On Tue, 2011-05-10 at 19:11 +0200, Dag Wieers wrote: > On Tue, 10 May 2011, Yury V. Zaytsev wrote: > > > Is there a reason why we don't build 64-bit wine packages for RHEL6? > > Apparently this is supposed to work [1], although, RHEL5- have gcc that > > is too old, so the only possible target for now is RHEL6. > > The 64bit wine is pretty useless at it is unable to run 32bit > applications. Unless that has changed recently ?
As far as I understand, it is supposed to work now, but is considered to be of beta-quality (see [1]). > Or we could have the 64bit RPM package include a 32bit and 64bit wine > build ? Not sure what the recommended practice would be ? Apparently yes, but as far as I understand this will be deprecated as soon as WoW64 is declared stable. Not sure if we should go this way, so only do WoW64 (again, see [1]). [1]: http://wiki.winehq.org/Wine64ForPackagers > > Also, in what concerns 32-bit wine, is it possible to somehow add 32-bit > > rpms to the 64-bit index for those who have 32-bit runtime installed? I > > guess that's how EPEL does it. > > The aim always was to create a tool that could check all the 32bit > packages for conflicts with the 64bit repository. And add all packages > from 32bit magically to the 64bit repository. Oh yeah, this sounds a lot like the promised lands. So is there any progress on this, does such tool exist already? > But I guess we could adopt the repository-scripts to whitelist certain > packages until we get around automating it ? I was just asking triggered by a request on IRC, I'm not prepared to give any help of this :-( > > For now, I guess, if you want to install 32-bit wine, you need to add > > rpmforge for i386 to yum.conf and be extra careful about it? > > Yes, or simply download them manually :-/ Which is what I do. Ok, I see, then my advice did make sense. -- Sincerely yours, Yury V. Zaytsev _______________________________________________ users mailing list users@lists.rpmforge.net http://lists.rpmforge.net/mailman/listinfo/users
