How long will 64bit Ubuntu users have to wait?
sh at sourcecode.de
Wed Sep 27 13:42:01 BST 2006
On Tuesday 26 September 2006 22:50, Kilz _ wrote:
> I think most users who would like/need wine would be happy to have a 32bit
> version rather than none at all. But I have had less success at it than
> Firefox. At least Firefox will let me make a binary package. One that will
> install and work. Not wine. I agree a 64bit wine is next to impossible, and
> a wasted effort because its a 32bit layer.
> So far I have found its possible to force architecture in the 32bit wine
> deb file and manually copy in a lib, then run a setup script to make it
> work. But what I have done is best called brute force hacking. In other
> words try it to see if it will work, then add what it asks for.
> If you want to take a look at what most 64bit users are doing to install
> wine take a look here.
First of all, forcing the package to work on 64bit (with the 32bit layer)
can't be the goal.
As you know, all packages will have to compile from source, so it means, that
we introduce at least, 2 32bit binary packages for wine, one for real 32bit
systems, and one for 64bit system, with 32bit compat libs (in future there
will be real 64bit wine packages, this means we have three binary packages
I don't think, that is something we want really. Think about the following:
What if TB decides to get rid of the 32bit compat libs on amd64? (As Long as
OOffice will need them, this is a no go, but just imagine).
No, the correct solution will be, wine64 for native 64bit apps, which are
currently not available from MS.
SysAdmin and Linux Specialist
JID: sh at linux-server.org
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-devel/attachments/20060927/257d4dd2/attachment-0001.pgp
More information about the ubuntu-devel