Robert Shearman wrote:
Rick Romero wrote:
12. wine ie6setup.exe
13. Error. "The download location information is damaged" WTF?
This error message happens on Windows 98 too. I suggest that you
complain to Microsoft.
That is not true here. I have Windows 98 SE 4.10. A here with
Rick Romero wrote:
12. wine ie6setup.exe
13. Error. "The download location information is damaged" WTF?
This error message happens on Windows 98 too. I suggest that you
complain to Microsoft.
--
Rob Shearman
t; > I updated it with current
> > informations. I don't have time to test the runtime settings so I'd be
> > glad if you could fill the missing part and send me the details so I'll
> > update the entry http://appdb.winehq.org/appview.php?versionId=469
>
> Thanks for t
On Mon, 2006-03-27 at 21:32 -0500, Segin wrote:
> There is one reason, inarguable (if you reply to this you have a IQ
> of
> 0) as to why WineTools is useless: Most of the WineTools 'magic' is
> in
> it's ~/.wine/config file, which Wine no longer uses/acknoleg
ething good. I got people to addresses
the Winetools problem a bit early. Sure, it would have gotten adressed
anyways, but only after enough complains come rolling in, months or
years from now. When I sent the flame, i had a purpose, a plan, and a
hoped outcome. The end result was nothing but good,
On 3/29/06, Chris Morgan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
How do you propose we prevent people from emailing people that post towine-devel? How do we choose who gets to email people directly andwho doesn't? How do we filter the contents of their email?Segin doesn't speak for the entire community and he
exactly what I am referring to; so, there is
no discrepancy. ;) I had in mind Segin's initial email (which was sent to the
entire list):
--- Segin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> There is one reason, inarguable (if you reply to
> this you have a IQ of
> 0) as to why WineTools
On Wednesday 29 March 2006 7:31 pm, Hiji wrote:
> > How do you propose we prevent people from emailing people that post to
> > wine-devel? How do we choose who gets to email people directly and
> > who doesn't? How do we filter the contents of their email?
>
> I want to chime in and say that I'm
Saulius Krasuckas wrote:
* On Tue, 28 Mar 2006, Karl Lattimer wrote:
And also, accusing people of having an IQ of 0 for replying to a flame
isn't in the slightest constructive,
Hardly. I have actually done something good. I got people to addresses
the Winetools prob
le on this list.
It's more about not feeding the trolls that agreeing with him.
In my mind, Jon is a much more respectable member of the Wine community
than "segin". It would be disappointing to see a real contributor
scared off by a troll.
Personally, I think Winetools has it
> How do you propose we prevent people from emailing people that post to
> wine-devel? How do we choose who gets to email people directly and
> who doesn't? How do we filter the contents of their email?
I want to chime in and say that I'm with Tom and the ole Doc here. I don't
think there's an
> > I'm pretty sure people are capable of filtering their own email.
> > Afaict the offending emails were between two individuals. You may not
> > like them but that has no bearing on whether they should be allowed to
> > post to the mailing list given that those emails to the mailing list
> > are
ired of users complaining about something not working and it turning out to be because of winetools, we wouldnt be having this convo.
With all of that being said and trying to get back on topic, sure winetools breaks a lot of things, but from what I can see, it also gets a lot of things working.
I'm pretty sure people are capable of filtering their own email.
Afaict the offending emails were between two individuals. You may not
like them but that has no bearing on whether they should be allowed to
post to the mailing list given that those emails to the mailing list
are appropriate.
Chri
Totally agreed. Segin needs to be not just kick/banned from the list, he needs to be K-Lined, if not G-Lined from all things wine! With respect to his comments though, on behalf of everyone involved with the project, and with the community as a whole, I sincerely apologize.
TomOn 3/29/06, Jason G
On 3/29/06, Dr J A Gow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I was interested to read several comments on this list in respect of such
> comments as 'IQ of zero'. Such comments were the final straw in leading me to
> take this action.
Thank you. It sometimes takes a thick skin to ignore the petty and
chil
EMAIL PROTECTED]>
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.7 (X11/20051202)
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Dr J A Gow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Winetools -> wine doors
References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
In-Rep
Typos, typos everywhere :)
> I've resisted switching from Pascal to C/C++ my whole high school, as I
> considered C too have too convoluted a syntax. My opinion hasn't changed,
> it's just that for a long time gcc was a tool of choice for a while and
> learning C was a necessity, pure and simple.
Am Di, Mär 28, 2006 at 03:21:01 -0500 schrieb Segin:
> How? The biggest thing that makes WineTools work is it's ability to set
> DLLOverrides via a config file that Wine no longer acknoleges, therfore
As this myth is floating around on this list since a long time I have
to repeat:
W
e
was rather addressing a possible reply denying the (read: /his/) fact, that thisone reason (why it is useless) is inargueable, than a certain person (sarcasm,anyone?).So, Inargueable, eh?Well. Depends.
I use both Sidenet and Winetools, they both provide an easy way to have a quickand simple (more
ing the (read: /his/) fact, that this
one reason (why it is useless) is inargueable, than a certain person (sarcasm,
anyone?).
So, Inargueable, eh?
Well. Depends.
I use both Sidenet and Winetools, they both provide an easy way to have a quick
and simple (more or less basic) setup for wine es
On Tuesday 28 March 2006 23:30, Joseph Garvin wrote:
> On Tue, 2006-03-28 at 17:22 -0500, Kuba Ober wrote:
> > I was pretty serious when I said about Lisp. Once you get to know it,
> > it's an extremely agile and productive programming language that has way
> > more power than Python does.
>
> Even
On Wed, 2006-03-29 at 12:27 +0300, Saulius Krasuckas wrote:
> * On Tue, 28 Mar 2006, Karl Lattimer wrote:
> > And also, accusing people of having an IQ of 0 for replying to a flame
> > isn't in the slightest constructive,
>
> Yes, he didn't write any single patch yet that was accepted, still he
* On Tue, 28 Mar 2006, Karl Lattimer wrote:
> And also, accusing people of having an IQ of 0 for replying to a flame
> isn't in the slightest constructive,
Yes, he didn't write any single patch yet that was accepted, still he
manages to joke calling one of the developers being a monkey. (Given t
Tom Williams wrote:
Tom Spear wrote:
Java, anyone? lol oh wait wait I got one better.. Fortran... or no,
how about... COBOL!! LMFAO gimme a break..
Seriously though, why not break winedoors up into different
components, and then have different submaintainers, and
On Tue, 2006-03-28 at 17:22 -0500, Kuba Ober wrote:
> I was pretty serious when I said about Lisp. Once you get to know it, it's an
> extremely agile and productive programming language that has way more power
> than Python does.
Even if that statement were true (I seriously doubt you can qualif
Tom Spear wrote:
> Java, anyone? lol oh wait wait I got one better.. Fortran... or no,
> how about... COBOL!! LMFAO gimme a break..
>
> Seriously though, why not break winedoors up into different
> components, and then have different submaintainers, and each component
> can be wri
> > > Can't we do this in C?
> >
> > I hope you meant C++, unless you think it's productive to do a poorly
> > documented and bug-ridden reimplementation of half of C++ standard
> > library*
> > everytime you want to do something other than a hello world application.
> >
> > Actually, for tools lik
Am Mo, Mär 27, 2006 at 09:32:29 -0500 schrieb Segin:
There is one reason, inarguable (if you reply to this you have a
IQ of
0) as to why WineTools is useless: Most of the WineTools 'magic'
is in
it's ~/.wine/config file, which Wine no longer uses/acknoleges,
thefore,
WineT
On 3/28/06, Kuba Ober <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Python!!?! i almost did a C | N > K (that would be cola, pepsi rather,> through nose to keyboard)>> ok ok ok ok although i almos-t ruined a perfectly free and good> keyboard, i don't like python cause i don't know it, and the learning
> curve has b
> Python!!?! i almost did a C | N > K (that would be cola, pepsi rather,
> through nose to keyboard)
>
> ok ok ok ok although i almos-t ruined a perfectly free and good
> keyboard, i don't like python cause i don't know it, and the learning
> curve has been... dreadful.
>
> Can't we do this in C?
