu: init at version 0.12.25 by samemrecebi · Pull Request #482846 · NixOS/nixpkgs

samemrecebi · 2026-01-22T23:14:44Z

Things done

Derivation that builds citron-emu. Citron-emu is a fork of the now archived yuzu. Compared to other forks this one is still actively maintained and also displays a strong anti-piracy stance clearly stating the software is for running Nintendo Switch Homebrew games. See FAQ

The derevation comes as a mix of the repos citron.nix by @simonwjackson and citron-flake by @Zempashi. I was not able to use what they have done but after some modifications to both of their work I was able to get it running.

Unlike the 2 previous implementations, the external dependency nx_tbdb is fetched direcly as the original build process also direcly fetches a URL using the cmake file. See here

mio-19 · 2026-01-23T05:37:57Z

`nixpkgs-review` result

Generated using nixpkgs-review.

Command: nixpkgs-review pr 482846
Commit: d37f7f32e3351c00dc4314abba831313c5083f9c

`x86_64-linux`

✅ 1 package built:

citron-emu

marcin-serwin

The derevation comes as a mix of the repos citron.nix by @simonwjackson and citron-flake by @Zempashi.

The first repo is licensed under GPL-2.0-or-later while there is no license statement in the second one. This means that work based on them cannot be legally incorporated into nixpkgs.

pbsds · 2026-01-24T15:12:50Z

I believe citron should be safe to distribute with nixpkgs, since they share a similar anti-piracy stance to azahar, and since they have a clearnet download of the source available unlike some of the previous yuzu forks. Nintendo has admitted that emulation is legal, but maintain that anti-circumvention still apply. From my brief research it seems you must provide citron with decryption keys yourself.

The first repo is licensed under GPL-2.0-or-later while there is no license statement in the second one. This means that work based on them cannot be legally incorporated into nixpkgs.

Is it okay with you that this derivation is distributed under MIT @simonwjackson and @Zempashi?

samemrecebi · 2026-01-24T15:51:21Z

I believe citron should be safe to distribute with nixpkgs, since they share a similar anti-piracy stance to azahar, and since they have a clearnet download of the source available unlike some of the previous yuzu forks. Nintendo has admitted that emulation is legal, but maintain that anti-circumvention still apply. From my brief research it seems you must provide citron with decryption keys yourself.

The first repo is licensed under GPL-2.0-or-later while there is no license statement in the second one. This means that work based on them cannot be legally incorporated into nixpkgs.

Is it okay with you that this derivation is distributed under MIT @simonwjackson and @Zempashi?

I don't think @Zempashi will respond, it seems that he has been inactive in github for a couple of months. Also after some more research is seems like the the both of the flakes are kinda based or at least very similar to this by @liberodark.

samemrecebi · 2026-01-30T01:07:56Z

Ok, after the feedback from @marcin-serwin I have redid the package and mainly based it on the work done by @liberodark for his own citron work and also his old previous work on the removed torzu package. I did extend it a bit to match up with how the latest version of citron is built and also added some option for the building and the features. The derevation this version is based on GPL3.

mio-19 · 2026-01-30T01:15:21Z

GPL3

nixpkgs is under MIT license. GPL3 works cannot be added to nixpkgs

samemrecebi · 2026-01-30T01:18:28Z

GPL3

nixpkgs is under MIT license. GPL3 works cannot be added to nixpkgs

ok small question then, the torzu package I based by work on was in nixpkgs before and maintained by the same person, after the removal of torzu it was reuploaded under gpl3. In this case what license do we base the work on?

samemrecebi · 2026-01-30T01:29:42Z

@liberodark for you is it acceptable that the package is distributed under MIT?

marcin-serwin · 2026-01-30T15:55:20Z

ok small question then, the torzu package I based by work on was in nixpkgs before and maintained by the same person, after the removal of torzu it was reuploaded under gpl3. In this case what license do we base the work on?

If you based the work on the removed nixpkgs code then it's under the MIT license. If the person just reuploaded the same file in their repo then it's still MIT. If the person made substantial changes to the recipe then those changes are released under the GPL license.

samemrecebi · 2026-01-30T21:40:00Z

ok small question then, the torzu package I based by work on was in nixpkgs before and maintained by the same person, after the removal of torzu it was reuploaded under gpl3. In this case what license do we base the work on?

If you based the work on the removed nixpkgs code then it's under the MIT license. If the person just reuploaded the same file in their repo then it's still MIT. If the person made substantial changes to the recipe then those changes are released under the GPL license.

In my opinion it is very similar and some part nearly identical to the torzu package that was removed. At least based on that I think the package can fall under MIT then.

marcin-serwin

Please squash all the commits into the first one

marcin-serwin

All changes should be squashed into the first commit, even the review fixups, see https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md#commit-conventions

liberodark · 2026-02-04T09:11:22Z

@liberodark for you is it acceptable that the package is distributed under MIT?

Hi,

I only work under GPL v3, but if you need to reuse my work on Citron or another Switch emulator under the MIT license, you have my permission.

Best Regards

liberodark · 2026-02-04T09:46:52Z

`nixpkgs-review` result

Generated using nixpkgs-review-gha

Command: nixpkgs-review pr 482846
Commit: 251ccb05fe68d5a7d5647c2376e958d786f1e707 (subsequent changes)
Merge: 0271b4d8b8b614178ce47699de7fdb5f4065e72f

Logs: https://github.com/liberodark/nixpkgs-review-gha/actions/runs/21665777139

`x86_64-linux`

✅ 1 package built:

citron-emu

`aarch64-linux`

✅ No rebuilds

`x86_64-darwin`

✅ No rebuilds

`aarch64-darwin`

✅ No rebuilds

MagicRB

LGTM except for the tzdb thing. it also builds, whether it works, dunno yet

samemrecebi · 2026-02-05T18:19:30Z

I think now every suggested changes are now implemented. @marcin-serwin is the current version acceptable?

pbsds · 2026-02-05T18:35:47Z

+    (lib.cmakeFeature "TITLE_BAR_FORMAT_IDLE" "${finalAttrs.pname} | ${finalAttrs.version} (nixpkgs) {}")
+    (lib.cmakeFeature "TITLE_BAR_FORMAT_RUNNING" "${finalAttrs.pname} | ${finalAttrs.version} (nixpkgs) | {}")


just a sanity check: is the | difference between these two intended?

pbsds · 2026-02-05T18:40:02Z

+  nx_tzdb = fetchzip {
+    url = "https://github.com/lat9nq/tzdb_to_nx/releases/download/${nx_tzdbVersion}/${nx_tzdbVersion}.zip";
+    hash = "sha256-YOIElcKTiclem05trZsA3YJReozu/ex7jJAKD6nAMwc=";
+    stripRoot = false;
+  };


I'm unsure whether this may require setting meta.sourceProvenance considering it is mainly data and not code. Had it been vendored in the citron-emu repo then we would not set meta.sourceProvenance...

Not a blocker

pbsds

Built and tested, LGTM. If not for the current state of the eden PR I would've merge this. However, in respect of #485097 (review) I'll go ahead and put this PR on your the radar as well @NixOS/nixpkgs-core.

I am in favor of distributing citron, please view my previous comment here as to why: #482846 (comment)

Both Citron and Eden have source code hosted on the clear net, however Citron in contrast to Eden displays a firmer anti-piracy stance while Eden only mentions "dumped/extracted from console" on their quick start page (their FAQ page is at the time of writing still pending). I have not viewed any of their Discord servers.

samemrecebi · 2026-02-05T19:30:53Z

Built and tested, LGTM. If not for the current state of the eden PR I would've merge this. However, in respect of #485097 (review) I'll go ahead and put this PR on your the radar as well @NixOS/nixpkgs-core.

I am in favor of distributing citron, please view my previous comment here as to why: #482846 (comment)

Both Citron and Eden have source code hosted on the clear net, however Citron in contrast to Eden displays a firmer anti-piracy stance while Eden only mentions "dumped/extracted from console" on their quick start page (their FAQ page is at the time of writing still pending). I have not viewed any of their Discord servers.

Also to add to this to even join the discord server you need to verify you have a CFW switch using a tool running on a actual switch, without it you cannot access most stuff. Also to add all the testing I did was done using a real CFW switch with software I own and dumped.

marcin-serwin

I don't have access to my regular PC at the moment so I can't test this but the diff LGTM.

pbsds · 2026-02-07T15:56:59Z

Also worth considering @nixos/nixpkgs-core: AFAIU nixpkgs doesn't do value judgements on the packages we distribute, since distribution does not equal endorsement. The removal of yuzu from nixpkgs was purely due to risk management, and the situation since then has changed. Also worth noting is that FreeBSD, Ubuntu and Debian still now distribute yuzu, and they have not been hit with any action from Nintendo.

alyssais · 2026-02-10T09:55:26Z

Indeed we don't see any reason to block this or #485097, given the reasoning expressed in the two PR threads.

samemrecebi requested a review from pbsds January 22, 2026 23:17

nixpkgs-ci Bot added 10.rebuild-linux: 1-10 This PR causes between 1 and 10 packages to rebuild on Linux. 10.rebuild-darwin: 0 This PR does not cause any packages to rebuild on Darwin. 10.rebuild-linux: 1 This PR causes 1 package to rebuild on Linux. labels Jan 22, 2026

mio-19 approved these changes Jan 23, 2026

View reviewed changes

mio-19 suggested changes Jan 23, 2026

View reviewed changes

Comment thread pkgs/by-name/ci/citron-emu/package.nix Outdated

nixpkgs-ci Bot added the 12.approvals: 1 This PR was reviewed and approved by one person. label Jan 23, 2026

