Re: Bullseye plans for wine
I would recommend that you make strides towards backporting vkd3d-1.2 aswell, since wine-6.0 would require this to build with d3d12 support. Currently this is only available in debian experimental, and is currently (imo) not being built correctly as libvkd3d-dev is not multilib installable due to vkd3d-compiler binary being 32-bit/64-bit depending on arch. This is posted in a own thread here on this mailinglist, so hopefully someone is looking into that aswell. Sveinar Søpler - On Mar 8, 2021, at 10:01 PM, Phil Morrell deb...@emorrp1.name wrote: > On Sun, Mar 07, 2021 at 09:32:32PM -0500, Michael Gilbert wrote: >> On Thu, Feb 25, 2021 at 8:22 AM Sean Ho wrote: >> > it would be nice if maintainers make efforts to let wine-5.0 to >> > buster-backports >> > first. >> >> Jens Reyer was solely responsible for wine's backports for a very long >> time. Since he has stepped back, there is no one currently pursuing >> this. >> >> A bug report is not very useful. Someone interested in producing >> backport packages is what is needed. > > Thank you for confirming your intentions. I'm happy to extend my > backporting of faudio to include wine (stable only) as I much prefer > using the debian packages to prefix managers like lutris. I'm sure some > of the games I play would benefit from the latest fixes and by the > sounds of it there is demand enough for a backport. > > I seem to remember there was another new dependency for v5 that'll need > doing first, but I'll be in touch when I've confirmed the scope of work.
Re: Bullseye plans for wine
On Sun, Mar 07, 2021 at 09:32:32PM -0500, Michael Gilbert wrote: > On Thu, Feb 25, 2021 at 8:22 AM Sean Ho wrote: > > it would be nice if maintainers make efforts to let wine-5.0 to > > buster-backports first. > > Jens Reyer was solely responsible for wine's backports for a very long > time. Since he has stepped back, there is no one currently pursuing > this. > > A bug report is not very useful. Someone interested in producing > backport packages is what is needed. Thank you for confirming your intentions. I'm happy to extend my backporting of faudio to include wine (stable only) as I much prefer using the debian packages to prefix managers like lutris. I'm sure some of the games I play would benefit from the latest fixes and by the sounds of it there is demand enough for a backport. I seem to remember there was another new dependency for v5 that'll need doing first, but I'll be in touch when I've confirmed the scope of work. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Re: Bullseye plans for wine
Michael, I'm interested to maintain the backport version of wine for Bullseye. I no need to have the latest version of Wine for my game so my laptop will be on Debian Stable after freeze. My sources.list is already configured to use "bullseye" instead of "testing". Maxime
Re: Bullseye plans for wine
On Thu, Feb 25, 2021 at 8:22 AM Sean Ho wrote: > it would be nice if maintainers make efforts to let wine-5.0 to > buster-backports first. Jens Reyer was solely responsible for wine's backports for a very long time. Since he has stepped back, there is no one currently pursuing this. > If making related new bug report are required, please let me know, thx. A bug report is not very useful. Someone interested in producing backport packages is what is needed. Best wishes, Mike
Re: Bullseye plans for wine
On Mon, Feb 22, 2021 at 7:34 AM Maxime Lombard wrote: > Do you think, after the freeze, to work on Wine-Staging at same time > than Wine-development ? I am willing to potentially sponsor someone else working on such a thing but can't commit to maintaining it myself. > I already try with wine-development-5.6 and i did some changes. > > This idea is to use wine-development as base, applied all Staging > patchset and finally refresh debian/* > > Wine-Staging on salsa gitlab : https://salsa.debian.org/Odelpasso/wine-staging Interesting, however a debian centric approach whould use multiple upstream source tarballs [0]. Best wishes, Mike [0]https://raphaelhertzog.com/2010/09/07/how-to-use-multiple-upstream-tarballs-in-debian-source-packages/
Re: Bullseye plans for wine
> Well, it would be nice if it were that simple ;) > But to be able to ship WINE 6.0 with Debian Bullseye, it would have needed to be included in Sid some time ago already. There simply is not enough time to include WINE 6.0 and check it integrates well with Buster with no side-effect, and still have it ready for release time. > But I’m quite sure there will be backports for Bullseye once WINE 6.0 reaches Bookworm. > I’m no Debian dev, feel free to point out any mistake in what I write. libfaudio has backported to buster-backports, and I also manually `sbuild` wine-5.0 to buster with little backports package dependencies, it would be nice if maintainers make efforts to let wine-5.0 to buster-backports first. Just a suggestion, and still thanks for packaging :) If making related new bug report are required, please let me know, thx. Regards, Sean.
