dimesio wrote: > > doh123 wrote: > > I'm thinking of putting together a HOWTO on the FAQ on how to run the Wine build command line under XQuartz for testing and maybe that will be accepted here since its stock unmodified Wine already anyways. > > The issue is not just Wine itself; I believe you when you say you use unmodified Wine. But wrappers such as yours also install winetricks and other tweaks that are relevant to troubleshooting a problem. It is not our responsibility to keep track of what every wrapper script out there is doing, and the people who use these things are often unaware of what they've installed. One thing you could do that the PlayOnLinux people promised long ago, but failed to deliver, is a a log that will summarize every tweak that was applied by your wrapper that users could copy and paste here. > > The second thing you need to fix for users to get support here is to properly install gecko in every wrapper. A wineprefix without gecko is broken. The wineprefix is made stock and nothing is installed unless the user went into Winetricks and installed it themselves. Nothing is automatic. I'd only accept bug reports if its someone who actually made the wrapper, not just downloaded someone else's because they might not even be using stock Wine builds. Normal Wineskin engines are stock, sure, but anyone can compile their own Wine code as well to make an engine. Wineskin is not designed to automatically get games working for you, you still do all the work yourself, there are no installation scripts or anything like that... or just download a working wrapper someone else has already made. Gecko is easy for the user to install if they need, but installing it in every wrapper no matter what is a HUGE and utter waste of space. When a wrapper is already like 150mb, asking the user to put another 30ish mb on top of that for Gecko when 75% of the things people run never even use it is crazy. That might work for the idea of normal Wine usage where you just have Wine on the system and use it for everything, but not with how Wineskin works. Every app you run contains its own wineprefix, its own X11, its own Wine build, and all the dependencies it needs. If you have 6 or 7 ports all with Gecko installed and none of them actually using it, wasting hundreds of mb is a bit silly. My option (I'll probably build it in to launch Terminal ready for you instead of just following a HOWTO) will not even use the wineprefix in the wrapper, it would just default to the normal ~/.wine. It would be nothing more than letting the people open Terminal with a pre-compiled Wine build ready to go and nothing more. There can be a note about making sure Gecko is installed... This would only be so people don't have to try to compile anything themselves just to test if its a Wine or Wineskin problem.
