RE: GNU+Linux corporate takeover, was: Wine for OpenBSD?
theo wrote: > What do thsi have to with OpenBSD? Drat. Someone discovered The Homoheterothropic Society for the Intermezzanic! Mesupposes we'll have to disband. --zeur. -- Friggin' Machines!
passive-aggressive questions (was: RE: GNU+Linux corporate takeover, was: Wine for OpenBSD?)
theo wrote: > What does this have to do with OpenBSD? Alright, let's talk about leadership. Do you folks think Linus is a better leader than Theo here? There, OpenBSD angle restored. (Yes, medoes wish that discussion about lunix et al. be toned down. Even so, mealso wishes that the passive-aggressive behaviour that theo just displayed here would stop.) Love && cuddles, --zeurkous. P.S.: Be careful what you wish for. -- Friggin' Machines!
Re: GNU+Linux corporate takeover, was: Wine for OpenBSD?
What does this have to do with OpenBSD? zap wrote: > > > > On 04/14/2020 04:22 PM, Theo de Raadt wrote: > > What the hell does this have to do with OpenBSD? > > > > > Probably it has nothing to do with OpenBSD, since they are no longer > talking about wine for OpenBSD. > > But yeah, I for one am glad you take up the K.I.S.S way of doing things. > > Linux is a beast that is going to crush itself someday. Not due to being > libre, but because its so overengineered that its complexity will kill it. >
Re: GNU+Linux corporate takeover, was: Wine for OpenBSD?
What do thsi have to with OpenBSD? zap wrote: > Well just to correct myself, seeming libre. It isn't actually that much > more libre than OpenBSD. > > > On 04/14/2020 05:54 PM, zap wrote: > > > > On 04/14/2020 04:22 PM, Theo de Raadt wrote: > >> What the hell does this have to do with OpenBSD? > >> > >> > > Probably it has nothing to do with OpenBSD, since they are no longer > > talking about wine for OpenBSD. > > > > But yeah, I for one am glad you take up the K.I.S.S way of doing things. > > > > Linux is a beast that is going to crush itself someday. Not due to being > > libre, but because its so overengineered that its complexity will kill it. >
Re: GNU+Linux corporate takeover, was: Wine for OpenBSD?
Well just to correct myself, seeming libre. It isn't actually that much more libre than OpenBSD. On 04/14/2020 05:54 PM, zap wrote: > > On 04/14/2020 04:22 PM, Theo de Raadt wrote: >> What the hell does this have to do with OpenBSD? >> >> > Probably it has nothing to do with OpenBSD, since they are no longer > talking about wine for OpenBSD. > > But yeah, I for one am glad you take up the K.I.S.S way of doing things. > > Linux is a beast that is going to crush itself someday. Not due to being > libre, but because its so overengineered that its complexity will kill it.
Re: GNU+Linux corporate takeover, was: Wine for OpenBSD?
On 04/14/2020 04:22 PM, Theo de Raadt wrote: > What the hell does this have to do with OpenBSD? > > Probably it has nothing to do with OpenBSD, since they are no longer talking about wine for OpenBSD. But yeah, I for one am glad you take up the K.I.S.S way of doing things. Linux is a beast that is going to crush itself someday. Not due to being libre, but because its so overengineered that its complexity will kill it.
Re: GNU+Linux corporate takeover, was: Wine for OpenBSD?
What does this have to do with OpenBSD? Steve Litt wrote: > On Tue, 14 Apr 2020 22:38:00 +0300 > Consus wrote: > > > On Tue, Apr 14, 2020 at 03:12:18PM -0400, Raul Miller wrote: > > > last I checked, systemd was not modular, was poorly documented, > > > exhibited incompatibilities with basically all historical > > > interfaces, and had introduced a variety of boot-time race > > > conditions (which mostly hit people who tried to change the > > > configuration from the default). These are all solvable problems, > > > but OpenBSD is not the only distribution which suffers from a lack > > > of competent contributions. > > > > It is modular to a degree, but separating services requires a bit of > > Here's the degree to which systemd is modular: > > http://troubleshooters.com/linux/systemd/lol_systemd.htm > > SteveT > > Steve Litt > March 2020 featured book: Troubleshooting: Why Bother? > http://www.troubleshooters.com/twb >
Re: GNU+Linux corporate takeover, was: Wine for OpenBSD?
