RE: Bug#595427: ITP: winetricks -- Quick and dirty script todownload and install variousredistributable runtime libraries
Are we in danger of making the best the enemy of the good? Packaging
winetricks as-is would be helpful: making it a part of the packaging system,
keeping it up-to-date, maybe adding a man page.
Massive integration of distributable libraries into wine, and/or the
creation of a wine-nonfree package with more of same, are great ideas. But
they're also a lot more work than just packaging winetricks. So maybe let
the simple one be done first, and take the pressure off those who need more
time to do the trickier work?
If the new winetricks package were to be called wine-nonfree, that would lay
the foundations for later efforts ...
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Andreas Barth [mailto:email@example.com]
> Sent: 05 September 2010 14:05
> To: Adam Borowski
> Cc: firstname.lastname@example.org; email@example.com
> Subject: Re: Bug#595427: ITP: winetricks -- Quick and dirty
> script todownload and install variousredistributable runtime libraries
> * Adam Borowski (firstname.lastname@example.org) [100905 11:04]:
> > It's a massive script, so the file count of 1 doesn't
> really matter. Also,
> > it needs to update more often than wine proper, as it
> refers to outside
> > locations.
> > I'd vote for having it as a separate package.
> It'd rather make sense to create a wine-nonfree which includes the
> libraries that we are allowed to redistribute, and downloads the
> Then it makes of course sense to have it as an seperate package (and
> with e.g. cmake I'm even not sure if we couldn't take the free version
> of it into wine proper).
> In other words, there will be some massive integration effort into
> debian, so winetricks won't look like the current script. Which is
> something that should be done.
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact