On 3/14/07, Dan Kegel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I haven't been villified yet, so let me try harder. Should winetricks
be committed to the winehq tree? It would be handy for people
triaging Wine bugs to see if e.g. native dcom, odbc, or corefonts
hide a bug.
I've uploaded a new version to
It looks a lot like a command-line version of what wine-doors aims to be,
right? Only the installing software aspect, and not the dynamic aspect of
repositories and such.
On 3/14/07, Stefan Dösinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Am Mittwoch 14 März 2007 20:01 schrieb Dan Kegel:
I haven't been
Hi,
On 14.03.2007 20:01, Dan Kegel wrote:
I haven't been villified yet, so let me try harder. Should winetricks
be committed to the winehq tree? It would be handy for people
triaging Wine bugs to see if e.g. native dcom, odbc, or corefonts
hide a bug.
Sorry if this has been answered
Carl-Daniel wrote:
Sorry if this has been answered before, but is winetricks a newer
version of winetools?
No. Winetricks (http://www.kegel.com/wine/winetricks ) is a single
11KB shell script. It's a tiny
command line tool that only knows how to install Microsoft
redistributable libraries
On 3/14/07, Dan Kegel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
And then there's Wine-Doors ( http://www.wine-doors.org ),
which is like Winetools with delusions of grandeur.
They seem to want to reinvent apt-get
for no particular reason, and as far as I can tell, they intend
to have a central server from which