On Tue, 14 Apr 2020 22:38:00 +0300 Consus wrote: > On Tue, Apr 14, 2020 at 03:12:18PM -0400, Raul Miller wrote: > > last I checked, systemd was not modular, was poorly documented, > > exhibited incompatibilities with basically all historical > > interfaces, and had introduced a variety of boot-time race > > conditions (which mostly hit people who tried to change the > > configuration from the default). These are all solvable problems, > > but OpenBSD is not the only distribution which suffers from a lack > > of competent contributions. > > It is modular to a degree, but separating services requires a bit of Here's the degree to which systemd is modular: http://troubleshooters.com/linux/systemd/lol_systemd.htm SteveT Steve Litt March 2020 featured book: Troubleshooting: Why Bother? http://www.troubleshooters.com/twb
Re: GNU+Linux corporate takeover, was: Wine for OpenBSD?
What does this have to do with OpenBSD? Raul Miller wrote: > On Tue, Apr 14, 2020 at 1:37 PM Consus wrote: > > On Tue, Apr 14, 2020 at 05:10:14PM +0200, Oddmund G. wrote: > > > I know all this, Ottavio. I have been using GNU+Linux since 1994 after > > > several years with Ultrix/VMS/OpenVMS @DEC: Slackware in the beginning, > > > then > > > Debian until the forced introduction of systemd and the rest of the crap > > > being considered as 'much better' and 'mandatory'. > > > > Because systemd is good enough "base tools suite". Think of it as a base > > system like OpenBSD provides. It has a _lot_ of issues with reliability, > > consistency and whatever, but simply put, other Linux folks failed to > > provide similar tools. Maybe someday someone will make something better. > > I think that thinking of it this way would be some kind of mistake: > > Last I checked, systemd was not modular, was poorly documented, > exhibited incompatibilities with basically all historical interfaces, > and had introduced a variety of boot-time race conditions (which > mostly hit people who tried to change the configuration from the > default). These are all solvable problems, but OpenBSD is not the only > distribution which suffers from a lack of competent contributions. > > I don't think Linux is particularly doomed -- computer systems tend to > stick around far longer than most sales pitches would have you > believe. But these are concerning issues. > > But that's also why these sorts of discussions tend to be fairly > worthless. While there are attractive things (for some use cases) > about systemd, the likelihood of a competent port to OpenBSD (which > addresses the above listed problems) isn't something anyone is > volunteering for. It would be a lot of work -- possibly a complete > rewrite and more work than anyone has put into systemd to date. > > -- > Raul >
Re: GNU+Linux corporate takeover, was: Wine for OpenBSD?
What the hell does this have to do with OpenBSD? i...@aulix.com wrote: > There are IMHO a few of good systemD free Linux distros: > Devuan - Debian without systemD > Parabola - Arch without systemD > > Alpine unfortunately lacks verification of checksums of earlier installed > files. > > Like wajig integrity (debsums) in Devuan. > > More info about verification: > https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Pacman/Rosetta#Verification_and_repair >
Re: GNU+Linux corporate takeover, was: Wine for OpenBSD?
On Tue, Apr 14, 2020 at 04:15:20PM -0400, Daniel Jakots wrote: > On Tue, 14 Apr 2020 16:05:56 -0400, Raul Miller > wrote: > > > Got any good docs on how to debug (or monitor) D-Bus issues? > > You're asking help to debug D-Bus on an OpenBSD mailing list? Why don't > you bring this sooo interesting discussion off-list? OpenBSD has D-Bus too, nah?
Re: GNU+Linux corporate takeover, was: Wine for OpenBSD?
On Tue, 14 Apr 2020 16:05:56 -0400, Raul Miller wrote: > Got any good docs on how to debug (or monitor) D-Bus issues? You're asking help to debug D-Bus on an OpenBSD mailing list? Why don't you bring this sooo interesting discussion off-list?
Re: GNU+Linux corporate takeover, was: Wine for OpenBSD?
On Tue, Apr 14, 2020 at 04:05:56PM -0400, Raul Miller wrote: > On Tue, Apr 14, 2020 at 3:38 PM Consus wrote: > > It is modular to a degree, but separating services requires a bit of > > work so yeah, in this area systemd sucks. Documentation is pretty good > > though. I don't like the complexity of the thing, but I've never been > > stuck because there is not enough docs. > > Got any good docs on how to debug (or monitor) D-Bus issues? Sure, try busctl(1).
Re: GNU+Linux corporate takeover, was: Wine for OpenBSD?
On Tue, Apr 14, 2020 at 3:38 PM Consus wrote: > It is modular to a degree, but separating services requires a bit of > work so yeah, in this area systemd sucks. Documentation is pretty good > though. I don't like the complexity of the thing, but I've never been > stuck because there is not enough docs. Got any good docs on how to debug (or monitor) D-Bus issues? Thanks, -- Raul
Re: GNU+Linux corporate takeover, was: Wine for OpenBSD?
On Tue, Apr 14, 2020 at 03:12:18PM -0400, Raul Miller wrote: > On Tue, Apr 14, 2020 at 1:37 PM Consus wrote: > > On Tue, Apr 14, 2020 at 05:10:14PM +0200, Oddmund G. wrote: > > > I know all this, Ottavio. I have been using GNU+Linux since 1994 after > > > several years with Ultrix/VMS/OpenVMS @DEC: Slackware in the beginning, > > > then > > > Debian until the forced introduction of systemd and the rest of the crap > > > being considered as 'much better' and 'mandatory'. > > > > Because systemd is good enough "base tools suite". Think of it as a base > > system like OpenBSD provides. It has a _lot_ of issues with reliability, > > consistency and whatever, but simply put, other Linux folks failed to > > provide similar tools. Maybe someday someone will make something better. > > I think that thinking of it this way would be some kind of mistake: > > Last I checked, systemd was not modular, was poorly documented, > exhibited incompatibilities with basically all historical interfaces, > and had introduced a variety of boot-time race conditions (which > mostly hit people who tried to change the configuration from the > default). These are all solvable problems, but OpenBSD is not the only > distribution which suffers from a lack of competent contributions. It is modular to a degree, but separating services requires a bit of work so yeah, in this area systemd sucks. Documentation is pretty good though. I don't like the complexity of the thing, but I've never been stuck because there is not enough docs. Can't say much about historical interfaces. > I don't think Linux is particularly doomed -- computer systems tend to > stick around far longer than most sales pitches would have you > believe. But these are concerning issues. Systemd actually solved a bunch of problems so I don't think it's bad or makes Linux "doomed". > But that's also why these sorts of discussions tend to be fairly > worthless. Of course they are. Just a chit-chat.
Re: GNU+Linux corporate takeover, was: Wine for OpenBSD?
On Tue, Apr 14, 2020 at 1:37 PM Consus wrote: > On Tue, Apr 14, 2020 at 05:10:14PM +0200, Oddmund G. wrote: > > I know all this, Ottavio. I have been using GNU+Linux since 1994 after > > several years with Ultrix/VMS/OpenVMS @DEC: Slackware in the beginning, then > > Debian until the forced introduction of systemd and the rest of the crap > > being considered as 'much better' and 'mandatory'. > > Because systemd is good enough "base tools suite". Think of it as a base > system like OpenBSD provides. It has a _lot_ of issues with reliability, > consistency and whatever, but simply put, other Linux folks failed to > provide similar tools. Maybe someday someone will make something better. I think that thinking of it this way would be some kind of mistake: Last I checked, systemd was not modular, was poorly documented, exhibited incompatibilities with basically all historical interfaces, and had introduced a variety of boot-time race conditions (which mostly hit people who tried to change the configuration from the default). These are all solvable problems, but OpenBSD is not the only distribution which suffers from a lack of competent contributions. I don't think Linux is particularly doomed -- computer systems tend to stick around far longer than most sales pitches would have you believe. But these are concerning issues. But that's also why these sorts of discussions tend to be fairly worthless. While there are attractive things (for some use cases) about systemd, the likelihood of a competent port to OpenBSD (which addresses the above listed problems) isn't something anyone is volunteering for. It would be a lot of work -- possibly a complete rewrite and more work than anyone has put into systemd to date. -- Raul
Re: GNU+Linux corporate takeover, was: Wine for OpenBSD?
There are IMHO a few of good systemD free Linux distros: Devuan - Debian without systemD Parabola - Arch without systemD Alpine unfortunately lacks verification of checksums of earlier installed files. Like wajig integrity (debsums) in Devuan. More info about verification: https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Pacman/Rosetta#Verification_and_repair
Re: GNU+Linux corporate takeover, was: Wine for OpenBSD?
On Tue, Apr 14, 2020 at 05:10:14PM +0200, Oddmund G. wrote: > I know all this, Ottavio. I have been using GNU+Linux since 1994 after > several years with Ultrix/VMS/OpenVMS @DEC: Slackware in the beginning, then > Debian until the forced introduction of systemd and the rest of the crap > being considered as 'much better' and 'mandatory'. Because systemd is good enough "base tools suite". Think of it as a base system like OpenBSD provides. It has a _lot_ of issues with reliability, consistency and whatever, but simply put, other Linux folks failed to provide similar tools. Maybe someday someone will make something better.
