Wine 6.20 Released With More Modules Switching To The PE Format

[cl333r]

From the phrasing, I get the impression you meant that as a "Ha! I win!", but all you have is my heartfelt thanks.

Don't you dare spare him, I got 4 bucks on you, finish him!

[Weasel]

That part I don't understand.
Aren't PE Builds already supported? The WINE team ports more and more libraries and programs to PE. So they can already create PE files.
And what system libraries which are bundled with the source?
Does it mean, that the system libraries are existing in already compiled form, which is bundled to the source code?
And which system libraries? The core of WINE or do they adding Windows binary files?

I don't understand the complete quote.

Some wine modules have dependencies on external libraries, such as zlib. A PE module can't directly call into a host .so zlib library, it needs a separate unix component (some libraries, like winex11, need that since you can't provide a PE libxcb for obvious reasons), and it works fine. But for other libraries that, say, only require zlib, there's no reason to incur the unix lib transition overhead: you can just embed zlib itself into the PE module. Heck you can build zlib as PE (i.e zlib1.dll).

That's the kind of "system libraries" it means. You can't always get around this, but for libraries that can be built as PE (and only provide functionality without talking to the host Linux OS), you can. zlib is an example of this: it doesn't depend on any Linux feature. libxcb is not, since it depends on the X server itself and a PE built libxcb isn't gonna work.

[ssokolow]

You have been wrong a few times now. Please note I have used https://wiki.archlinux.org many times on you so far when you have been wrong. Yes I normally use debian but for these odd things I use gentoo or arch wiki turns out those guys are good on documenting this stuff.

Please note it was not "Ha! I win!" it was darn I have to correct this person again. I was not blunt on the source I was using the last time. Hopefully this comes less common.

...I don't remember "many times", and I'm not some fragile-ego'd man-child who takes it as a personal injury to admit being wrong. Can you give me some examples?

(Preferably with links to the conversations so I can confirm that it was really me being wrong and not just something like "oiaohm insisted I was covering my ass/moving the goalposts when I was admitting I got sloppy with my phrasing and didn't properly communicate what I meant to communicate from the beginning".)

[oiaohm]

...I don't remember "many times", and I'm not some fragile-ego'd man-child who takes it as a personal injury to admit being wrong. Can you give me some examples?

(Preferably with links to the conversations so I can confirm that it was really me being wrong and not just something like "oiaohm insisted I was covering my ass/moving the goalposts when I was admitting I got sloppy with my phrasing and didn't properly communicate what I meant to communicate from the beginning".)

The reality here I was not always know as oiaohm on this site. So I have known you since 2013. This the same patten of screw up on you side. You have used search engines have been unable to find out to-do something then formed the presume that it cannot be done. Bad new here is google and duckduckgo will screw you over as they go on the most popular results.

Yes it the same kind of odd case that getting you as well. Current case evdev joysticks use to emulate as old Linux joysticks so the old Linux joysticks configuration tool use always be able to configure the evdev(event) joystick so people finding the old configuration system use to solve the users problem resulting in google and other search engine believing those sites had to be the right answer. Audio and graphical at different times has got you as well.

For a person who is right so often its annoying for me to have to be correcting you at all. Particularly when its the same trap that getting you. Arch and gentoo wiki sites have the habit of putting all the options on one page. Most other distributions like Ubuntu, Debian, Fedora, Redhat... have the idea of putting each type of problem on their own page so in the current case old school joystick will be on one page new evdev stuff will be on a new page. Of course the old joystick page is going to be the most visited by users so by the search engine this is going to have the highest probability to show you even if you ask directly about evdev Linux joysticks.

So this trap that getting you its not just your fault its the way Linux documentation is commonly done and how it end up interacting with general search engines so leading you to dead ends. Please note I use to run into the same dead ends until I worked out what the problem was.

This is also a trap that gets new users. Yes google and duckduckgo searchs are useful to a point but at times they are very thing in your way finding the right solution. I would also guess you would have been searching how to solve the problem not using the term arch or gentoo just generic lInux or one of the Linux with fragmented documentation.

The times before when I pulled you up on this I was not clear how you are getting caught and screwed over. You are not alone for this problem. Yes this is just how the google/duckduckgo/.... algorithms work and come bias against new facts putting a higher priority on showing people old facts that could possible be disproven.

ssokolow its the basic problem that lack of evidence does not proven anything and if you believe lack of evidence proves something you normally will be wrong. Yes you use google and duckduckgo they give you lack of evidence then you make the believe that X does not exist. Then down the track I end up correcting you on it to my annoyance because you are normally better than this. Lack of evidence means you need to dig deeper. I would just love to see this trap no longer catch you out.

[sophisticles]

I have never understood the point of WINE and the like. Consider Linux users' basic view:

1) Windows sucks.

2) Linux is way better.

3) Oh, I forgot most of the software I want/need to run is Windows only.

If you truly believe open source is better then you don't use closed source, proprietary Windows only apps. If you need to use Windows apps then install Windows.

[Quackdoc]

The reality here I was not always know as oiaohm on this site. So I have known you since 2013. This the same patten of screw up on you side. You have used search engines have been unable to find out to-do something then formed the presume that it cannot be done. Bad new here is google and duckduckgo will screw you over as they go on the most popular results.

...I don't remember "many times", and I'm not some fragile-ego'd man-child who takes it as a personal injury to admit being wrong. Can you give me some examples?

Boy do I love a good old fashioned phoronix dungfest

I have never understood the point of WINE and the like. Consider Linux users' basic view:

1) Windows sucks.

2) Linux is way better.

3) Oh, I forgot most of the software I want/need to run is Windows only.

If you truly believe open source is better then you don't use closed source, proprietary Windows only apps. If you need to use Windows apps then install Windows.

I think linux is a better operating system, but I think there are some legitimately useful windows apps, and think there are even some points of windows that are better than linux, therefore I shouldn't use linux? Is that what you are getting at? instead of trying to make an OS as good as possible, you want to intentionally gimp it in order to maintain "Muh Foss Purity" instead of making linux the best operating system family it could be.

If you want nothing but foss, then go use an OS that allows nothing but foss. I want a flexible system that I can mold to my purpose, which is what Linux is, Linux is NOT an OS where only foss is allowed lol.

[ssokolow]

<montage>

The reality here I was not always know as oiaohm on this site. So I have known you since 2013.

Whatever works for you. I've been ssokolow since I first logged onto the Internet in 1997, aside from my IRC nick and sites where "ssokolow" is taken... then I'm "deitarion".

Feel free to search up my old posts to your heart's content. When someone catches me in a mistake somewhere like Reddit, I correct myself and I use strike-through on the old text rather than erasing it... and, barring anything I've honestly forgotten, the only posts I've made that are no longer up are ones where the site I posted them is gone or started over.

So I have known you since 2013. This the same patten of screw up on you side. You have used search engines have been unable to find out to-do something then formed the presume that it cannot be done. Bad new here is google and duckduckgo will screw you over as they go on the most popular results.

You'd really prefer I be "that guy" and exhaustively enumerate every technique I used, place I searched, and keyword set I tried, rather than just using "Google and DuckDuckGo" as polite shorthand for "I've done more searching than most people do"?

For a person who is right so often its annoying for me to have to be correcting you at all.

We're human. We all make mistakes. I didn't sign up to be inhumanly perfect and I'm certainly not going to expect that of others either.

Particularly when its the same trap that getting you. Arch and Gentoo wiki sites have the habit of putting all the options on one page.

I'll admit it may have been overlooked but, given how messed up my sense of time is, I think it's more likely that Archwiki didn't have the relevant information at the time and I hadn't realized how long it's been since I last checked.

(As an example, some time after COVID lockdowns started, I decided to go back and re-read some fanfiction I liked... only to discover "Holy shit! The epilogue of that was posted in 2007? It didn't feel like it was that long ago!")

I'm curious enough that I tried to check the Archwiki edit history but they limited it to registered users, the CAPTCHA for creating an account requires the output of a pacman pipeline, all my systems are currently running Debian derivatives, and I don't care enough to go download an Arch VM image just to read a wiki's edit history.

ssokolow its the basic problem that lack of evidence does not proven anything and if you believe lack of evidence proves something you normally will be wrong.

I'm well aware that I may have overlooked things and I choose my phrasing carefully. Note that I said "while everything I've searched up indicates that ...".

Without an edit history like GitHub Issues and its competitors, I can't prove it wasn't added in one of the edits I made, so you'll have to take my word that it was there when you first read it.

Lack of evidence means you need to dig deeper.

I'm curious to know how deep you think I'm digging... because I strongly believe it's a gross underestimation.

A typical search would be no less than ten pages each on Google and DDG for each keyword set I can think of, another minimum ten pages for each Stack Exchange site: search I can think of (Unix & Linux Stack Exchange, Ask Ubuntu, ServerFault, etc.), anything that looks even remotely relevant in the "related" sidebar on Stack Exchange results, site: searches for any other relevant sites I can think of (eg. Qt Forum and Qt Centre when I'm looking for the correct way to do something in a PyQt project), at least one Archwiki page (though I admit I usually remember this step when one shows up in Google/DDG results), any potentially relevant Archwiki internal hyperlinks from the page(s) I started on, and the `apropos` command... and that's just the generic stuff that's more or less guaranteed, not the more specific "I know the internals of this"-informed stuff.

We're talking hours of searching spread across at least two or three days.

I dunno about you, but the next thing that would come to mind for me is trawling through the source code to the evdev implementation to confirm that what I'm looking for actually exists, and I'm not willing to go that far.

</montage>

[oiaohm]

I'll admit it may have been overlooked but, given how messed up my sense of time is, I think it's more likely that Archwiki didn't have the relevant information at the time and I hadn't realized how long it's been since I last checked.

https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/Gam...nd_calibration that was correct 20 days after the change to evdev in the kernel. So no the information was there. Of course that update is before most distributions required you to know about evdev-joystick.

I'm curious enough that I tried to check the Archwiki edit history but they limited it to registered users, the CAPTCHA for creating an account requires the output of a pacman pipeline, all my systems are currently running Debian derivatives, and I don't care enough to go download an Arch VM image just to read a wiki's edit history.

I will give you their security on who can edit the wiki and review history is kind of savage but it also does keep the quality of their wiki up.

A typical search would be no less than ten pages each on Google and DDG for each keyword set I can think of, another minimum ten pages for each Stack Exchange site: search I can think of (Unix & Linux Stack Exchange, Ask Ubuntu, ServerFault, etc.), anything that looks even remotely relevant in the "related" sidebar on Stack Exchange results, site: searches for any other relevant sites I can think of (eg. Qt Forum and Qt Centre when I'm looking for the correct way to do something in a PyQt project), at least one Archwiki page (though I admit I usually remember this step when one shows up in Google/DDG results), any potentially relevant Archwiki internal hyperlinks from the page(s) I started on, and the `apropos` command... and that's just the generic stuff that's more or less guaranteed, not the more specific "I know the internals of this"-informed stuff.

We're talking hours of searching spread across at least two or three days.

Arch is a rolling release system. So they are running very new kernels and updating their documentation to match up to those new kernels with the required tools they do very well.

This is part of my not again. Because as soon as you point out this to a person they say I put days into searching. Yes you can waste days searching even months.

I dunno about you, but the next thing that would come to mind for me is trawling through the source code to the evdev implementation to confirm that what I'm looking for actually exists, and I'm not willing to go that far.

Diving into the evdev documentation on the kernel would not have helped you.

https://sourceforge.net/projects/linuxconsole/files/

But if you had looked at the package that jscal comes from you would have noticed evdev-joystick configuration program had also appeared. Yes evdev-joystick is added to the linux console when evdev/eventx starts being used for joysticks in the Linux kernel.

Generally I do not go past the 3 page of Google or DDG because most cases going past there is "sunk cost fallacy". I learnt that one the hard way because I had a site search up on one computer that was first page google yes it was a Arch wiki page at the second computer at the same house that page was on page 60(I was having it had to be here stubbornness at the time). Sorry to say Google and DDG is more do you fell lucky than one would dream at times. Yes that was the same day.

Yes with some of these changes it is faster to read the Linux kernel source code than attempt to use Google and DDG to get the answer. ssokolow the trick is known the point when you should just say bugger it google and ddg.... are not going to answer the question then having the knowledge of where will have the answers.

Please note when I say dig deeper I am not meaning attempt to dig deeper using Google or ddg. Dig deeper normally for me end up opening a message on a correct support forum asking for clarification. Your problem you presumed since you could not find the solution with the tools you were usage that there was no solution. This will get you again.

[ssokolow]

Please note when I say dig deeper I am not meaning attempt to dig deeper using Google or ddg. Dig deeper normally for me end up opening a message on a correct support forum asking for clarification. Your problem you presumed since you could not find the solution with the tools you were usage that there was no solution. This will get you again.

I'll admit to that. I do have a strong bias against creating new accounts and asking questions of strangers when I can just try harder to answer my question by anonymously reading documents.

Possibly a negative side-effect of operating on the assumption that anything I say or do online will remain visible and easy to search up from my name in perpetuity. Asking a question means doing due diligence to not look stupid, which is mentally exhausting compared to just searching and reading more.

[Weasel]

I have never understood the point of WINE and the like.

Running Windows applications on Linux.

1) Windows sucks.

The OS yes.

2) Linux is way better.

The OS (kernel and core userland libs) yes.

3) Oh, I forgot most of the software I want/need to run is Windows only.

It's not Windows only since you can run it in Wine on Linux, dumbass.

Most Windows apps are far superior to Linux apps. Heck, they don't suffer from dependency hell either, you can use portable Windows apps easily etc. But it works with Wine too so not a problem, works on Linux.

No need to worry about GTK/Qt/ffmpeg and package managers and other bullshit dependency incompatibilities. No need to install anything either, much less be root. This applies even to Windows apps that are also available on Linux, natively.

If you need to use Windows apps then install Windows.

How about no?