Karl Lattimer wrote:
Am Mo, M�r 27, 2006 at 09:32:29 -0500 schrieb Segin:
There is one reason, inarguable (if you reply to this you have a IQ of
0) as to why WineTools is useless: Most of the WineTools 'magic' is in
it's ~/.wine/config file, which Wine no longer uses/ackno
Kai Blin wrote:
* Segin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [27/03/06, 21:32:29]:
There is one reason, inarguable (if you reply to this you have a IQ of
0) as to why WineTools is useless: Most of the WineTools 'magic' is in
it's ~/.wine/config file, which Wine no longer use
Marcus Meissner wrote:
On Tue, Mar 28, 2006 at 11:50:17AM +0200, Joris Huizer wrote:
Segin wrote:
There is one reason, inarguable (if you reply to this you have a IQ of
0) as to why WineTools is useless: Most of the WineTools 'magic' is in
it's
Am Mo, Mär 27, 2006 at 09:32:29 -0500 schrieb Segin:
> There is one reason, inarguable (if you reply to this you have a IQ of
> 0) as to why WineTools is useless: Most of the WineTools 'magic' is in
> it's ~/.wine/config file, which Wine no longer uses/acknoleges,
* Segin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [27/03/06, 21:32:29]:
> There is one reason, inarguable (if you reply to this you have a IQ of
> 0) as to why WineTools is useless: Most of the WineTools 'magic' is in
> it's ~/.wine/config file, which Wine no longer uses/acknoleges, th
On Tue, Mar 28, 2006 at 11:50:17AM +0200, Joris Huizer wrote:
> Segin wrote:
> >There is one reason, inarguable (if you reply to this you have a IQ of
> >0) as to why WineTools is useless: Most of the WineTools 'magic' is in
> >it's ~/.wine/config file,
Segin wrote:
There is one reason, inarguable (if you reply to this you have a IQ of
0) as to why WineTools is useless: Most of the WineTools 'magic' is in
it's ~/.wine/config file, which Wine no longer uses/acknoleges, thefore,
WineTools is utterly useless and has no point in
--- Segin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> There is one reason, inarguable (if you reply to
> this you have a IQ of
> 0) as to why WineTools is useless: Most of the
> WineTools 'magic' is in
> it's ~/.wine/config file, which Wine no longer
> uses/acknoleges, t
There is one reason, inarguable (if you reply to this you have a IQ of
0) as to why WineTools is useless: Most of the WineTools 'magic' is in
it's ~/.wine/config file, which Wine no longer uses/acknoleges, thefore,
WineTools is utterly useless and has no point in existing AT ALL, PERIOD.
ation to the AppDB in order to
keep that information for the wine devel folks get some feedback what is
going on with, for example, DLL overrides. For example, if the AppDB keeps
track of the most overriden DLLs (information "feeded" by winedoors - or
winetools 8)) I think wine develop
ors should return some information to the AppDB in order to
keep that information for the wine devel folks get some feedback what is
going on with, for example, DLL overrides. For example, if the AppDB keeps
track of the most overriden DLLs (information "feeded" by winedoors - or
On Sat, 2006-03-25 at 14:02 -0500, Segin wrote:
> Also note that most of Winetools prior usefullness was killed when we
> killed ~/.wine/config
Now we rely on winereg? is that correct (I should know this ;)
I've been making some steady progress today, managed to get CD auto
detect
Also note that most of Winetools prior usefullness was killed when we
killed ~/.wine/config
Dr J A Gow wrote:
Karl Lattimer wrote:
Fair point that it has been useful to you, it has been useful to me
also. Here's what I see.
* An over complicated bash script, with way too many difficu
Guys, WineTools clearly works for some people, there's no need to lay into
it. After all, Wine itself has some slightly ugly areas of code still :)
On Fri, 2006-03-24 at 19:00 +, Dr J A Gow wrote:
> > I've looked through the winetools code and it is a clusterf*ck of
> > nonsense. It appears to be in the final stages of code rot, however
>
> This "clusterf*ck of nonsense" helped me to get a microcontr
ss' of Wine
when it comes to a necessary rush-job.
I should add I don't use Winetools as a matter of course - I used it once
to get me out of a hole, and it did!
What I am proposing and indeed working on is;
* An appdb integrated application manager
* A clean UI which fits with gnome HIG
*
I've looked through the winetools code and it is a clusterf*ck of
nonsense. It appears to be in the final stages of code rot, however
This "clusterf*ck of nonsense" helped me to get a microcontroller
development suite running under Wine, which otherwise would not install
nativ
Karl Lattimer wrote:
[...]
I've looked through the winetools code and it is a clusterf*ck of
nonsense. It appears to be in the final stages of code rot [...]
Is THIS enough to get rid of Winetools?
I read your story about winetools a couple weeks ago around the same
time that I tried using winetools on FC5 test 3, it didn't go well with
winetools and I was looking for another solution and couldn't find one
that fitted well with my criteria.
I started thinking of packages lik
On 3/17/06, Joachim von Thadden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Am Do, Mär 16, 2006 at 11:41:53 -0800 schrieb Dan Kegel:
> > Instead, it should just be a couple of checkboxes for
> > optional things like dcom98 and IE6, shouldn't it?
>
> I think this is not enough. After you installed IE6 how do you w
Am Do, Mär 16, 2006 at 11:41:53 -0800 schrieb Dan Kegel:
> Instead, it should just be a couple of checkboxes for
> optional things like dcom98 and IE6, shouldn't it?
I think this is not enough. After you installed IE6 how do you want to
disable it? Many apps are looking directly for it. They will
On 3/16/06, Joachim von Thadden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >This is exactly what we try to have with the next version of WineTools.
> >
> > Right, but Mike meant "without installing any Microsoft libraries".
>
> Sure, that's why we integrate a &
ion changes.
> >>
> >> Click -> Download application -> Install -> Run
> >
> >This is exactly what we try to have with the next version of WineTools.
>
> Right, but Mike meant "without installing any Microsoft libraries".
Sure, that's why we integra
n
>
>This is exactly what we try to have with the next version of WineTools.
Right, but Mike meant "without installing any Microsoft libraries".
- Dan
--
Wine for Windows ISVs: http://kegel.com/wine/isv
Philip V. Neves wrote:
What I'm seeing here with the whole debate with wine and winetools is
that its a configuration management issue. The project is getting into
the stage where testing needs to be accomodated and so does getting
things working. I think whats currently availabl
Am Fri, Mar 10, 2006 at 12:55:20AM +0100 schrieb Sven Paschukat:
> Marcus Meissner schrieb:
> >Hmm, I have some kind of recommendation here.
> >
> >What about winetools using ".winetools" as WINEPREFIX setting?
> >
> >This would make it poss
h a
> list of freely downloadable applications that work "out of the box" with
> no configuration changes.
>
> Click -> Download application -> Install -> Run
This is exactly what we try to have with the next version of WineTools.
Regards
Joachim von Thadden
--
"Never touch a running system! Never run a touching system?
Never run a touchy system!!!"
Philip V. Neves wrote:
Something that interfaces with the AppDB would be good. It would make
things easier. I think, given the complaints given by the developers are
also valid but so are the complaints made by the people trying to use
the program and even the testers. Most other projects do
What I'm seeing here with the whole debate with wine and winetools is
that its a configuration management issue. The project is getting into
the stage where testing needs to be accomodated and so does getting
things working. I think whats currently available for managing
configuratio
Thank you, Andreas Jaeger for the clarification regarding the
inclusion of Winetools in SUSE.
On Thu, Mar 09, 2006 at 02:27:23PM +0100, Joachim von Thadden wrote:
> Am Thu, Mar 09, 2006 at 01:41:06PM +0100 schrieb Jan Zerebecki:
> > Winetools is only sporadically updated for new ve
Jason Green wrote:
On 3/11/06, Tony Lambregts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
In simple terms we get WineTools to query the AppDB with an application name (ie
somename.exe) and we return a list of applications for the user to choose from
and the after the user selects the program WineTools ge
On 3/11/06, Tony Lambregts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In simple terms we get WineTools to query the AppDB with an application name
> (ie
> somename.exe) and we return a list of applications for the user to choose from
> and the after the user selects the program WineTools ge
the Wine developers have accomplished so far; however, I feel that those that
have put the effort into Winetools have done so because they saw a need and
filled it. In the realm of ease of use and user-friendliness, Wine is
horribly lacking. Yes, it is getting better, but I think that Winetoo
On 3/9/06, Joachim von Thadden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > This leads to many users asking for help in #winehq on freenode.
> > But nobody there wants to support winetools and thus can only
> > suggest them to remove their .wine and redo it without winetools
>
As it stands, WineTools somewhat impedes testing and
bug reporting of Wine versions of dlls (eg. ole32, oleaut32, rpcrt4)
since you encourage your users to use Windows versions of those dlls,
even though the Wine ones work for many applications.
IMHO, the Wine developers should spend less time b*t
On Thursday 09 March 2006 08:27, Joachim von Thadden wrote:
> Am Thu, Mar 09, 2006 at 01:41:06PM +0100 schrieb Jan Zerebecki:
> > I think a quote from http://www.winehq.org/site/download somewhat
> > sums up the cencus on this list regarding Winetools: "WineTools
> >
Marcus Meissner schrieb:
Hmm, I have some kind of recommendation here.
What about winetools using ".winetools" as WINEPREFIX setting?
This would make it possible to keep a ".wine" for the purists, and
".winetools" for the "just get things done" peopl
> Hmm, I have some kind of recommendation here.
>
> What about winetools using ".winetools" as
> WINEPREFIX setting?
>
> This would make it possible to keep a ".wine" for
> the purists, and
> ".winetools" for the "just get things done
> > Currently no Winetools developer works closely with the Wine
> > developers to correct problems of interaction between Winetools
> > and Wine.
>
> What does that mean? We are making a tool to make Windows programs run
> with Wine. We do not develop Wine and our mai
Jan Zerebecki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hi.
>
> For Andreas Jaeger: I CCed you, because you said on
> http://en.opensuse.org/Wishlist_Packages_that_are_already_there
> that Winetools got included for the next SUSE release. I hope you
> are the correct person to talk to
Am Thu, Mar 09, 2006 at 01:41:06PM +0100 schrieb Jan Zerebecki:
> I think a quote from http://www.winehq.org/site/download somewhat
> sums up the cencus on this list regarding Winetools: "WineTools
> [is] only recommended if installation or operability of Windows
> software fa
Hi.
For Andreas Jaeger: I CCed you, because you said on
http://en.opensuse.org/Wishlist_Packages_that_are_already_there
that Winetools got included for the next SUSE release. I hope you
are the correct person to talk to or at least can forward this to
someone who is. The following might be
Joachim von Thadden wrote:
I understand the goal of WineTools and I can see both sides of this issue but
for for some of us it really is frustrating because it makes our jobs harder.
The purpose of WineTools is not to "undermine" and also it is, was and
will never meant to
Am Tue, Jan 24, 2006 at 09:16:21AM -0800 schrieb Juan Lang:
> I support winetools, though I don't use it myself. Not only as a matter
> of principle (this is open source we're talking about, and one of the
> beauties is we don't get to constrain how it's used.) Als
they are clicking on, or not
> be presented with the bad choices. With the way it is _ALL_ new times
> visiting http://www.winehq.org/site/download have an impressions that
> winetools are the absolute requirement and download and install them.
I do not know whether this is true. Me myself
On Tue, 2006-01-24 at 21:01 +0100, Sven Paschukat wrote:
> as Vitaly noted it is not always clear that WineTools is not a
> requirement for using Wine, so let the users decide if they want to test
> or just want to use Wine.
> "... or if you want to get best chances of
I'm not sure we need a counterpoint to Vitaliy. The fact that it took
over a month to hear back from the winetools guys seems like reason
enough to pull it from the downloads page. Winetools might be a
useful tool but we can't have wine's users depending on them if we
developers
Hm. Felt I needed to offer a counterpoint to Vitaliy's rather
enthusiastic response.
I support winetools, though I don't use it myself. Not only as a matter
of principle (this is open source we're talking about, and one of the
beauties is we don't get to constrain how it&#x
M and/or many of the
> builtin DLLs that come with the IE6. To find a configuration for as many
> apps as possible was one of the goals. Not to force users (with very low
> skills) to have many different wine installations *and* many wine user
> directories was a second goal. So this is
Dear developers and all others reading this list,
from Sven Paschukat I was informed about the discussion of removing the
WineTools link from the winehq website. I read all remarks made to that
hotly discussed topic and I am willing to tell you all a bit about the
purpose and history of WineTools
I'll contact Joachim to get a statement. But plz give us some days...
Sven
Marcus Meissner schrieb:
Could some one from the WineTools project give us a update on our concerns here?
I am not even sure Joachim von Thadden is subscribed here.
Ciao, Marcus
> Could some one from the WineTools project give us a update on our concerns
> here?
I am not even sure Joachim von Thadden is subscribed here.
Ciao, Marcus
Hello Everyone,
Anyone who reads the posting on this list already knows that I stood up for
the wineTools project and almost made a couple enemies... But me and Vitaliy
came to a half way agreement on whether or not we should keep the link
on our downloads page to WineTools
I feel I need to
On 12/24/05, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sat, 24 Dec 2005 04:22:19 +0100, Vitaliy Margolen
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > As such, you are just _a_ user of Wine that fails to listen. And there is
> no point to speak with you about something that you are not even a part of.
On Sat, 24 Dec 2005 04:22:19 +0100, Vitaliy Margolen
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
As such, you are just _a_ user of Wine that fails to listen. And there is
no point to speak with you about something that you are not even a part of.
well since once again you prefer to ignore or not even read mo
Friday, December 23, 2005, 6:16:17 PM, Tom Wickline wrote:
> On 12/23/05, Vitaliy Margolen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Friday, December 23, 2005, 11:36:16 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> > I suppose everyone needs to feel important somewhere - some more than
>> > others.
>>
>> Before we get perso
On 12/23/05, Vitaliy Margolen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Friday, December 23, 2005, 11:36:16 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > I suppose everyone needs to feel important somewhere - some more than
> > others.
>
> Before we get personal, and start discussing who did what, please stop by
> on #wineh
#x27;t get those types of reports as often
as we should. One reason why we don't get these reports is because
users have winetools to make wine easier. They don't run wine
directly, configure wine with winecfg, and stumble over any usability
issues. That is why this issue began in the
On 12/23/05, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, 23 Dec 2005 17:42:14 +0100, Chris Morgan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
> > I'm going to have to side with Vitaliy on this one. I've helped
> > dozens of users in #winehq that have
Friday, December 23, 2005, 11:36:16 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I suppose everyone needs to feel important somewhere - some more than
> others.
Before we get personal, and start discussing who did what, please stop by
on #winehq.
Then well'll talk.
ly and you daren't step out of bed.
So pls don't start this BS about winetools are good, they
help users but use them on your own risk agreeing that you comply with
all licenses.
I dont ever recall saying winetools was good, but I think choice is.
Authors of winetools know we
s a whole.
That's why we have to be _really careful_ what we "officially" recommend
to users. Look at what happened to original Napster. Judge didn't care
what their intentions were. But he did looked at what it was _meant_ to
be used for. So pls don't start this BS about winet
On Fri, 23 Dec 2005 17:33:05 +0100, Vitaliy Margolen
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I'm still insisting...and in most cases against the law.
Everyone is responsible for thier own actions. Someone who makes a hammer
is not responsible for a murder comitted with it.
How does wine ensur
I'm going to have to side with Vitaliy on this one. I've helped
dozens of users in #winehq that have had problems with wine due to
winetools since we made the changes to remove the .config file.
Apparently winetools has been upgraded to work with 0.9x versions of
wine, this is
Friday, December 23, 2005, 6:13:30 AM, Tom Wickline wrote:
> The Wine Tools maintainers have agreed to look into the problems that
> you have brought to the surface, can we please drop this subject?
No. I'm still insisting on removing winetools from the download page.
They are again
On 12/23/05, Vitaliy Margolen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On a slightly related note, in CrossOver we force a whole bunch of DLLs
> > to be builtin, like ole32, oleaut32, rpcrt4 and msi. Maybe we should do
> > the same for Wine?
> Well we could add them to the override list I guess. But I think
On Fri, 23 Dec 2005 06:58:03 +0100, Vitaliy Margolen
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
6. "Version"="win98" - that is wrong. Wine's default _is_ win2k.
It is right for the goal of the winetools. Again, this is why it's
titled "3rd Party Tools".
No,
Vitaliy Margolen schrieb:
I do not have Wine installed. All I have is wine symlink in my ~/bin dir.
And winetools could not find wine nor winecfg. So when I ran wt it
complained about that.
That's a situation we don't have expected. I will try to make a fix.
Mm looking at thos
don't get those types of reports as often
as we should. One reason why we don't get these reports is because
users have winetools to make wine easier. They don't run wine
directly, configure wine with winecfg, and stumble over any usability
issues. That is why this issue began in
1 - 100 of 135 matches
Mail list logo