Re: GNU+Linux corporate takeover, was: Wine for OpenBSD?
Le 14/04/2020 à 17:10, Oddmund G. a écrit : Linux is doomed. Closer 'integration' of systemd, pulseaudio, wayland Wayland isn't that bad. It solves many things by reducing the display complexity and is much faster than X.Org. The real problem is by being simple; many compositors (~= window managers) started to implement their own drawing API leading in many effort duplication. with other system components will make it very difficult, if not impossible to continue resisting and keeping up alternative GNU+Linux development in the future. This was one of the reasons why I switched to OpenBSD a couple of years ago. I'm also loving OpenBSD for its simplicity but unable to use it as a daily driver because of hardware support so I have a dualboot with Alpine Linux which I could recommend for people who love simplicity and elegance but can't stick with OpenBSD yet. Note that not all distributions are based on GNU and so for this naming GNU+Linux or GNU/Linux should not be used anymore. Now I am retired and it is absolutely perfect! Thank you Theo & all the other guys & girls keeping it alive and kickin'! Could not agree more. I wish I could contribute to kernel code but I'm far from a hardware developer :). -- David
Re: GNU+Linux corporate takeover, was: Wine for OpenBSD?
Amen to all that. Arch Linux worked for me for many years, but the Arch philosophy of adopting bleeding edge software has become increasingly difficult to deal with, given the corporate takeover of Linux. Started out with BSD in the early days, moved to Slackware, Debian, and then Arch. Finally got fed up and explored the major BSD derivatives and OpenBSD was the only one I found where things just work (most of the time!). Kudos to Theo and everybody involved. I try to help where I can, though my abilities and time are limited even in retirement. Dave On 4/14/20, Oddmund G. wrote: > Le 14/04/2020 à 15:49, Ottavio Caruso a écrit : >> On Tue, 14 Apr 2020 at 12:06, Oddmund G. wrote: >>> Since the ongoing corporate takeover of GNU+Linux, >> GNU, whether we like them or not, have not been and will not be taken >> over by "corporate", as long as Stallman is alive. >> >> As for Linux, it is not an OS but just a kernel. The only distros that >> has been taken over by "corporate" are Red Hat (but it was annoyingly >> corporate-friendly even before it was bought by IBM) and SuSE. The >> remaining have not been taken over by >> "corporate" if they wanted to. >> >> Cheap digs don't usually get the facts right. >> > I know all this, Ottavio. I have been using GNU+Linux since 1994 after > several years with Ultrix/VMS/OpenVMS @DEC: Slackware in the beginning, > then Debian until the forced introduction of systemd and the rest of the > crap being considered as 'much better' and 'mandatory'. > > Even FSF has swallowed this, because systemd is 'free software', > Trisquel being Ubuntu-based adopted it as if nothing had happened or > they probably thougfht they had no choice. Stallman pissed in his pants > and is not relevant any more. > > Corporate takeovers does not happen overnight and there are some > resistance. 60-70 Linux 'distributions' are still using non-systemd > inits. The problem is that the 'big' core distributions are being > streamlined to be 'compatible' with 'New Linu$'. Micro$oft became a > member of the Linu$ Foundation almost four years ago. I strongly believe > that it was not for 'fun'... > > Linux is doomed. Closer 'integration' of systemd, pulseaudio, wayland > ++. with other system components will make it very difficult, if not > impossible to continue resisting and keeping up alternative GNU+Linux > development in the future. This was one of the reasons why I switched to > OpenBSD a couple of years ago. I tried it for a while by the end of the > '90s, but it wasn't adapted to what I was doing at that time, so I > switched back to Debian. > > Now I am retired and it is absolutely perfect! Thank you Theo & all the > other guys & girls keeping it alive and kickin'! > > Cheers, > > Oddmund > > -- David J. Raymond david.raym...@nmt.edu http://physics.nmt.edu/~raymond
Re: GNU+Linux corporate takeover, was: Wine for OpenBSD?
