Malware on Wine review
ngompa13 at gmail.com
Wed Feb 25 19:26:10 CST 2009
On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 6:50 PM, Ben Klein <shacklein at gmail.com> wrote:
> 2009/2/26 King InuYasha <ngompa13 at gmail.com>:
> > 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
> > them, or are they treated like associated files and run through the
> > interpreter? Really, Windows apps on Linux is basically the same
> > 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
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