[Fedora-packaging] Re: supporting closed source operating systems?

[Yaakov Nemoy]

On Mon, Jul 14, 2008 at 10:35 PM, Toshio Kuratomi <a.badger at gmail.com> wrote:
> Yaakov Nemoy wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Jul 14, 2008 at 10:11 PM, Jeff Spaleta <jspaleta at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Mon, Jul 14, 2008 at 12:06 PM, Yaakov Nemoy <loupgaroublond at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> If you can show a demo of compiling certain open source windows apps
>>>> so that they can work on Fedora via wine, then I can definitely argue
>>>> that this is no longer secondary architecture.
>>>>
>>>> I have a couple of VJ programs some friends asked about getting into
>>>> Fedora, all open source, but some run on windows.  Being able to build
>>>> them on Fedora easily will make it very easy for them to create a
>>>> Fedora based VJ station.
>>>
>>> I will fight you tooth and nail on this. It might even come down to a
>>> Dance Dance Revolution Dance off.  If we can distribute it under the
>>> Fedora brand, we must have a version that runs natively before we
>>> consider a windows cross-compiled binary that runs under wine.  I
>>> personally draw the line there. Native first, emulated second. If
>>> native doesnt work, get it fixed, or its not going to be part of
>>> Fedora.
>>
>> Frets on Fire.
>>
>> Seriously, we might as well write the program over from scratch,
>> cannabalizing the algorithms from it as we go along.  Doing that would
>> probably mean making a free-codec and nonfree-codec version too.
>> Currently, it's supported by searching in all the usual windows places
>> to see if codecs are installed.
>>
>> Now that wine is 1.0, I think it really deserves the same pariah
>> status that Mono should get.  It's an API controlled by a single
>> corporation that is not 100% documented, complex, and been
>> reimplemented from the inside out.  Where do we draw the line between
>> Mono compiling EXEs and DLLs that work under .Net on Windows and a
>> cross compiler compiling EXEs and DLLs that work on windows without
>> .Net?  If you really want to make this argument, why don't we draw the
>> line at Mono?.
>>
> If I understand your question correctly, the big difference that I see is
> that .Net EXE's and DLLs (assemblies) run on any platform.  AFAIK, windows
> .DLLs and .EXEs will only run on wine on x86.

Correction, .Net EXEs and DLLs will run on any platform only on top of
.Net or Mono.

But otherwise yes.

True, we are limited to a single architecture, but then wine doesn't
run on anything else, AFAIK, anyways.

-Yaakov