Le 14/04/2020 à 15:49, Ottavio Caruso a écrit : On Tue, 14 Apr 2020 at 12:06, Oddmund G. wrote: Since the ongoing corporate takeover of GNU+Linux, GNU, whether we like them or not, have not been and will not be taken over by "corporate", as long as Stallman is alive. As for Linux, it is not an OS but just a kernel. The only distros that has been taken over by "corporate" are Red Hat (but it was annoyingly corporate-friendly even before it was bought by IBM) and SuSE. The remaining have not been taken over by "corporate" if they wanted to. Cheap digs don't usually get the facts right. I know all this, Ottavio. I have been using GNU+Linux since 1994 after several years with Ultrix/VMS/OpenVMS @DEC: Slackware in the beginning, then Debian until the forced introduction of systemd and the rest of the crap being considered as 'much better' and 'mandatory'. Even FSF has swallowed this, because systemd is 'free software', Trisquel being Ubuntu-based adopted it as if nothing had happened or they probably thougfht they had no choice. Stallman pissed in his pants and is not relevant any more. Corporate takeovers does not happen overnight and there are some resistance. 60-70 Linux 'distributions' are still using non-systemd inits. The problem is that the 'big' core distributions are being streamlined to be 'compatible' with 'New Linu$'. Micro$oft became a member of the Linu$ Foundation almost four years ago. I strongly believe that it was not for 'fun'... Linux is doomed. Closer 'integration' of systemd, pulseaudio, wayland ++. with other system components will make it very difficult, if not impossible to continue resisting and keeping up alternative GNU+Linux development in the future. This was one of the reasons why I switched to OpenBSD a couple of years ago. I tried it for a while by the end of the '90s, but it wasn't adapted to what I was doing at that time, so I switched back to Debian. Now I am retired and it is absolutely perfect! Thank you Theo & all the other guys & girls keeping it alive and kickin'! Cheers, Oddmund
GNU+Linux corporate takeover, was: Wine for OpenBSD?
On Tue, 14 Apr 2020 at 12:06, Oddmund G. wrote: > Since the ongoing corporate takeover of GNU+Linux, GNU, whether we like them or not, have not been and will not be taken over by "corporate", as long as Stallman is alive. As for Linux, it is not an OS but just a kernel. The only distros that has been taken over by "corporate" are Red Hat (but it was annoyingly corporate-friendly even before it was bought by IBM) and SuSE. The remaining have not been taken over by "corporate" if they wanted to. Cheap digs don't usually get the facts right. -- Ottavio Caruso
Re: Wine for OpenBSD?
Le 11/04/2020 à 14:25, Peter Nicolai Mathias Hansteen a écrit 11. apr. 2020 kl. 12:15 skrev Nikita Stepanov : Wine for OpenBSD? Oh, OpenBSD goes well with most kinds of wine, just don’t overdo it. Same with beer, liquors as always. All the best, — Peter N. M. Hansteen, member of the first RFC 1149 implementation team http://bsdly.blogspot.com/ http://www.bsdly.net/ http://www.nuug.no/ "Remember to set the evil bit on all malicious network traffic" delilah spamd[29949]: 85.152.224.147: disconnected after 42673 seconds. Bonjour, While my ThinkPad supported wine quite well, OpenBSD unfortunately collapsed...:-D I asked for help about a week ago, but nobody bothered answering, not even with the common 'do your homework' comment. I managed to solve the problem myself without reinstallation and everything is fine. I am not really a newbie, as I started using computers about 45 years ago (at the university of your town, Peter). I have been working for IBM and DEC and should probably not need to ask for help, but I am getting older (approaching 70) and I have forgotten certain Unix mechanisms. Since the ongoing corporate takeover of GNU+Linux, with all imaginable and disastrous consequences, I am very thankful for having OpenBSD and being able to use it. I will avoid spilling Wine on laptops in the future, crossing my fingers and hoping for OpenBSD to last as long as I live... Cheers, Oddmund
Re: Wine for OpenBSD?
On Sun, 12 Apr 2020 at 08:24, slackwaree wrote: > > You don't want wine anyway. That is the shining example of badly written > software which sucked 15 years ago the same way it does today. T Provided Wine is now broken on most modern OSes that only ship with 64-bit binaries, there are tons of reasons why Wine is still relevant. There are gazillions of abandonware (badly) written for old versions of Windows (Win 3.* up to XP) that don't even run properly on Windows 10 but run beautifully on Wine. I have to thank Wine for getting my amateur licence because I had to run a multiple question trainer written circa 2006. Not to mention countless old electrical/electronic software that nobody is bothered porting to 64-bit *nix. -- Ottavio Caruso
Re: Wine for OpenBSD?
