Bug#407063: wine in desktop task?
[ Sorry for the late reply, but ideas don't always flow the way you'd want ] On Wed, Jan 17, 2007 at 10:10:14PM +0100, Per Olofsson wrote: Robert Millan: But then windows virus and trojans need to know that messing with your c:\windows isn't the right way to damage your system if you're using wine. And if they are actualy going to make wine-aware virus, they could write a bash script as well. Even if such malware wouldn't damage the system, it could still do things like sending spam and infecting other computers. That would probably work in wine. Now I really wonder, is that *our* problem? It doesn't reflect badly in *our* users, only in users of Windows. There are ethical reasons why seeking this would be a bad thing, but working to prevent it, to the point that we have to give up on legitimate features, is really what we want? Note that Microsoft themselves don't follow that. They supply full win32 compat in their win64 vapourware OS. This means most viruses will still work, but they accept that because the cost of not providing win32 compat would be too high. If that cost is too high for Microsoft to break compatibility for the sake of reducing the virus problem *in their own platform*, why would the cost (i.e letting our users run viruses than can only harm our rivals) be too high for us to provide this compatibility in our platform? -- Robert Millan My spam trap is [EMAIL PROTECTED] Note: this address is only intended for spam harvesters. Writing to it will get you added to my black list. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#407063: wine in desktop task?
Robert Millan wrote: [ Sorry for the late reply, but ideas don't always flow the way you'd want ] On Wed, Jan 17, 2007 at 10:10:14PM +0100, Per Olofsson wrote: Even if such malware wouldn't damage the system, it could still do things like sending spam and infecting other computers. That would probably work in wine. Now I really wonder, is that *our* problem? It doesn't reflect badly in *our* users, only in users of Windows. There are ethical reasons why seeking this would be a bad thing, but working to prevent it, to the point that we have to give up on legitimate features, is really what we want? Isn't it our problem if our users' systems get turned into spam proxies and botnets? If that cost is too high for Microsoft to break compatibility for the sake of reducing the virus problem *in their own platform*, why would the cost (i.e letting our users run viruses than can only harm our rivals) be too high for us to provide this compatibility in our platform? Spam proxies and botnets harm all users. Even worms that only infect Wine and Windows harm all users because of wasted bandwidth. -- Pelle -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#407063: wine in desktop task?
Robert Millan wrote: [ Sorry for the late reply, but ideas don't always flow the way you'd want ] On Wed, Jan 17, 2007 at 10:10:14PM +0100, Per Olofsson wrote: Even if such malware wouldn't damage the system, it could still do things like sending spam and infecting other computers. That would probably work in wine. Now I really wonder, is that *our* problem? It doesn't reflect badly in *our* users, only in users of Windows. There are ethical reasons why seeking this would be a bad thing, but working to prevent it, to the point that we have to give up on legitimate features, is really what we want? Isn't it our problem if our users' systems get turned into spam proxies and botnets? If that cost is too high for Microsoft to break compatibility for the sake of reducing the virus problem *in their own platform*, why would the cost (i.e letting our users run viruses than can only harm our rivals) be too high for us to provide this compatibility in our platform? Spam proxies and botnets harm all users. Even worms that only infect Wine and Windows harm all users because of wasted bandwidth. -- Pelle -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#407063: wine in desktop task?
On Mon, Feb 19, 2007 at 09:58:36PM +0100, Per Olofsson wrote: Robert Millan wrote: [ Sorry for the late reply, but ideas don't always flow the way you'd want ] On Wed, Jan 17, 2007 at 10:10:14PM +0100, Per Olofsson wrote: Even if such malware wouldn't damage the system, it could still do things like sending spam and infecting other computers. That would probably work in wine. Now I really wonder, is that *our* problem? It doesn't reflect badly in *our* users, only in users of Windows. There are ethical reasons why seeking this would be a bad thing, but working to prevent it, to the point that we have to give up on legitimate features, is really what we want? Isn't it our problem if our users' systems get turned into spam proxies and botnets? Yes, but it is not *our* problem. We will be guided by the needs of our users and the free software community. We will place their interests first in our priorities. spam proxies and botnets are a problem indeed, but it has nothing to do with us. By ingringing limitations unto our users to solve this problem, I think we're following different priorities here (e.g. that which places overall well-being of the internet before our users). In fact, the other part of the problem (malware that affects Windows) does really benefit us. Of course, I would never advocate to promote it because of that, since I find that completely unethical, but I don't think we should spend our effort and make compromises to paliate one of our rival's most notable problems. If that cost is too high for Microsoft to break compatibility for the sake of reducing the virus problem *in their own platform*, why would the cost (i.e letting our users run viruses than can only harm our rivals) be too high for us to provide this compatibility in our platform? Spam proxies and botnets harm all users. Even worms that only infect Wine and Windows harm all users because of wasted bandwidth. Ok. Let's consider a naive user who: - Clicks just about anything (and gets all the malware) - Can't figure out that he needs wine to run his win32 programs. The only way malware can harm our user is by wasting bandwidth. Do you think this bandwidth cost (of the user himself, not 3rd parties) is worse than the inability to run his critical win32 applications? Note that in a migration from Windows this inability will most likely make the difference between accepting the new system or going back to Windows. On a sidenote, perhaps it wouldn't be that bad to integrate Clamav into wine after all ;) -- Robert Millan My spam trap is [EMAIL PROTECTED] Note: this address is only intended for spam harvesters. Writing to it will get you added to my black list. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#407063: wine in desktop task?
Op 16-01-2007 om 23:54 schreef Luis Matos: i agree on wine to stand in the desktop task. Desktop task should cover user's possible activities and it's normal that any user (mostly new users) to try to run a certain windows application. The question is ... Why not? Debian is about free software. Free as is in freedom of speech (not free drinks) Wine, the Wine Is No Emulator, exists mostly to run not so free software. But people are free to run non free software. ( For me is Debian also about freedom ) It is a good thing to explain to those who believe they need wine, that they need to do something extra when they want non-free software. So, not including wine in the desktop task, is the best way to tell what Debian is all about. Cheers Geert Stappers -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#407063: wine in desktop task?
Hello there ... Maybe i am contributing for the wrong distro. Dom, 2007-01-21 às 11:25 +0100, Geert Stappers escreveu: Op 16-01-2007 om 23:54 schreef Luis Matos: i agree on wine to stand in the desktop task. Desktop task should cover user's possible activities and it's normal that any user (mostly new users) to try to run a certain windows application. The question is ... Why not? Debian is about free software. Free as is in freedom of speech (not free drinks) agreed. Wine, the Wine Is No Emulator, exists mostly to run not so free software. agreed. But people are free to run non free software. ( For me is Debian also about freedom ) agree. It is a good thing to explain to those who believe they need wine, that they need to do something extra when they want non-free software. So ... when a new user runs a program he bought in linux and really sees that he does not work ... well ... because his program is not opensource ... is not runnable in linux? So, not including wine in the desktop task, is the best way to tell what Debian is all about. -- just so make the thing hotter ... o you defend debian should move wine for non-free. -- No. Debian is about distributing free as in speech software that can run syde-by-side (or on bottom) with proprietary programs. Having a free system is to have the ability to run both. Other way, the system is not free at all. Besides all this free story ... I am really not right about including wine. For a new user it is a good thing, but maybe most users don't use it (because they only use software that is designed for linux). But, maybe it's useful to be there when a windows program appears. The user would be surprised for it to work in linux (i did sometime ago). My story is an example. I use linux only software and installed wine because ... i just did. Someday i just executed an install (unconscionably, just clicked on top of it) and after that, i was waiting for the error popup when ... it ran. I was tremendously pleased about it. If i hadn't wine installed, that would never happen. Cheers Geert Stappers -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#407063: wine in desktop task?
On Mon, Jan 15, 2007 at 11:18:07PM -0500, Joey Hess wrote: Robert Millan wrote: How about adding wine to desktop task? Why? We seem to have a perfectly usable desktop without wine, That's quite true for most of our office desktops. Unfortunately (and so much I hate having to say this) it is not the case for the gaming desktop sector in which we haven't penetrated yet. Sure, we do have good games (vegastrike, stratagus, wesnoth..), but: - They're roughly 10 years behind to meet the standards of artistic quality (graphics and sound, but also game logic) that most propietary games have. - They're not the *same* games our target user is used to. Replacing MSIE with Firefox gives you another functional product that most people would be happy with, but games are in lots of ways artistic works much like music or movies. And users get attached to artistic works in a way that makes them impossible to replace completely. That doesn't mean I don't believe in free games. Just that it's too early for them to win, the same way it's too early for Creative Commons music to win but I expect some day that will happen. Most games are programmed around the soon-to-die win32 API that wine provides. Note that in supporting this API by default, we don't risk making it a de-facto standard for cross-platform support, because the 64bit transition is surely going to kill it anyway. It'll be different when we have to choose wether (and how much) supporting win64, as we'll have to weight the benefits against the risk of aiding the enemy. I believe we'll have a great opportunity to penetrate in the gaming desktop sector during the 64bit transition. Microsoft is in a difficult position since their OS has almost zero drivers for the new platform, and they have trouble even porting their own OS application components. Unfortunately, according to the predictions (see http://catb.org/~esr/writings/world-domination/world-domination-201.html), this transition ends in late 2008, which means etch is our last release before it happens. and if you want to install some windows software, you can apt-get install wine as part of the process of installing it. That's good enough for a power user. But think of Joe user who just got Debian preinstalled on his laptop because he wanted to save $100 in license fees. He has no idea what wine is, but if he can just click on setup.exe and it works, he will never need to know about wine. Think of it in comparison with OpenOffice and Firefox (which we already preinstall). Joe knows he wants OpenOffice and Firefox, so he can try to figure out how to install them. That will be easier than figuring out why my program won't run. -- Robert Millan My spam trap is [EMAIL PROTECTED] Note: this address is only intended for spam harvesters. Writing to it will get you added to my black list. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#407063: wine in desktop task?
On Wed, 17 Jan 2007, Robert Millan wrote: That's good enough for a power user. But think of Joe user who just got Debian preinstalled on his laptop because he wanted to save $100 in license fees. He has no idea what wine is, but if he can just click on setup.exe and it works, he will never need to know about wine. If he has no idea, and he just clicks on anything which has an .exe extension, he will need to know about windows virus and trojans instead. Frankly, I don't think this is a good thing for Joe user. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#407063: wine in desktop task?
On Wed, Jan 17, 2007 at 11:26:19AM +0100, Santiago Vila wrote: On Wed, 17 Jan 2007, Robert Millan wrote: That's good enough for a power user. But think of Joe user who just got Debian preinstalled on his laptop because he wanted to save $100 in license fees. He has no idea what wine is, but if he can just click on setup.exe and it works, he will never need to know about wine. If he has no idea, and he just clicks on anything which has an .exe extension, he will need to know about windows virus and trojans instead. But then windows virus and trojans need to know that messing with your c:\windows isn't the right way to damage your system if you're using wine. And if they are actualy going to make wine-aware virus, they could write a bash script as well. My point is that it isn't lack or presence of win32 api support that makes a difference, but rather disposition of malware authors to target this system (and security awareness of Joe, of course). -- Robert Millan My spam trap is [EMAIL PROTECTED] Note: this address is only intended for spam harvesters. Writing to it will get you added to my black list. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#407063: wine in desktop task?
Robert Millan: But then windows virus and trojans need to know that messing with your c:\windows isn't the right way to damage your system if you're using wine. And if they are actualy going to make wine-aware virus, they could write a bash script as well. Even if such malware wouldn't damage the system, it could still do things like sending spam and infecting other computers. That would probably work in wine. -- Pelle -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#407063: wine in desktop task?
Robert Millan wrote: How about adding wine to desktop task? Why? We seem to have a perfectly usable desktop without wine, and if you want to install some windows software, you can apt-get install wine as part of the process of installing it. -- see shy jo signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#407063: wine in desktop task?
i agree on wine to stand in the desktop task. Desktop task should cover user's possible activities and it's normal that any user (mostly new users) to try to run a certain windows application. The question is ... Why not? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#407063: wine in desktop task?
Package: tasksel Version: 2.58 Severity: wishlist Tags: patch How about adding wine to desktop task? --- tasksel-2.63/tasks/desktop~ 2007-01-12 23:19:19.0 +0100 +++ tasksel-2.63/tasks/desktop 2007-01-16 00:10:54.0 +0100 @@ -65,3 +65,7 @@ cupsys-bsd # gui for configuration of the print server foomatic-gui + wine + wine-utils + libwine-print + libwine-gl -- System Information: Debian Release: 4.0 APT prefers testing APT policy: (500, 'testing') Architecture: amd64 (x86_64) Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/bash Kernel: Linux 2.6.18-3-amd64 Locale: LANG=ca_AD.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=ca_AD.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8) Versions of packages tasksel depends on: ii aptitude 0.4.4-1terminal-based apt frontend ii debconf [debconf-2.0] 1.5.11 Debian configuration management sy ii liblocale-gettext-perl1.05-1 Using libc functions for internati ii tasksel-data 2.58 Official tasks used for installati tasksel recommends no packages. -- debconf information excluded -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
