Re: _INTRODUCTION_ to installing/using Wine?
On Mon 27 Sep 2021 at 14:28:37 -0500, Richard Owlett wrote:
> On 09/26/2021 08:54 AM, piorunz wrote:
> > On 26/09/2021 14:42, Richard Owlett wrote:
> > > I have not used any version of Windows since WinXP and have the AMD64
> > > flavor of Debian 10.7 installed on the relevant machine.
> > >
> > > I wish to do two things:
> > > 1. Explore some text manipulation applications I used then
> > > (obviously 32 bit apps).
> > > 2. Explore Bible study tools used by others at church
> > > (32 or 64 bit ???).
> > >
> > > I have found references [1][2] suitable for addressing specific detailed
> > > questions. I'm looking for introductory material -- especially such that
> > > would cause me to think of questions I should consider before proceeding.
> > > Suggestions?
> > > TIA
> > >
> > > References:
> > > 1. https://wiki.debian.org/Wine
> > > 2. https://www.winehq.org/
> > > Goes into much detail but does not have an "overview only" page.
> >
> > After you install Wine (your reference materials covers that), simply
> > execute in terminal "wine name_of_your_exe" from the folder where .exe is.
> >
> > That's all.
>
> I *DOUBT* it as:
> 1. I'm well past "three score and ten" ;}
Of what possible relevance is that? There are other users who use the
same argument, often giving extensive excrutiating biographical details.
A user may doubt the advice given, but I thought piorunz's helpful post
deserved a less ageist response.
> 2. [1] explicitly states:
> > Users on a 64-bit system should make sure that both wine32
> > and wine64 (...) are installed ...
>
> Careful reading of [1] and [2] {w/apologies to J. Caesar} suggests:
> " All .exe are divided into three flavors:
> 1. pure 32 bit
> 2. pure 64 bit
> 3. pure hodgepodge
> "
> >
> > If something doesn't work, install required components using winetricks.
> > Simply install package winetricks, open it, and navigate graphically to
> > install .Net Frameworks, C++ redistributables and whatever else your
> > Windows app needs to operate.
>
> Is not that paragraph sufficient justification for my question?
Without a doubt it is.
--
Brian.
Reply to: