Difference between revisions of "Talk:Wine"

From ArchWiki
Jump to: navigation, search
(Clarification: closed)
Line 1: Line 1:
 +
== Poor writing ==
 +
Throughout the article, I see: a lack of grammar, repetitive or overly verbose statements, and overuse of the [note] tag.  Anyone else want to correct this? [[User:T1nk3r3r|T1nk3r3r]] ([[User talk:T1nk3r3r|talk]]) 22:23, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
 +
 
== WINEARCH=win32 ==
 
== WINEARCH=win32 ==
  

Revision as of 22:23, 17 July 2012

Poor writing

Throughout the article, I see: a lack of grammar, repetitive or overly verbose statements, and overuse of the [note] tag. Anyone else want to correct this? T1nk3r3r (talk) 22:23, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

WINEARCH=win32

Wine seems to treat empty folders as win64 prefix folders, making it confusing to create win32 prefixes in empty folders. It gives the error [wine: WINEARCH set to win32 but '/home/wine/photoshop' is a 64-bit installation]. Perhaps we should add a note about this? See this bugreport http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=29661 -- JKAbrams 14:35, 20 Jan 2012 (EDT)

Yup, feel free to add that note. --Svenstaro 12:24, 20 January 2012 (EST)

Clarification

"To clarify the above, the i686 package Wine will work exactly like a x86_64 package Wine with a win32 WINEPREFIX with no ill effects."

This confused me omre than clarified anything. My suspicion - if i had any - would be that 64 bit system posing as a 32 bit system might be problematic. But this sentence seems to 'reassure' readers that things will work -- even if you're not using the elaborate method mentioned above. Huh? Clarification, please... --Madchine 20:42, 2 March 2012 (EST)

What is there to clarify? It looks like you understood things right. People on i686 who just type "wine program-name" will get the same behavior as people on x86_64 that use WINEARCH=win32 "wine program-name". --Svenstaro 23:47, 2 March 2012 (EST)
Reworded, I hope it's clearer now. -- Kynikos 08:12, 4 March 2012 (EST)