Malware on Wine review

King InuYasha ngompa13 at
Wed Feb 25 19:26:10 CST 2009

On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 6:50 PM, Ben Klein <shacklein at> wrote:

> 2009/2/26 King InuYasha <ngompa13 at>:
> > Now that Nautilus has the desktop file requiring execute bit, I have a
> > question for all of you to consider. Do JAR files require the +x bit to
> load
> > them, or are they treated like associated files and run through the
> > interpreter? Really, Windows apps on Linux is basically the same
> situation
> > as Java applications run through the bytecode interpreter.
> You just answered your own question. Java is interpreted and has to be
> passed through a compatible byte-code interpreter. Wine does not
> interpret PE files in this fashion, and cannot because it is not and
> does not have a CPU emulator. So a JAR file should run if passed as an
> argument to the interpreter, just like what happens with the scripting
> languages that open the file for reading instead of trying to fork and
> execute.

But, doesn't Wine translate Win32 calls into its equivalent calls for Linux?
GDI to X11, D3D to OpenGL, etc.?
That sounds like an interpreter to me. It may not necessarily a bytecode
interpreter, but it still interprets the Win32 API and translates it to the
appropriate UNIX APIs. Isn't this what makes Wine not an emulator?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...

More information about the wine-devel mailing list