Michael Stefaniuc mstefani@redhat.com wrote:
Once again, packages with custom patches can't be supported through WineHQ bugzilla for obvious reasons. If the packager knows what he/she is dooing by
I disagree with this statement. Each distribution modifies the upstream Wine in one way or the other.
Could you please list other Wine packages provided by distributions with custom patches applied you are aware of?
And a blanket "Screw you, use upstream Wine if you want support" doesn't cut it. The distributions are for us the main consumers of Wine and we should help them provide a good Wine experience to their users.
Of course in this specific case aka bug 26271 we cannot help as it involves winepulse.drv which is an unsupported outside patch.
That's precisely my point. How many users are prepared to compile Wine from source when they report a bug with such a Wine build, and somebody asks them to either use a package without custom patches or compile Wine om their own instead? What are the advantages of this "support"? Do the unsuspecting users really deserve to get such a hidden problem with presumably "official" Wine package they have recieved? It's very doubtful in the first place that the term "official" should be used for such packages. Are you going to encourage packagers to include whatever patches they deem to be "an important feature" for the users, and still claim that provide an official Wine binary package?