[ubuntu-us-mn] How to get WINE to update in Ubuntu Hardy (8.04)

[Chuck Cole]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Richard Laager [mailto:rlaager at wiktel.com]
> Sent: Thursday, August 28, 2008 1:14 AM
> To: Chuck Cole
> Cc: ubuntu-us-mn
> Subject: Re: [ubuntu-us-mn] How to get WINE to update in Ubuntu Hardy
> (8.04)
>
>
> On Wed, 2008-08-27 at 18:03 -0500, Chuck Cole wrote:
> > How/where do I do these steps below?
>
> The steps you quoted tell you which menu items to use to get to a
> terminal and the specific commands to paste. I don't know how this can
> be made any simpler.

That much was simple, and I agree it all looks quite simple.  However, I simply do not know and cannot confirm by assorted searches
just what the missing paths and filenames are.

The instruction does not cite the explicit path and file to paste into, and my guesswork didn't find files in etc/apt that have
anything similar in them nor any clues that I see as confirming to the instruction info.


Try re-reading the instructions you pasted.

Have, and have done related searches, etc.  That instruction doesn't identify explict paths or explicit file names for the pasting
unless I'm more blind than I thought.


> Also, from what I can see, wine 1.0.0 is available in hardy-updates, so
> I'm surprised you're not getting that through the normal upgrade
> process: http://packages.ubuntu.com/search?keywords=wine

How or where does this reference provide explicit info on the specific instructions to accomplish an update from 0.9.59 to a version
1.x?

The searches confirm what we both expect, that a version 1.x should be available.  However, my installs via either package manager
or add/delete don't seen to enable fetching the newer updates but seem to do that in other cases.

Neither add/delete nor package manager will grab a version other than 0.9.59, as I stated.  Have tried many times and several
variant approaches and have no success at getting a v 1.x update or install.

I'm sure it's simple, but the explict path and filename info just isn't there, is it?


Thanks for your comments


Chuck