On Sun, 12 Apr 2020 07:24:09 + slackwaree wrote: > You don't want wine anyway. That is the shining example of badly written > software which sucked 15 years ago the same way it does today. They tried to > make it better with cedega, crossover office and what not and failed > miserably. All you could get out of it is to run basic apps like notepad or > calc even those with tons of bugs like borders, frames missing, broken fonts, > crashes etc. They claimed it can run game X,Y,Z but who cares about it when > Windows can run all games perfectly. This is ain't the 90's man everyone can > afford to have 2-3 or more PCs at home and with all these virtualization > supports like vmware, virtualbox around which just runs perfectly windows > applications in windows I even ask the question why is wine still exist, > probably it's someones pet project who don't want to let it go... > > > > ‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐ > On Saturday, April 11, 2020 12:15 PM, Nikita Stepanov > wrote: > > > Wine for OpenBSD? > > > All you could get out of it is to run basic apps like notepad or calc even > those with tons of bugs like borders, frames missing, broken fonts, crashes > etc. I used to have FreeBSD on my old office desktop till 2018, WINE was the only way to run MT4 [1] on it. MT4 worked flawlessly with WINE, no frames missing, no broken fonts, not even one crash for few years... > This is ain't the 90's man everyone can afford to have 2-3 or more PCs at > home But sometimes you have to be outside the home. [1] https://www.metatrader4.com/ Cheers! -- Radek
Re: Wine for OpenBSD?
On April 12, 2020 10:24:09 AM GMT+03:00, slackwaree wrote: >You don't want wine anyway. That is the shining example of badly >written software which sucked 15 years ago the same way it does today. >They tried to make it better with cedega, crossover office and what not >and failed miserably. All you could get out of it is to run basic apps >like notepad or calc even those with tons of bugs like borders, frames >missing, broken fonts, crashes etc. They claimed it can run game X,Y,Z >but who cares about it when Windows can run all games perfectly. This >is ain't the 90's man everyone can afford to have 2-3 or more PCs at >home and with all these virtualization supports like vmware, virtualbox >around which just runs perfectly windows applications in windows I even >ask the question why is wine still exist, probably it's someones pet >project who don't want to let it go... > > > >‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐ >On Saturday, April 11, 2020 12:15 PM, Nikita Stepanov > wrote: > >> Wine for OpenBSD? Nah... Some people (like me) doesn't want to have windows at all. Sadly, karma is a b**ch and now I got a Win VM :) Yet, you won't need windows just to run a single app occasionally. I don't claim that wine is great, but it is useful . For me porting WINE to the BSD family is not worth it and utterly useless. On the other side ZFS is a more reasonable approach and if anyone asks - I think that openBSD can securely host VMs and in such use - ZFS or LVM can be quite useful. Best Regards, Strahil Nikolov
Re: Wine for OpenBSD?
You don't want wine anyway. That is the shining example of badly written software which sucked 15 years ago the same way it does today. They tried to make it better with cedega, crossover office and what not and failed miserably. All you could get out of it is to run basic apps like notepad or calc even those with tons of bugs like borders, frames missing, broken fonts, crashes etc. They claimed it can run game X,Y,Z but who cares about it when Windows can run all games perfectly. This is ain't the 90's man everyone can afford to have 2-3 or more PCs at home and with all these virtualization supports like vmware, virtualbox around which just runs perfectly windows applications in windows I even ask the question why is wine still exist, probably it's someones pet project who don't want to let it go... ‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐ On Saturday, April 11, 2020 12:15 PM, Nikita Stepanov wrote: > Wine for OpenBSD?
Re: Wine for OpenBSD?
On 2020-04-11, Nikita Stepanov wrote: > Wine for OpenBSD? At hackathons, we typically ask the French developers to pick out a wine from the menu, but they are pretty reluctant to take on this responsibility. -- Christian "naddy" Weisgerber na...@mips.inka.de
Re: Wine for OpenBSD?
wooosh wine is not there on openbsd its not going to be there on openbsd reasons are too long for me to write this early in the morning, plz google-fu them On 4/11/20 8:32 AM, Nikita Stepanov wrote: > I mean� > https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wine_(software) > 18:30, 11 апреля 2020 г., Peter Nicolai Mathias Hansteen > : > > > > � 11. apr. 2020 kl. 12:15 skrev Nikita Stepanov > : > > � Wine for OpenBSD? > > > > Oh, OpenBSD goes well with most kinds of wine, just don’t overdo > it. Same with beer, liquors as always. > > All the best, > > — > Peter N. M. Hansteen, member of the first RFC 1149 implementation > team > http://bsdly.blogspot.com/ http://www.bsdly.net/ http://www.nuug.no/ > "Remember to set the evil bit on all malicious network traffic" > delilah spamd[29949]: 85.152.224.147: disconnected after 42673 > seconds. >
Re: Wine for OpenBSD?