Re: Bullseye plans for wine
Hi Michael, Do you think, after the freeze, to work on Wine-Staging at same time than Wine-development ? I already try with wine-development-5.6 and i did some changes. This idea is to use wine-development as base, applied all Staging patchset and finally refresh debian/* Wine-Staging on salsa gitlab : https://salsa.debian.org/Odelpasso/wine-staging Maxime
Re: Bullseye plans for wine
On Sun, Feb 7, 2021 at 4:34 PM Maxime Lombard wrote: > No objection but why do not ship Wine-6.0 as stable version for > Bullseye instead of 5.0 ? Because milestone 1 in the freeze policy [0] requires no large/disruptive changes. Best wishes, Mike [0] https://release.debian.org/bullseye/freeze_policy.html
Re: Bullseye plans for wine
Le 09/02/2021 à 21:58, Sveinar Søpler a écrit : I would say i agree with the plans of not focusing on wine-devel. I think it would be a shame not to ship wine-6.0 as the stable version tho. Well, it would be nice if it were that simple ;) But to be able to ship WINE 6.0 with Debian Bullseye, it would have needed to be included in Sid some time ago already. There simply is not enough time to include WINE 6.0 and check it integrates well with Buster with no side-effect, and still have it ready for release time. But I’m quite sure there will be backports for Bullseye once WINE 6.0 reaches Bookworm. --- I’m no Debian dev, feel free to point out any mistake in what I write. OpenPGP_signature Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Bullseye plans for wine
I would say i agree with the plans of not focusing on wine-devel. I think it would be a shame not to ship wine-6.0 as the stable version tho. Sveinar Søpler - On Feb 7, 2021, at 10:34 PM, Berillions berilli...@gmail.com wrote: > Hi, > > No objection but why do not ship Wine-6.0 as stable version for > Bullseye instead of 5.0 ? > Because as Phil explained in another mail, wine-6.0 release date is > after the 1st freeze date ? > > Sorry for these questions, it's new for me. > But it would be a shame to have an old stable version in Bullseye. > > If there are no inconveniences to push wine-6.0 into > bullseye-backports when available. > > Cordially, > Max > > > Le dim. 7 févr. 2021 à 21:48, Michael Gilbert a écrit : >> >> Given some of the discussion on this list recently, it seems there is >> a need for plans to be clarified. >> >> My intent is for wine-development to no longer ship in stable >> releases. I don't see the value of a mid-cycle version of wine to be >> in debian stable any more. It made sense when the time between wine >> stable releases was very long, but that is no more. In conclusion, >> there is no objective to get wine-development ready in time for the >> freeze. >> >> Also, the plan is to ship wine 5 as the stable version of wine for >> bullseye. Work on wine 6 will pick up after the freeze. >> >> Best wishes, >> Mike
Re: Bullseye plans for wine
Hi, No objection but why do not ship Wine-6.0 as stable version for Bullseye instead of 5.0 ? Because as Phil explained in another mail, wine-6.0 release date is after the 1st freeze date ? Sorry for these questions, it's new for me. But it would be a shame to have an old stable version in Bullseye. If there are no inconveniences to push wine-6.0 into bullseye-backports when available. Cordially, Max Le dim. 7 févr. 2021 à 21:48, Michael Gilbert a écrit : > > Given some of the discussion on this list recently, it seems there is > a need for plans to be clarified. > > My intent is for wine-development to no longer ship in stable > releases. I don't see the value of a mid-cycle version of wine to be > in debian stable any more. It made sense when the time between wine > stable releases was very long, but that is no more. In conclusion, > there is no objective to get wine-development ready in time for the > freeze. > > Also, the plan is to ship wine 5 as the stable version of wine for > bullseye. Work on wine 6 will pick up after the freeze. > > Best wishes, > Mike >
Bullseye plans for wine
Given some of the discussion on this list recently, it seems there is a need for plans to be clarified. My intent is for wine-development to no longer ship in stable releases. I don't see the value of a mid-cycle version of wine to be in debian stable any more. It made sense when the time between wine stable releases was very long, but that is no more. In conclusion, there is no objective to get wine-development ready in time for the freeze. Also, the plan is to ship wine 5 as the stable version of wine for bullseye. Work on wine 6 will pick up after the freeze. Best wishes, Mike
