[Bug 8033] TOPO 4.2.7: Unhandled Page Fault Using

wine-bugs at winehq.org wine-bugs at winehq.org
Sat Oct 6 18:32:19 CDT 2007


http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8033





--- Comment #37 from James Hawkins <truiken at gmail.com>  2007-10-06 18:32:18 ---
(In reply to comment #36)
> (In reply to comment #35)
> > I don't think you understand how the development process works.
> 
> I'm a *user* of Wine (via Fedora 7), not one of its developers. Wine is
> included in many Linux distributions as RPM files, and these RPM files are
> occasionally updated. From the sound of it, someone needs to have a nice
> (polite) chat with the Fedora packagers (and probably the others too) because
> you seem to be saying that the RPM update process is likely to be slowly
> *trashing* everyone's Wine installations. Sweet.
> 

As a user, you are a part of the development process by submitting bug reports.
 Please read [1] to get a better understanding of what alpha software means.

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_release_life_cycle#Alpha

> > Wine is alpha and the developers make no guarantee of stability.
> 
> I'm not expecting stability. However, I do expect considerably more interest in
> bug reports. All of the reported crashes have happened with clean package
> installations and so qualify as bona-fide bugs.
> 

If we weren't interested in bug reports, no one would be responding to this bug
at all.

> Basically: Wine now has USERS - get used to it.
> 
> > All you have to do to get them back is
> > 
> > $ mv .wine-save .wine
> 
> Then what's the point of wineprefix? I need to be able to update my *existing*
> .wine installation, or the Wine developers must make it plain that anyone who
> wants to update his/her Wine packages is expected to uninstall all their
> Windows programs beforehand and then reinstall them afterwards. (And then see
> how many people are left using Wine...)
> 

You don't understand the idea of a wineprefix, and that's making this
conversation difficult.  You can have several wineprefixes along with several
different versions of Wine installed.  Honestly that's besides the point
though.  If you upgrade Wine and an app breaks, then that is a regression and
we would ask you to run a regression test to see which commit broke the app. 
Keeping a wineprefix between version is extremely common, but you miss the
point that it's not guaranteed to work.

> > To sum it up, if you can't reproduce this bug with a clean .wine, then this
> > bug will be closed as invalid.
> 
> That is a very sad attitude - the bug exists and I have posted the traces to
> prove it. This particular game doesn't even *start* with a "clean" .wine,
> presumably because important registry keys are missing, so there's a nice
> little "catch-22" for you! And if you're saying that Wine crashes simply
> because it can't find a registry key then that sounds like very sloppy coding
> to me.
> 

Attitude?  It's Wine policy.  It sounds like you're adding registry entries
from Windows to make the app work in the first place.  Is that the case?  If
so, this bug is definitely invalid.  To file a bug report, you have to be able
to provide step-by-step instructions to reproduce the bug.  That starts with a
clean wineprefix:

$ mv .wine .wine-save
$ wineprefixcreate
$ wine setup.exe
$ cd [dir containing exe]
$ wine app.exe
[crashes, bad behavior, etc]


-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.



More information about the wine-bugs mailing list