http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8033
--- Comment #46 from rankincj@yahoo.com 2007-10-07 14:36:22 --- (In reply to comment #45)
Vitaliy may not have the best bedside manner,
There are no words to describe the enormity of this understatement...
but he's right.
No, you're both missing the bigger picture: you are implicitly saying that upgrading Wine requires all installed applications to be reinstalled afterwards, because that is the only approach that you are willing to test. And unfortunately for you, *no-one* uses that approach. Consider what happens when you upgrade binary Wine RPMs via yum, for example. In short, practically *every single one* of your users is slowly trashing his/her existing wineprefix directories whenever s/he upgrades his/her Wine packages, and so by your own argument, *no-one at all* should be using Wine until v1.0 is released. In my case, that trashing can be assumed to have reached the point where Wine just crashes now. And crashing always indicates a bug, even in beta software.
Actually, to be fair, I don't see how Wine v1.0 would solve my problem either, unless you are undertaking to have solved everyone's "updating wineprefix directories" problem by then. However, that would first involve admitting that there *is* a problem...
-
wine-bugs＠winehq.org