Including Mono within a Wine package - should Wine expect this?

[Scott Ritchie]

Dan Kegel wrote:
> A wine-gecko package would be very useful.
> 
> Wine-mono on the other hand is probably premature.
> How many apps are helped at the moment by
>   winetricks mono12
> ?  I don't think it's a large number.

Honestly I don't know.  Is this due to inadequacies in the current mono,
or inadequacies in Wine?

Either way, Mono 2.0 will finally come out around the same time as Wine
1.0 (quarter 2 of 2008), and I suspect the number of applications Mono
helps will greatly improve by then.

> 
> The wine-gecko package should just be a repackaging
> of the same blob that is normally downloaded,
> at least until we figure out how to do a proper cross-build.
> 
> 

Agreed.  The one tricky thing here is making a proper "source" package.
 There is some precedent for source packages that don't actually build
on the architecture they're for.  The ia32-libs package, for instance,
contains both binary and source versions of the 32 bit libraries since
it's solely for 64 bit arches, however to build those binaries requires
use of a 32 bit system.

Similarly, we can ship a wine-gecko "source" package which includes
binary and source, with the readme detailing how to actually build the
binary from the source (ie, use Windows).  Meanwhile the source package
"builds" by just copying the binary into the right place (much like how
ia32-libs builds).

Thanks,
Scott Ritchie