Hello Dmitry,
Dmitry Timoshkov wrote:
Andreas Bierfert andreas.bierfert@lowlatency.de wrote:
could you please stop arguing about the validity of the bug. What you are stating in comment 6 is really not exclusive. The Fedora wine packages are in fact 'prepackaged binary'.
Using the term 'prepackaged binary' doesn't make the package suddenly valid for WineHQ bugzilla, since it clearly contains not supported patches. Same applies for instance to crossover, ies4linux, wineskin or any other.
For the Fedora users pulse support in wine is an important feature. This is why the patches are in the Fedora build in the first place. I'd much rather have them included with upstream... Maybe sometime wine will gain openal support for audio input/output and this issue will go away.
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. 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.
including such patches - he/she should take the full resposibility for that, including accepting bug reports for his package. If he/she doesn't want to carry the support burden then using Wine source without any custom patches is the way to go.
bye michael