http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=31237
--- Comment #3 from alister.hood@gmail.com 2012-07-18 20:18:04 CDT --- (In reply to comment #1)
To do it right you'd need to ensure that all processes running under the same wineserver see the same time, so even tracking child processes wouldn't be sufficient. It would need a convincing use case to be worth the effort.
So that sounds like you would be open to patches, anyway. Is that right?
Is there any guidance on what might make a "convincing use case"? There are a lot of use cases, but they do tend to be pretty niche. Another example is for testing a program e.g. to see if it handles expired certificates correctly, or if it works correctly on a leap day.
BTW I've just been reminded that as well as faketime, there is an alternative called datefudge, although last I heard it was missing some of the functionality of datetime. I'll need to test the datefudge executable with Wine on the weekend, but I imagine it will have similar issues.
(In reply to comment #2)
You could use RunAsDate: http://www.nirsoft.net/utils/run_as_date.html
works in wine, since 1.3.30: http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=19975
There are cases where RunAsDate doesn't work, and I suspect that a faketime implementation in Wine would not have the same limitations (But I don't really know how Wine works, so I can't say for sure).