I mean� https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wine_(software) 18:30, 11 апреля 2020 г., Peter Nicolai Mathias Hansteen : � 11. apr. 2020 kl. 12:15 skrev Nikita Stepanov : � Wine for OpenBSD? Oh, OpenBSD goes well with most kinds of wine, just don’t overdo it. Same with beer, liquors as always. All the best, — Peter N. M. Hansteen, member of the first RFC 1149 implementation team http://bsdly.blogspot.com/ http://www.bsdly.net/ http://www.nuug.no/ "Remember to set the evil bit on all malicious network traffic" delilah spamd[29949]: 85.152.224.147: disconnected after 42673 seconds.
Re: Wine for OpenBSD?
> 11. apr. 2020 kl. 12:15 skrev Nikita Stepanov : > > Wine for OpenBSD? > Oh, OpenBSD goes well with most kinds of wine, just don’t overdo it. Same with beer, liquors as always. All the best, — Peter N. M. Hansteen, member of the first RFC 1149 implementation team http://bsdly.blogspot.com/ http://www.bsdly.net/ http://www.nuug.no/ "Remember to set the evil bit on all malicious network traffic" delilah spamd[29949]: 85.152.224.147: disconnected after 42673 seconds. signature.asc Description: Message signed with OpenPGP
Re: Wine for OpenBSD?
Am Sa., 11. Apr. 2020 um 13:19 Uhr schrieb Nikita Stepanov : > Wine for OpenBSD? Your patch?
Wine for OpenBSD?
Wine for OpenBSD?
Wine under OpenBSD
Hello, Is wine available for OpenBSD ? I could'nt find it in packages nor ports. If not available, it might be possible to run it under linux emulate ? Thanks for experience. Regards
Re: Wine under OpenBSD
On 05-02-11 18:58, Jean-Francois wrote: Hello, Is wine available for OpenBSD ? I could'nt find it in packages nor ports. Do a bit more looking... If not available, it might be possible to run it under linux emulate ? ports: emulators/wine http://openports.se/emulators/wine Robert
Re: Wine under OpenBSD
Jean-Francois jfsimon1...@gmail.com writes: Is wine available for OpenBSD ? I could'nt find it in packages nor ports. My ports tree (on -current) has /usr/ports/emulators/wine/, but the Makefile says at the top # XXX This port is not finished and does not work. So no package built for now. Then again, if you're in a position to help move it forward, I'm sure Ariane will appreciate a helping hand. - Peter -- Peter N. M. Hansteen, member of the first RFC 1149 implementation team http://bsdly.blogspot.com/ http://www.bsdly.net/ http://www.nuug.no/ Remember to set the evil bit on all malicious network traffic delilah spamd[29949]: 85.152.224.147: disconnected after 42673 seconds.
Re: Wine on OpenBSD
On Sun, Dec 28, 2008 at 02:28:58PM -0600, Austin English wrote: I've gotten around some of the issues, but am looking for the 'right' way to do so, rather than hacks. Check the ports/misc archives. There was an effort on porting wine, but it did not get very far. If I remember correctly, there was some issues with process signal handling or whatever.
Wine on OpenBSD
Howdy, A few people have asked recently about Wine on OpenBSD on the wine mailing lists. I decided to give it a spin, since the version in ports is nearly 10 years old (!). I've made a bit of progress, but seems there are multiple bugs that need fixing (on both ends). What I've done so far: # export PKG_PATH=ftp://ftp.openbsd.org/pub/OpenBSD/4.4/packages/i386/ # pkg_add autoconf-2.6.1 bison cups git gnutls sane-backends jpeg openldap-server OpenBSD already has most dependencies satisfied, but these weren't met by a default install. Bug #1 The version of lcms in ports doesn't get picked up by wine. Should I send an e-mail to po...@openbsd.org? $ wget http://www.littlecms.com/lcms-1.17.tar.gz gzip2 -d lcms-1.17.tar.gz tar -xvf lcms-1.17.tar cd lcms-1.17 make # make install After that, continue with building wine: $ CPPFLAGS=-I/usr/local/include LDFLAGS=-L/usr/local/lib ./configure make depend make -k Which gives a lot more problems: configure: libhal development files not found, no dynamic device support. configure: libcapi20 development files not found, ISDN won't be supported. configure: libcups development files not found, CUPS won't be supported. configure: WARNING: OpenSSL development files not found, SSL won't be supported. configure: WARNING: libpng development files not found, PNG won't be supported. libhal/libcapi20 are expected, since they're not installed. They're not really useful anyway, so not a big deal. libcups IS installed. Looking at config.log: configure:15933: gcc -o conftest -g -O2 -I/usr/local/include -I/usr/local/include -L/usr/local/lib conftest.c -lcups -Wl,-R/usr/local/lib -L/usr/local/lib -lossaudio -li386 5 /usr/local/lib/libcups.so.3.0: warning: strcpy() is almost always misused, please use strlcpy() /usr/local/lib/libcups.so.3.0: warning: sprintf() is often misused, please use snprintf() /usr/local/lib/libcups.so.3.0: undefined reference to `pthread_getspecific' /usr/local/lib/libcups.so.3.0: undefined reference to `pthread_once' /usr/local/lib/libcups.so.3.0: undefined reference to `pthread_key_create' /usr/local/lib/libcups.so.3.0: undefined reference to `pthread_mutex_unlock' /usr/local/lib/libcups.so.3.0: undefined reference to `pthread_mutex_lock' /usr/local/lib/libcups.so.3.0: undefined reference to `pthread_setspecific' There are a few more similar errors: /home/austin/wine-git/conftest.c:196: undefined reference to `pthread_attr_get_np' /home/austin/wine-git/conftest.c:196: undefined reference to `pthread_getattr_np' /home/austin/wine-git/conftest.c:196: undefined reference to `pthread_get_stackaddr_np' /home/austin/wine-git/conftest.c:196: undefined reference to `pthread_get_stacksize_np' Next up is the OpenSSL problem. Google tells me that you need to use -lcrypto along with -lssl. I filed a wine bug (http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16649) for this. Adding that shuts it up, but there are still problems in the actual build. I think we may need to include some other headers, but haven't looked yet. There are a ton of errors like: /usr/lib/libssl.so.11.0: undefined reference to `BIO_find_type' /usr/lib/libssl.so.11.0: undefined reference to `EVP_enc_null' /usr/lib/libssl.so.11.0: undefined reference to `EVP_CIPHER_CTX_init' /usr/lib/libssl.so.11.0: undefined reference to `X509_NAME_dup' /usr/lib/libssl.so.11.0: undefined reference to `COMP_compress_block' /usr/lib/libssl.so.11.0: undefined reference to `EVP_rc2_cbc' /usr/lib/libssl.so.11.0: undefined reference to `sk_new_null' /usr/lib/libssl.so.11.0: undefined reference to `X509_STORE_get_by_subject' /usr/lib/libssl.so.11.0: undefined reference to `lh_free' ... etc. libpng has a similar problem, the versions in pkg_add and ports seem to be missing png.h. I tried installing from source, but it's munging on zlib somehow: /usr/local/lib/libpng.so.7.0: undefined reference to `deflate' /usr/local/lib/libpng.so.7.0: undefined reference to `inflate' /usr/local/lib/libpng.so.7.0: undefined reference to `inflateInit_' ... etc. though that's an error on my end. If you try compiling after that, mostly compiles, though you get quite a few compiler warnings. Launching any app (even wine --version) results in a segfault, so there's quite a bit of work to be done still. Any advice/help appreciated. -- -Austin
Re: Wine on OpenBSD
On Sun, Dec 28, 2008 at 01:43:42PM -0600, Austin English wrote: Any advice/help appreciated. run windows in a virtual machine. it may be slow, but it's a lot faster than trying to make wine work, especially if you can't get around the library issues you mentioned. -- jake...@sdf.lonestar.org SDF Public Access UNIX System - http://sdf.lonestar.org
Re: Wine on OpenBSD
On Sun, Dec 28, 2008 at 2:25 PM, Jacob Meuser jake...@sdf.lonestar.org wrote: On Sun, Dec 28, 2008 at 01:43:42PM -0600, Austin English wrote: Any advice/help appreciated. run windows in a virtual machine. it may be slow, but it's a lot faster than trying to make wine work, especially if you can't get around the library issues you mentioned. -- jake...@sdf.lonestar.org SDF Public Access UNIX System - http://sdf.lonestar.org I'm not worried about getting it done quickly. I'm looking at doing so properly so the fixes can be merged upstream. I've gotten around some of the issues, but am looking for the 'right' way to do so, rather than hacks. -- -Austin
Re: Wine on OpenBSD
On Sun, Dec 28, 2008 at 02:28:58PM -0600, Austin English wrote: I've gotten around some of the issues, but am looking for the 'right' way to do so, rather than hacks. have you looked in the misc@/ports@ archives? that is the 'right' thing to do before asking questions. -- jake...@sdf.lonestar.org SDF Public Access UNIX System - http://sdf.lonestar.org
