On 12.02.23 10:53, Junichi Uekawa wrote:
The -stable suffix was added for the Debian alternatives system. While
I don't expect an issue with adding an /usr/lib/wine/wine64-stable
link, I wonder if the whole issue is really a bug (still probably a
regression, which I can't comment on since I'm not involved in current
packaging) or wrong usage.
Somehow /usr/bin/wine-stable has correct files in the right place, so
/usr/bin/wine-stable works
Yes, as soon as "wine" is installed it sets up the Debian alternatives
system. (Which is used so both the stable and the development Wine
packages may use /usr/bin/wine and may even be coinstalled.) I'm glad
to see that this part works as intended.
/usr/bin/wine64-stable fails because of missing files.
Should /usr/bin/wine64-stable be there at all?
I don't know if we really need /usr/bin/wine64, or could just go with
/usr/bin/wine and the rest in /usr/lib/wine. But if we want
/usr/bin/wine64 then we also need /usr/bin/wine64-stable (for the
alternatives system).
Currently this is a link to /usr/lib/wine/wine64. Current maintainers
may replace it with a wrapper script or provide the link suggested
previously. (Or figure out why the -stable suffix in the link is now
expected by the binary, while it wasn't in the past.)
For now, I don't think I can help further, back to retirement
GReets
jre
