Re: Wine status
Hi there! On Sun, 11 Sep 2011 16:00:36 +0200, Kai Wasserbäch wrote: Ove Kåven schrieb am 11.09.2011 14:56: Den 11. sep. 2011 13:44, skrev Cesare Leonardi: In the recent past upstream site started to advertise this as Wine Debian package: http://dev.carbon-project.org/debian/wine-unstable/ [...] These are deb package that upgrades wine-unstable and that you have to install with dpkg. In these days i've tested them and seem to work well. The person that make them is Kai Wasserbäch, a Debian developer. I know, that many, including some DDs, want me to provide a APT archive, but I'm not really happy with that, as it might encourage people to use third party packages without a second thought (like: Can I trust the provider?) Given that you have access to Debian resources, why not using them? ;-) http://upsilon.cc/~zack/blog/posts/2009/04/howto:_uploading_to_people.d.o_using_dput/ Thx, bye, Gismo / Luca pgp5XOrm0F9RE.pgp Description: PGP signature
Wine status
Hi all. I'd like to know if someone has more info on the Wine package status. From the outside and after searching from time to time on the internet, it's still not clear to me what's the reason why this package is so old. Upstream is 1.2.3 (stable) and 1.3.28 (development) and they looks like quite active releasing new versions. In Debian we have two Wine packages: - wine 1.0.1 (1.1.24 in experimental) - wine-unstable 1.1.35 Looking from sourceforge: - 1.0.1 was released on 2008-10-17 - 1.1.35 was released on 2009-12-18 In the past, the more detailed informations i've found regarding the Wine delay were this: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=557783 But now it's seem superceded. During the past years i've used opensuse Factory packages, converted to deb using alien, and that worked quite well. They are regularly updated: http://download.opensuse.org/repositories/Emulators:/Wine/openSUSE_Factory/i586/ In the recent past upstream site started to advertise this as Wine Debian package: http://dev.carbon-project.org/debian/wine-unstable/ These are deb package that upgrades wine-unstable and that you have to install with dpkg. In these days i've tested them and seem to work well. The person that make them is Kai Wasserbäch, a Debian developer. I'm really confused. Why doesn't Kay packages can't be the official Debian packages? What's the problem behind Wine: technical, time, license? It will be really appreciated if someone can share more info about that. Cesare. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4e6c9f2b.7040...@gmail.com
Re: Wine status
On Sun, Sep 11, 2011 at 1:44 PM, Cesare Leonardi wrote: I'd like to know if someone has more info on the Wine package status. From the outside and after searching from time to time on the internet, it's still not clear to me what's the reason why this package is so old. It is probably a better idea to contact the maintainers and Kai Wasserbäch himself than debian-devel. -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/CAKTje6HcfZvtVS=_3Bn7HbNzt1rFVD+pBJhc-=8p+gezqoy...@mail.gmail.com
Re: Wine status
Den 11. sep. 2011 13:44, skrev Cesare Leonardi: Upstream is 1.2.3 (stable) and 1.3.28 (development) and they looks like quite active releasing new versions. Of course. In Debian we have two Wine packages: - wine 1.0.1 (1.1.24 in experimental) - wine-unstable 1.1.35 It's slightly newer now, but not new enough yet. Looking from sourceforge: - 1.0.1 was released on 2008-10-17 - 1.1.35 was released on 2009-12-18 In the past, the more detailed informations i've found regarding the Wine delay were this: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=557783 But now it's seem superceded. Because of the work and time needed for compliance with Debian's strict DFSG requirements (in addition to having to package a full mingw toolchain to compile it, upstream's Gecko package had to undergo a repackaging for DFSG compliance, plus a complete license audit; no small task, many thanks to Stephen Kitt for doing that), this issue was only resolved like a month ago. Not in time for me to have enough summer hacking time left to do a lot of updates. I'm really confused. Why doesn't Kay packages can't be the official Debian packages? I suspect he always meant it to be temporary - letting users have *something*, even if the packages may not be perfect and may not even have been allowed into Debian at the time. He hasn't offered to be a comaintainer. What's the problem behind Wine: technical, time, license? With the license issues recently resolved, it's mostly time now. The packaging still needs some revisions in order to become multiarch-compatible. I have plans to make the wine packages use the alternatives system more extensively, both for handling Wine's 64-bit support and for making wine and wine-unstable coinstallable. All this takes time, which I haven't had much of the last couple of weeks. I hope to have more time in October (and I really hope to have it before next Debian release, at least...) For the time being, you may have to stick with Kai's stuff, I suppose. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4e6cb018.5000...@arcticnet.no
