Actually, the both wine's package in debian repository don't work correctly when you install the 32-bits and 64-bits package. The installation is fine but when you launch wine64, a 64-bits prefix is create but it's impossible to launch and install a 32-bits applications (like explained here http://wiki.winehq.org/Wine64 section "Building a shared WoW64 setup")
I already explain to Michael how it's possible to use this shared WoW64 setup. To use it, a user needs libwine package amd64 + i386 and wine package amd64. libwine package amd 64 *MUST* to contain all librairies present in "/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu" + 2014-08-17 17:00 GMT+02:00 jre <[email protected]>: > Hi > > On 08/17/2014 02:38 PM, LOMBARD Maxime wrote: > > Make a difference between the stable and unstable version of wine can be > > a good idea BUT only in the package's name and not in the application's > > name. > > > > For me actually, it's very complicated and it will be more difficult to > > resolv bug ... > > Why you don't create the wine's package like from Ubuntu, it's more easy > : > > > > *** Stable Wine's package *** > > wine package which include all files installed in "/usr/bin" > > libwine package which include all files installed in "/usr/lib/*/wine" > > > > *** Unstable Wine's package *** > > wine-unstable package which include all files installed in "/usr/bin" > > without suffixe > > libwine-unstable package which include all files installed in > > "/usr/lib/*/wine" without suffixe. > > > > And failed the both installations. Example, wine is in conflict with > > wine-unstable and vice-versa. > > If a user install wine-unstable package, it uninstall automatically wine > > package. > > Well, this is not really related to #758312 since this one is indeed > about the package names and the transition -unstable --> -development. > > Anyway; afaik it was a long standing goal to make both wine versions > (including their 32bit and 64bit versions) coinstallable. This I would > really like to see. > Still I agree that working directly with the suffix'ed versions really > is a pain and does not meet user's expectations. > Therefore in bug #758291 ([wine-development] Please use Debian's > alternative system) I requested/suggested an actual solution which imho > should make us all happy. > Without it I would tend to prefer your solution. > > I think we are finally quite close to actually get the wine packages > that were planned for many painful years now (again a so huge thank you > to Michael here). I hope to send a first patch to #758291 tomorrow which > implements the alternative system at least for the -development packages. > > I CC'd that bug because I think discussing this topic is more > appropriate there (or directly at the pkg-wine-party list). > > Greets > jre > > >
_______________________________________________ pkg-wine-party mailing list [email protected] http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-wine-party
