Wine 1.2 binary for Mac OSX

Questions about Wine on macOS.
Locked
ahso
Level 4
Level 4
Posts: 182
Joined: Sat Feb 20, 2010 2:31 am

Wine 1.2 binary for Mac OSX

Post by ahso »

Hi
why there's no binary for Mac OSX?

http://www.winehq.org/download
User avatar
dimesio
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 13202
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2008 10:30 pm

Re: Wine 1.2 binary for Mac OSX

Post by dimesio »

ahso wrote:Hi
why there's no binary for Mac OSX?

http://www.winehq.org/download
Package maintainers are volunteers. No one has volunteered for Mac OSX.
doh123
Level 8
Level 8
Posts: 1227
Joined: Tue Jul 14, 2009 1:21 pm

Post by doh123 »

Mac OS X is a bit different than most linux distros... making a single binary isn't really that great of an idea really... mainly coming down to X11, and having many different versions in many different install locations.

If you use Wineskin you wont have to worry about it, but as its a 3rd party product, you cannot get support here for it.
ahso
Level 4
Level 4
Posts: 182
Joined: Sat Feb 20, 2010 2:31 am

Post by ahso »

Why not integrate that in Wine?
- I do a Installer.exe to give to Mac/Lin/Win users
- Users won't have to bother about each app. Like myself I'm running a dozen Win applications on Linux.

Anyway compiling a static Wine binary should be no problem?
Bryan Baldwin

Wine 1.2 binary for Mac OSX

Post by Bryan Baldwin »

On 07/21/2010 08:42 PM, ahso wrote:
Why not integrate that in Wine?
- I do a Installer.exe to give to Mac/Lin/Win users
- Users won't have to bother about each app. Like myself I'm running a dozen Win applications on Linux.

Anyway compiling a static Wine binary should be no problem?
That would be out of scope for the WINE project. Distributing a vetted
version of X is not part of WINE.

Linux distributions have a much better installation method. On Debian or
Ubuntu its called apt-get. On Archlinux its called pacman -S or yaourt
-S. Other distributions have their own equally graceful mechanisms. Mac
OS has Wineskin, or you could try Macports. The only platform that .exe
installers actually apply to is the Windows platform itself. If you are
already using Windows, you don't need WINE.

Bryan
James Mckenzie

Wine 1.2 binary for Mac OSX

Post by James Mckenzie »

ahso <[email protected]> wrote:
Sent: Jul 21, 2010 1:42 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: [Wine] Re: Wine 1.2 binary for Mac OSX

Why not integrate that in Wine?
- I do a Installer.exe to give to Mac/Lin/Win users
- Users won't have to bother about each app. Like myself I'm running a dozen Win applications on Linux.

Anyway compiling a static Wine binary should be no problem?
That's been tried and it does not work. Wine HAS to integrate with what is offered. Thus, there are several projects to integrate Wine with MacOSX. Wineskin, WineBottler, MacPorts and Fink all offer a method of installing Wine using various methods.

What you are talking about in the first item is to build an installer for Wine. Apple's installer is notoriously 'broken' and even Apple says not to use it for packages that maybe de-installed at a later time. The 'preferred' method is drag-n-drop into the Applications folder with information being held for the specific program in $HOME (~)/Library/Application Support/<Application Name>/... This is how WineBottler and Wineskin work. Fink has a 'smarter' installer, so it installs into /usr/local/. I don't use MacPorts, but reports are that it installs programs into /opt. None of these install any application software directly into /usr (symbolic links, yes, programs, no.)

Also, Wine is and will remain a user-space application. Windows is a different animal, it is a full blown operating system. What we are trying to do is layer the Windows32/Windows64 APIs on top of the UNIX/Linux layer to give the ability to run Windows compliant programs. We are not trying to duplicate .NET or any other functionality that is ADDITIONAL to these APIs. That is the scope of another project.

You are, of course, welcome to attempt to build a full installer with all of the required add-ons. The last time I checked the disk image file was on the order of 200MB or more. I don't 'fiddle' with that anymore (it was called Darwine.)

James McKenzie
ryan woodsmall

Wine 1.2 binary for Mac OSX

Post by ryan woodsmall »

Anyway compiling a static Wine binary should be no problem?
Given the way Wine uses some of the requisite libraries, providing static binaries isn't a solution. There are many moving parts to Wine on OS X, and providing Wine only without any of the other reqs will result in a half-usable Wine lacking many features.

I use a script to build and install Wine and a number of the recommended prerequisite software packages from source:

http://code.google.com/p/osxwinebuilder/

Binary install directories are 200+MB. An OS X binary distribution of Wine would be rather large and would likely present licensing issues as well, as not all required packages are LGPL.

In short, use a source build, build script, MacPorts/Fink, WineBottler or Wineskin. A winehq.org-supported binary package isn't likely going to happen soon.
ahso
Level 4
Level 4
Posts: 182
Joined: Sat Feb 20, 2010 2:31 am

Post by ahso »

http://winebottler.kronenberg.org/

Seems to be what I was looking for. A wine binary plus some extra functionality
Locked