Re: Wine status
On 11/09/2011 14:56, Ove Kåven wrote: Because of the work and time needed for compliance with Debian's strict DFSG requirements (in addition to having to package a full mingw toolchain to compile it, upstream's Gecko package had to undergo a repackaging for DFSG compliance, plus a complete license audit; no small task, many thanks to Stephen Kitt for doing that), this issue was only resolved like a month ago. [...] Many thanks Ove for all these detailed updates. Really, really, really appreciated. Keep up the good work. Cesare. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4e6cb619.1000...@gmail.com
Re: Wine status
Dear Cesare, dear Ove, Ove Kåven schrieb am 11.09.2011 14:56: Den 11. sep. 2011 13:44, skrev Cesare Leonardi: In the recent past upstream site started to advertise this as Wine Debian package: http://dev.carbon-project.org/debian/wine-unstable/ I had nothing to do with that, I actually wasn't even informed in advance and just started to notice a lot more traffic on my site from one day to the other. These are deb package that upgrades wine-unstable and that you have to install with dpkg. In these days i've tested them and seem to work well. The person that make them is Kai Wasserbäch, a Debian developer. I know, that many, including some DDs, want me to provide a APT archive, but I'm not really happy with that, as it might encourage people to use third party packages without a second thought (like: Can I trust the provider?) I'm really confused. Why doesn't Kay packages can't be the official Debian packages? I suspect he always meant it to be temporary - letting users have *something*, even if the packages may not be perfect and may not even have been allowed into Debian at the time. This. (It actually served as a place where I could make the builds, I used for filing bugs, available to upstream; then it was named by winehq.org as the primary source for Debian.) You might even read that on my page (e.g. [0] or [1]) too. Though, of course, my blog is not mandatory reading. ;) He hasn't offered to be a comaintainer. TBH I never intended to maintain Wine, though I'm doing this now, to some extent, anyway. ;) I used Wine and, when I reported upstream bugs to upstream, was asked to try the latest Git or release with some patches applied. Thus I needed to build them and also make the builds available to the upstream devs. (@Ove: I've already a multiarch-ready branch on my system which uses a significantly simplified debian/rules. If you are interested in that, let me know and I put it up somewhere.) Kind regards, Kai Wasserbäch [0] http://www.carbon-project.org/On_the_unofficial_wine_unstable_packages_on_dev_carbon_project_org.html [1] http://dev.carbon-project.org/debian/ -- E-Mail: cu...@debian.org IRC: Curan Jabber: dri...@debianforum.de URL: http://wiki.debian.org/C%C3%B9ran GnuPG: 0xE1DE59D2 0600 96CE F3C8 E733 E5B6 1587 A309 D76C E1DE 59D2 signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Wine status
Den 11. sep. 2011 16:00, skrev Kai Wasserbäch: (@Ove: I've already a multiarch-ready branch on my system which uses a significantly simplified debian/rules. If you are interested in that, let me know and I put it up somewhere.) Not really. I always try to keep the packages possible to build without changes on older systems (easy backports), which means I'm probably not going to simplify the rules much, especially if such simplified rules rely on new features like multiarch. Besides, the current rules can already handle multiarch, there are just a few other things to work on before I'll dare turning multiarch on. (And given that, last I heard, the dpkg in testing/unstable still don't handle multiarch, well...) Still, anyway, thanks for your efforts. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4e6cdf4c.4060...@arcticnet.no