samemrecebi requested a review from mio-19 January 23, 2026 16:40

mio-19 approved these changes Jan 24, 2026

View reviewed changes

marcin-serwin requested changes Jan 24, 2026

View reviewed changes

nixpkgs-ci Bot added the 8.has: package (new) This PR adds a new package label Jan 27, 2026

marcin-serwin mentioned this pull request Jan 29, 2026

eden: init at 0.1.1 #485097

Merged

13 tasks

samemrecebi requested a review from marcin-serwin January 30, 2026 01:08

samemrecebi force-pushed the init-citron branch from 3b84bac to 62b4f7e Compare January 30, 2026 01:28

samemrecebi force-pushed the init-citron branch from 62b4f7e to 1e51548 Compare January 30, 2026 01:36

marcin-serwin requested changes Jan 30, 2026

View reviewed changes

samemrecebi force-pushed the init-citron branch 3 times, most recently from 053210a to 251ccb0 Compare February 1, 2026 18:08

marcin-serwin requested changes Feb 1, 2026

View reviewed changes

Comment thread pkgs/by-name/ci/citron-emu/package.nix

Comment thread pkgs/by-name/ci/citron-emu/package.nix Outdated

Comment thread pkgs/by-name/ci/citron-emu/package.nix

Comment thread pkgs/by-name/ci/citron-emu/package.nix Outdated

Comment thread pkgs/by-name/ci/citron-emu/package.nix Outdated

samemrecebi force-pushed the init-citron branch from 251ccb0 to bbe8585 Compare February 4, 2026 10:48

marcin-serwin reviewed Feb 4, 2026

View reviewed changes

Comment thread pkgs/by-name/ci/citron-emu/package.nix Outdated

MagicRB approved these changes Feb 4, 2026

View reviewed changes

Comment thread pkgs/by-name/ci/citron-emu/package.nix Outdated

nixpkgs-ci Bot added 12.approvals: 2 This PR was reviewed and approved by two persons. and removed 12.approvals: 1 This PR was reviewed and approved by one person. labels Feb 4, 2026

samemrecebi force-pushed the init-citron branch from bbe8585 to efbacdc Compare February 5, 2026 18:13

citron-emu: init at version 0.12.25

0422085

samemrecebi force-pushed the init-citron branch from efbacdc to 0422085 Compare February 5, 2026 18:16

samemrecebi requested a review from marcin-serwin February 5, 2026 18:19

pbsds reviewed Feb 5, 2026

View reviewed changes

pbsds approved these changes Feb 5, 2026

View reviewed changes

nixpkgs-ci Bot added 12.approvals: 3+ This PR was reviewed and approved by three or more persons. and removed 12.approvals: 2 This PR was reviewed and approved by two persons. labels Feb 5, 2026

marcin-serwin approved these changes Feb 6, 2026

View reviewed changes

pbsds added this pull request to the merge queue Feb 10, 2026

Merged via the queue into NixOS:master with commit 6167e8d Feb 10, 2026
32 of 34 checks passed

		(lib.cmakeFeature "TITLE_BAR_FORMAT_IDLE" "${finalAttrs.pname} \| ${finalAttrs.version} (nixpkgs) {}")
		(lib.cmakeFeature "TITLE_BAR_FORMAT_RUNNING" "${finalAttrs.pname} \| ${finalAttrs.version} (nixpkgs) \| {}")

Uh oh!

Conversation

samemrecebi commented Jan 22, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Things done

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

mio-19 commented Jan 23, 2026

nixpkgs-review result

x86_64-linux

Uh oh!

marcin-serwin left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

pbsds commented Jan 24, 2026

Uh oh!

samemrecebi commented Jan 24, 2026

Uh oh!

samemrecebi commented Jan 30, 2026

Uh oh!

mio-19 commented Jan 30, 2026

Uh oh!

samemrecebi commented Jan 30, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

samemrecebi commented Jan 30, 2026

Uh oh!

marcin-serwin commented Jan 30, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

samemrecebi commented Jan 30, 2026

Uh oh!

marcin-serwin left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

marcin-serwin left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

liberodark commented Feb 4, 2026

Uh oh!

liberodark commented Feb 4, 2026

nixpkgs-review result

x86_64-linux

aarch64-linux

x86_64-darwin

aarch64-darwin

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

MagicRB left a comment • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

samemrecebi commented Feb 5, 2026

Uh oh!

pbsds Feb 5, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

pbsds Feb 5, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

pbsds left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

samemrecebi commented Jan 22, 2026 •

edited

Loading

`nixpkgs-review` result

`x86_64-linux`

samemrecebi commented Jan 30, 2026 •

edited

Loading

marcin-serwin commented Jan 30, 2026 •

edited

Loading

`nixpkgs-review` result

`x86_64-linux`

`aarch64-linux`

`x86_64-darwin`

`aarch64-darwin`

MagicRB left a comment •

edited

Loading

pbsds Feb 5, 2026 •

edited

Loading