Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Wine 8.5

winehq.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 93 posts

Re: Wine 8.5

#61

Post by giomasce »

steeleduncan wrote: post #32
giomasce wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Proton developer here, working for CodeWeavers. Everything we develop goes preferentially in Wine, and is kept in Proton as a "hack" only when a solution clean enough for Wine is unfeasible or too complicated. Proton is periodically rebased onto Wine, so everything in Proton and not in Wine is additional rebasing work, which we'd like to avoid as much as possible.

Thanks for all the great work. I hadn't realised Proton was developed by CodeWeavers. Out of curiosity, what is the relationship between Proton and your own product Crossover?

In principle they are somewhat similar: they're both Wine + local patches (either backported from more recent Wine versions or hacks that are not suitable for upstream Wine) + some glue. CrossOver also has a GUI, which Proton doesn't need because the GUI there is Steam and Proton is supposed to be as transparent as possible. And like I said for Proton, it's in our best interest to keep the diff between Wine and CrossOver as small as possible, because that's a liability that takes its toll at each rebase.

In practice Proton and CrossOver tends to have rather different sets of needs. Proton only supports Linux and is only focused on gaming. CrossOver exists for a handful of platforms, most notably macOS (which has a number of intricacies: missing 32 bit libraries, Apple Silicon, missing Vulkan drivers which requires MoltenVK, but MoltenVK itself cannot really offer all the features standard Vulkan drivers have on Linux), and is also used for non-gaming applications. CrossOver also lives in the form of specialized branches we develop for specific applications, on request of their developers. So while of course we share everything that can be shared, in my experience this tends to be not that much (except what goes upstream, of course). In pratice CrossOver and Proton live in different repositories, have independent build systems and independent release schedules.

Re: Wine 8.5

#62

Post by dijit »

tacroqueen wrote: post #59
jwr wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interesting — I hear that repeated sometimes, but it always turns out that the person stating that opinion is an Excel expert and barely looked at anything else. Having used Excel, Numbers, OpenOffice (since back when it was still StarOffice), and Google Sheets, I find it to be a mixed bag. For example, there are certain things which Numbers does way better (drag&drop rows to reorder them, for example) and I personal…

No offense but you clearly are not a spreadsheet power user (and to be clear you're starting off with what feels like a pretentious reply/generalization: always turns out that the person stating that opinion is an Excel expert and barely looked at anything else.) I have never heard anyone that has used both products deeply ever admit that Numbers comes close to the capabilities of Excel (and this includes a few forme…

the major issue the parent eluded to was a sort of sunk cost fallacy that exists in the spreadsheet ecosystem.

Excel is great software, truly, what it enables people to do is impressive (and awful sometimes).

But once you have convinced yourself that its industry standard, why look as deeply into alternatives to even figure out if there are better tools? all of them will have quirks, some will certainly be more powerful in some areas (google docs has the ability to read data direct from bigquery for example).

Many already convinced themselves that excel is the one true format and there is no reason to look hard at anything else.

Others don't want their investment in learning to be wasted.

Theres a lot of people who are genuinely not incentivised to look at the ecosystem critically.

Re: Wine 8.5

#63

Post by omginternets »

artificial wrote: post #47
ogogmad wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why? I occasionally use them* for taxes and whatnot, and they pretty much work identically. The differences seem at best marginal. * - LO Calc and MS Excel.

Similar to how databases are nearly identical superficially. Once you have a non trivial coupling the inertia kicks in. That said, depending on your use case (light usage minimial complex multi sheet macros) the differences are indeed minor.

An example would be helpful.

Re: Wine 8.5

#64

Post by tacroqueen »

dijit wrote: post #62
tacroqueen wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No offense but you clearly are not a spreadsheet power user (and to be clear you're starting off with what feels like a pretentious reply/generalization: always turns out that the person stating that opinion is an Excel expert and barely looked at anything else.) I have never heard anyone that has used both products deeply ever admit that Numbers comes close to the capabilities of Excel (and this includes a few forme…

the major issue the parent eluded to was a sort of sunk cost fallacy that exists in the spreadsheet ecosystem. Excel is great software, truly, what it enables people to do is impressive (and awful sometimes). But once you have convinced yourself that its industry standard, why look as deeply into alternatives to even figure out if there are better tools? all of them will have quirks, some will certainly be more power…

> But once you have convinced yourself that its industry standard, why look as deeply into alternatives to even figure out if there are better tools?

I suppose that's true to an extent. However one of the reasons spreadsheets in general are so popular is their fluid accessibility. Just about anybody can get right to work even in Excel. Once you've gotten started in Excel there's little incentive to leave. That it offers a full blown powerful programming environment (which is definitely not the best in almost any area) erases much reason to seek alternatives. It's not a situation where Excel is meaningfully less accessible than the alternatives.

> Many already convinced themselves that excel is the one true format and there is no reason to look hard at anything else.

I mean this is sort of true. It's simple enough and good enough and actually insanely powerful on top of all that. What is the compelling reason to even seek an alternative? (saying this knowing full well that people often do, and usually it's Sheets).

And lack of external data sources is not a small potatoes feature (speaking in reference to Numbers here) - I think that alone puts Excel and Sheets way above Numbers. (And personally I can die happy not seeing another line of AppleScript for the rest of my days).

At least GSuite gives you browser accessibility - and even Excel to a large extent. Numbers ties you to the Mac desktop and iOS crowd. That seems like an already poor incentive to switch. It's great that it works for some people - but it's a niche product, where Excel simply isn't, period.

Re: Wine 8.5

#65

Post by JiNCMG »

steeleduncan wrote: post #32
giomasce wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Proton developer here, working for CodeWeavers. Everything we develop goes preferentially in Wine, and is kept in Proton as a "hack" only when a solution clean enough for Wine is unfeasible or too complicated. Proton is periodically rebased onto Wine, so everything in Proton and not in Wine is additional rebasing work, which we'd like to avoid as much as possible.

Thanks for all the great work. I hadn't realised Proton was developed by CodeWeavers. Out of curiosity, what is the relationship between Proton and your own product Crossover?

I've been a Crossover customer since their 2012 end of the world sale.

Re: Wine 8.5

#66

Post by davidgerard »

orhmeh09 wrote: post #31
anthk wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Use Guix, everything gets compiled fine, no matter what. If you need non-free because of $HARDWARE reasons, use nonguix, (or just a non-free kernel to avoid polluting the userland), but I won't help you on that. Altough you can install guix on any GNU/Linux distro, on top: https://guix.gnu.org/manual/en/html_node/System-Installation... Then, run guix pull as a non root, and next, guix package -i lmms Don't forget to…

It sounds like WINE "just works" for their uses, "non-free" or not.

the whole stack is free software, the API just originated at Microsoft.

Re: Wine 8.5

#67

Post by davidgerard »

jcelerier wrote: post #52
davidgerard wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I use one fully open-source program (LMMS) which I've found a PITA to build reliably. But the Windows binary under WINE just works. We have a stable binary format for Linux! It's Windows.

.. why would you build LMMS? you can just download the latest appimage and run it: https://github.com/LMMS/lmms/releases

or I could keep doing what's worked fine for me for years in a consistent setup, of course.

Re: Wine 8.5

#68

Post by davidgerard »

anthk wrote: post #16
davidgerard wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I use one fully open-source program (LMMS) which I've found a PITA to build reliably. But the Windows binary under WINE just works. We have a stable binary format for Linux! It's Windows.

Use Guix, everything gets compiled fine, no matter what. If you need non-free because of $HARDWARE reasons, use nonguix, (or just a non-free kernel to avoid polluting the userland), but I won't help you on that. Altough you can install guix on any GNU/Linux distro, on top: https://guix.gnu.org/manual/en/html_node/System-Installation... Then, run guix pull as a non root, and next, guix package -i lmms Don't forget to…

or I could keep doing the thing that has worked in a consistent manner for me for years rather than gratuitously do something different, of course.

Re: Wine 8.5

#69

Post by meibo »

geokon wrote: post #18
julienfr112 wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I suspect mikrotik devs to work on linux...

Can you compile code from within Linux to run on wine..? I know clang supports Windows, but I haven't heard anyone have a crosscompilation setup like that (sounds handy!)

We actually run MSVC builds for Linux by running the VC++ toolchain in Wine, it works very well apart from process startup times, which have been getting a lot better.

Re: Wine 8.5

#70

Post by anthk »

davidgerard wrote: post #68
anthk wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Use Guix, everything gets compiled fine, no matter what. If you need non-free because of $HARDWARE reasons, use nonguix, (or just a non-free kernel to avoid polluting the userland), but I won't help you on that. Altough you can install guix on any GNU/Linux distro, on top: https://guix.gnu.org/manual/en/html_node/System-Installation... Then, run guix pull as a non root, and next, guix package -i lmms Don't forget to…

or I could keep doing the thing that has worked in a consistent manner for me for years rather than gratuitously do something different, of course.

Well, Guix it's a universal solution over any distro, ensuring that whatever thing you install with it, it will get the correct dependencies with no dependency hell, ever. You can even have different library versions for different software. Guix will handle then in the background.
Post reply on HN