Two enhancement requests for winetricks

[Dan Kegel]

On Tue, Jun 8, 2010 at 11:09 PM, Jan Hoogenraad <jan-winehq at h-i-s.nl> wrote:
>> http://code.google.com/p/winezeug/issues/detail?id=127 "want uninstall"
>
> Could this useage (use winetricks ONLY on a relatively empty .wine directory
> to troubleshoot) be documented on every place in the winetricks
> documentation directories ?

That's not quite true; it works perfectly fine on big .wine directories.
It's just that they're not such a great idea, each additional thing you
install has a chance to screw up the things already installed,
and that has nothing to do with winetricks.

> This is not the way the documentation feels at:
> http://wiki.winehq.org/winetricks
>
> e.g. a short point explaining this, and that there is NO way to remove
> winetricks will help here.

OK, I added a note about it towards the bottom of the page.

> At this point, even the Ubuntu standard wine packaging includes winetricks.
> This leaves end-users with the impression that they are integral part of
> wine, and thus maintained.

Winetricks is maintained; the lack of uninstall doesn't mean it's unmaintained.

> Wine has been maturing.
> I now have a stable Windows environment, which required a few winetricks a
> year ago. This was then reasonable.
> I really will not anymore remove the .wine directory to delete all installed
> applications including keys & settings.
>
> If I can help with starting an uninstaller, I am willing to put in some
> time: A helpful step for me as a user would be to begin with a few cases
> that can simply be implemented (e.g. cc580, which I could remove recently
> due to a bug fix).
>
> I also see some application-like entries (7zip, firefox, gecko, python, vlc,
> wmp) where the package uninstaller may work.

If you or anyone else wants to submit patches to implement a way to
uninstall things, please go ahead.   The user interface would be a challenge,
though.  I'd rather not have an uninstall verb for each regular verb.
- Dan