GNU bug report logs -
#27546
[PATCH] Add wine stable release
Previous Next
To add a comment to this bug, you must first unarchive it, by sending
a message to control AT debbugs.gnu.org, with unarchive 27546 in the body.
You can then email your comments to 27546 AT debbugs.gnu.org in the normal way.
Toggle the display of automated, internal messages from the tracker.
Report forwarded
to
guix-patches <at> gnu.org
:
bug#27546
; Package
guix-patches
.
(Sat, 01 Jul 2017 11:54:02 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Acknowledgement sent
to
Nicolas Goaziou <mail <at> nicolasgoaziou.fr>
:
New bug report received and forwarded. Copy sent to
guix-patches <at> gnu.org
.
(Sat, 01 Jul 2017 11:54:02 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #5 received at submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]
Hello,
Not so long ago, I realized, painfully, we were distributing development
version of wine (currently 2.11), but not the stable one (currently
2.0.1).
The following patch attempts to provide the missing release. Ideally,
I think this variable should be named "wine" and the other "wine-dev" or
some such. However, so as to limit fuss, this patches leaves "wine"
as-is, and introduce "wine-2.0.1" instead.
Regards,
--
Nicolas Goaziou 0x80A93738
[0001-gnu-wine-Add-stable-release.patch (text/x-diff, inline)]
From 24e94a9109717df9aca8c1f8c4810e2f57e5a682 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Nicolas Goaziou <mail <at> nicolasgoaziou.fr>
Date: Sat, 1 Jul 2017 13:42:34 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] gnu: wine: Add stable release
* gnu/packages/wine.scm (wine-2.0.1): New variable.
---
gnu/packages/wine.scm | 12 ++++++++++++
1 file changed, 12 insertions(+)
diff --git a/gnu/packages/wine.scm b/gnu/packages/wine.scm
index 1fb2c542c..e3ca11c40 100644
--- a/gnu/packages/wine.scm
+++ b/gnu/packages/wine.scm
@@ -147,6 +147,18 @@ integrate Windows applications into your desktop.")
;; effect as building on i686 anyway.
(supported-systems '("i686-linux" "x86_64-linux"))))
+(define-public wine-2.0.1
+ (package (inherit wine)
+ (name "wine")
+ (version "2.0.1")
+ (source (origin
+ (method url-fetch)
+ (uri (string-append "https://dl.winehq.org/wine/source/2.0"
+ "/wine-" version ".tar.xz"))
+ (sha256
+ (base32
+ "10qm0xxqzvl4y3mhvaxcaacrcs8d5kdz5wf0gbxpmp36wnm4xyvc"))))))
+
(define-public wine64
(package
(inherit wine)
--
2.13.2
Information forwarded
to
guix-patches <at> gnu.org
:
bug#27546
; Package
guix-patches
.
(Sat, 01 Jul 2017 17:39:02 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #8 received at 27546 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]
On Sat, Jul 01, 2017 at 01:53:26PM +0200, Nicolas Goaziou wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Not so long ago, I realized, painfully, we were distributing development
> version of wine (currently 2.11), but not the stable one (currently
> 2.0.1).
>
> The following patch attempts to provide the missing release. Ideally,
> I think this variable should be named "wine" and the other "wine-dev" or
> some such. However, so as to limit fuss, this patches leaves "wine"
> as-is, and introduce "wine-2.0.1" instead.
Since we don't typically package development releases, how about
removing 2.11 and replacing it with 2.0.1?
[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]
Information forwarded
to
guix-patches <at> gnu.org
:
bug#27546
; Package
guix-patches
.
(Sat, 01 Jul 2017 19:42:02 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #11 received at 27546 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
Hello,
Leo Famulari <leo <at> famulari.name> writes:
> On Sat, Jul 01, 2017 at 01:53:26PM +0200, Nicolas Goaziou wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> Not so long ago, I realized, painfully, we were distributing development
>> version of wine (currently 2.11), but not the stable one (currently
>> 2.0.1).
>>
>> The following patch attempts to provide the missing release. Ideally,
>> I think this variable should be named "wine" and the other "wine-dev" or
>> some such. However, so as to limit fuss, this patches leaves "wine"
>> as-is, and introduce "wine-2.0.1" instead.
>
> Since we don't typically package development releases, how about
> removing 2.11 and replacing it with 2.0.1?
Thank you for the review.
I do not mind, for all I need is the stable release. However, I'm not
the one who packaged wine in the first place. Maybe its author has
a different use case.
Anyway, the patch implements the less invasive solution. We can also
apply it for now and settle on the next stable release, whenever it
happens. