Re: README: add a note about 64-bit Wine and 32-bit apps (try 2)
Austin English <austinenglish(a)gmail.com> writes:
@@ -80,7 +80,9 @@ Optional support libraries: to make sure to install the 32-bit versions of these libraries; see http://wiki.winehq.org/WineOn64bit for details. If you want a true 64-bit Wine (or a mixed 32-bit and 64-bit Wine setup), see - http://wiki.winehq.org/Wine64 for details. + http://wiki.winehq.org/Wine64 for details. Note that a 64-bit Wine + build will not run 32-bit applications (which many 64-bit applications + include and rely upon) without also building 32-bit Wine.
I think this should go on the mentioned wiki page instead, preferably with a big warning sign. -- Alexandre Julliard julliard(a)winehq.org
On Tue, Dec 15, 2015 at 2:14 AM, Alexandre Julliard <julliard(a)winehq.org> wrote:
Austin English <austinenglish(a)gmail.com> writes:
@@ -80,7 +80,9 @@ Optional support libraries: to make sure to install the 32-bit versions of these libraries; see http://wiki.winehq.org/WineOn64bit for details. If you want a true 64-bit Wine (or a mixed 32-bit and 64-bit Wine setup), see - http://wiki.winehq.org/Wine64 for details. + http://wiki.winehq.org/Wine64 for details. Note that a 64-bit Wine + build will not run 32-bit applications (which many 64-bit applications + include and rely upon) without also building 32-bit Wine.
I think this should go on the mentioned wiki page instead, preferably with a big warning sign.
-- Alexandre Julliard julliard(a)winehq.org
Why not both? If we're redirecting everyone to the wiki we could arguably replace the entire README with a link to http://wiki.winehq.org/FAQ. I'm not opposed to putting it on the wiki, but given how often this comes up in #winehq, I don't think putting it in the wiki alone will make a huge amount of difference. -- -Austin
Austin English <austinenglish(a)gmail.com> writes:
On Tue, Dec 15, 2015 at 2:14 AM, Alexandre Julliard <julliard(a)winehq.org> wrote:
Austin English <austinenglish(a)gmail.com> writes:
@@ -80,7 +80,9 @@ Optional support libraries: to make sure to install the 32-bit versions of these libraries; see http://wiki.winehq.org/WineOn64bit for details. If you want a true 64-bit Wine (or a mixed 32-bit and 64-bit Wine setup), see - http://wiki.winehq.org/Wine64 for details. + http://wiki.winehq.org/Wine64 for details. Note that a 64-bit Wine + build will not run 32-bit applications (which many 64-bit applications + include and rely upon) without also building 32-bit Wine.
I think this should go on the mentioned wiki page instead, preferably with a big warning sign.
-- Alexandre Julliard julliard(a)winehq.org
Why not both? If we're redirecting everyone to the wiki we could arguably replace the entire README with a link to http://wiki.winehq.org/FAQ. I'm not opposed to putting it on the wiki, but given how often this comes up in #winehq, I don't think putting it in the wiki alone will make a huge amount of difference.
In fact, most of the README is already links to the wiki, and that's how it should be. I don't see a reason to single out that specific problem given that we don't even explain how to build 64-bit in the first place. -- Alexandre Julliard julliard(a)winehq.org
On Tue, Dec 15, 2015 at 1:39 PM, Alexandre Julliard <julliard(a)winehq.org> wrote:
Austin English <austinenglish(a)gmail.com> writes:
On Tue, Dec 15, 2015 at 2:14 AM, Alexandre Julliard <julliard(a)winehq.org> wrote:
Austin English <austinenglish(a)gmail.com> writes:
@@ -80,7 +80,9 @@ Optional support libraries: to make sure to install the 32-bit versions of these libraries; see http://wiki.winehq.org/WineOn64bit for details. If you want a true 64-bit Wine (or a mixed 32-bit and 64-bit Wine setup), see - http://wiki.winehq.org/Wine64 for details. + http://wiki.winehq.org/Wine64 for details. Note that a 64-bit Wine + build will not run 32-bit applications (which many 64-bit applications + include and rely upon) without also building 32-bit Wine.
I think this should go on the mentioned wiki page instead, preferably with a big warning sign.
-- Alexandre Julliard julliard(a)winehq.org
Why not both? If we're redirecting everyone to the wiki we could arguably replace the entire README with a link to http://wiki.winehq.org/FAQ. I'm not opposed to putting it on the wiki, but given how often this comes up in #winehq, I don't think putting it in the wiki alone will make a huge amount of difference.
In fact, most of the README is already links to the wiki, and that's how it should be. I don't see a reason to single out that specific problem given that we don't even explain how to build 64-bit in the first place.
-- Alexandre Julliard julliard(a)winehq.org
I've updated http://wiki.winehq.org/AMD64 (which is what http://wiki.winehq.org/Wine64 redirects to) and http://wiki.winehq.org/BuildingWine (which is what http://wiki.winehq.org/WineOn64bit redirects to).. I feel like the AMD64 page should be renamed to Wine64 (since it also applies to at least aarch64).. -- -Austin
Austin English <austinenglish(a)gmail.com> writes:
I've updated http://wiki.winehq.org/AMD64 (which is what http://wiki.winehq.org/Wine64 redirects to) and http://wiki.winehq.org/BuildingWine (which is what http://wiki.winehq.org/WineOn64bit redirects to)..
Thanks!
I feel like the AMD64 page should be renamed to Wine64 (since it also applies to at least aarch64)..
Agreed. -- Alexandre Julliard julliard(a)winehq.org
On Wed, Dec 23, 2015 at 2:07 AM, Alexandre Julliard <julliard(a)winehq.org> wrote:
Austin English <austinenglish(a)gmail.com> writes:
I've updated http://wiki.winehq.org/AMD64 (which is what http://wiki.winehq.org/Wine64 redirects to) and http://wiki.winehq.org/BuildingWine (which is what http://wiki.winehq.org/WineOn64bit redirects to)..
Thanks!
I feel like the AMD64 page should be renamed to Wine64 (since it also applies to at least aarch64)..
Agreed.
So I just tried, but I get an error: A page with the name 'Wine64' already exists. Try a different name. presumably that refers to the redirect, but I'm not sure where that's configured. Perhaps someone else has an idea. -- -Austin
On 12/23/2015 05:14 PM, Austin English wrote:
On Wed, Dec 23, 2015 at 2:07 AM, Alexandre Julliard <julliard(a)winehq.org> wrote:
Austin English <austinenglish(a)gmail.com> writes:
I've updated http://wiki.winehq.org/AMD64 (which is what http://wiki.winehq.org/Wine64 redirects to) and http://wiki.winehq.org/BuildingWine (which is what http://wiki.winehq.org/WineOn64bit redirects to).. Thanks!
I feel like the AMD64 page should be renamed to Wine64 (since it also applies to at least aarch64).. Agreed. So I just tried, but I get an error: A page with the name 'Wine64' already exists. Try a different name.
presumably that refers to the redirect, but I'm not sure where that's configured. Perhaps someone else has an idea.
Since I setup the redirects earlier this summer, I remember moinmoin's quirks and can take care of this very quickly tonight. My only question is do you all want to move the "AMD64" page back to "Wine64" wholesale, or should I leave the "AMD64" page and just copy all the text over to "Wine64" for everyone to edit how they want? My logic in making the "AMD64" page in the first place was that it would eventually just become development notes (especially for OS-es besides Linux) and troubleshooting for that architecture. That's why I didn't bother with anything like an "x86" page. I pictured user-facing stuff and basic instructions going in other docs or main wiki-pages, but if the readme is going to link regularly to the wiki, I can definitely see the value in a "Wine64" page. Does everyone want to dump the "AMD64" page for notes too though? Kyle
On Wed, Dec 23, 2015 at 7:47 PM, Kyle Auble <kyle.auble(a)zoho.com> wrote:
On 12/23/2015 05:14 PM, Austin English wrote:
On Wed, Dec 23, 2015 at 2:07 AM, Alexandre Julliard <julliard(a)winehq.org> wrote:
Austin English <austinenglish(a)gmail.com> writes:
I've updated http://wiki.winehq.org/AMD64 (which is what http://wiki.winehq.org/Wine64 redirects to) and http://wiki.winehq.org/BuildingWine (which is what http://wiki.winehq.org/WineOn64bit redirects to)..
Thanks!
I feel like the AMD64 page should be renamed to Wine64 (since it also applies to at least aarch64)..
Agreed.
So I just tried, but I get an error: A page with the name 'Wine64' already exists. Try a different name.
presumably that refers to the redirect, but I'm not sure where that's configured. Perhaps someone else has an idea.
Since I setup the redirects earlier this summer, I remember moinmoin's quirks and can take care of this very quickly tonight.
Great, thanks.
My only question is do you all want to move the "AMD64" page back to "Wine64" wholesale, or should I leave the "AMD64" page and just copy all the text over to "Wine64" for everyone to edit how they want? My logic in making the "AMD64" page in the first place was that it would eventually just become development notes (especially for OS-es besides Linux) and troubleshooting for that architecture. That's why I didn't bother with anything like an "x86" page.
I pictured user-facing stuff and basic instructions going in other docs or main wiki-pages, but if the readme is going to link regularly to the wiki, I can definitely see the value in a "Wine64" page. Does everyone want to dump the "AMD64" page for notes too though?
I don't see the harm in having AMD64 specific information on an AMD64 page, with it linking/referencing Wine64. I'm more concerned with having a Wine64 page that is useful for packagers/users. -- -Austin
On 12/23/2015 06:57 PM, Austin English wrote:
On Wed, Dec 23, 2015 at 7:47 PM, Kyle Auble <kyle.auble(a)zoho.com> wrote:
My only question is do you all want to move the "AMD64" page back to "Wine64" wholesale, or should I leave the "AMD64" page and just copy all the text over to "Wine64" for everyone to edit how they want? My logic in making the "AMD64" page in the first place was that it would eventually just become development notes (especially for OS-es besides Linux) and troubleshooting for that architecture. That's why I didn't bother with anything like an "x86" page.
I pictured user-facing stuff and basic instructions going in other docs or main wiki-pages, but if the readme is going to link regularly to the wiki, I can definitely see the value in a "Wine64" page. Does everyone want to dump the "AMD64" page for notes too though? I don't see the harm in having AMD64 specific information on an AMD64 page, with it linking/referencing Wine64.
I'm more concerned with having a Wine64 page that is useful for packagers/users.
Done, "Wine64" is back up, but it's pretty sparse. Most of the info on "AMD64" was already aimed at developers. Thinking back, I probably moved most packager- and (power) user-oriented stuff that isn't in the FAQ to the "Shared WoW64" section of the "BuildingWine" page. I'll leave it up to you all to fill out the page though. BTW, I saw that you all decided to bring back the "Biarch on Ubuntu" page, which is cool because I know "BuildingWine" is a bit of a monster. I made that page because building hints and instructions were scattered across the wiki and other docs, and I thought one general walkthrough would be good. I'm sure if someone came at it with a different perspective, they could find a lot to prune or improve, then maybe reorganize a few bits on other pages. Kyle
On Wed, Dec 23, 2015 at 8:58 PM, Kyle Auble <kyle.auble(a)zoho.com> wrote:
On 12/23/2015 06:57 PM, Austin English wrote:
On Wed, Dec 23, 2015 at 7:47 PM, Kyle Auble <kyle.auble(a)zoho.com> wrote:
My only question is do you all want to move the "AMD64" page back to "Wine64" wholesale, or should I leave the "AMD64" page and just copy all the text over to "Wine64" for everyone to edit how they want? My logic in making the "AMD64" page in the first place was that it would eventually just become development notes (especially for OS-es besides Linux) and troubleshooting for that architecture. That's why I didn't bother with anything like an "x86" page.
I pictured user-facing stuff and basic instructions going in other docs or main wiki-pages, but if the readme is going to link regularly to the wiki, I can definitely see the value in a "Wine64" page. Does everyone want to dump the "AMD64" page for notes too though?
I don't see the harm in having AMD64 specific information on an AMD64 page, with it linking/referencing Wine64.
I'm more concerned with having a Wine64 page that is useful for packagers/users.
Done, "Wine64" is back up, but it's pretty sparse. Most of the info on "AMD64" was already aimed at developers. Thinking back, I probably moved most packager- and (power) user-oriented stuff that isn't in the FAQ to the "Shared WoW64" section of the "BuildingWine" page. I'll leave it up to you all to fill out the page though.
Great, thanks Kyle! -- -Austin
participants (3)
-
Alexandre Julliard -
Austin English -
Kyle Auble