Various problems- it just gets worse!

[Duane Clark]

Shachar Shemesh wrote:
> Duane Clark wrote:
> 
> 
>>I do understand the aversion to scripts, but the wineinstall one is 
>>fairly mild. I've been using Wine for more than 3 years and have even 
>>done some development on it (I wish I had more time for that... sigh). 
>>Still, if I want to test with a clean install, I delete or move the 
>>old windows and .wine directories and just use wineinstall to create 
>>fresh versions. Because, well, it just works so well and is a lot 
>>easier than doing the configuration by hand.
> 
> 
> My beef with wineinstall is that there is no way to isolate the 
> configuration creation part from the install part. I think we should 
> have a script that does only the configuration, fake root and registry 
> creation. This way, the script can be bundled with the package and 
> placed on the destination machine. such a script should be runnable 
> without the sources dir (maybe by specifying the location of the 
> template registry and such via command line, maybe created by ./configure).
> 
> This way, the order CAN be "./configure, make depend, make, make 
> install, createconf" for normal install. Packagers can then do 
> "./configure --templatedir=/usr/share/wine --prefix=/usr (etc) && make 
> depend && make && TMPDIR=/tmp/winerpmroot make install", and run 
> "createconf" from the "postinstall" section of the RPM sort of thing.
> 
> Opinions?

It sounds like you are looking for something useful for binary 
distributions. I think that wineinstall would normally only be used by 
someone who is downloading and installing their first source 
distribution. So I think wineinstall is appropriate for that.

For binary distributions, I think a GUI tool is more appropriate. And 
there exists a tool, winesetuptk, for that purpose. It is a long time 
since I tried that tool, but as I recall, it was fairly easy to use.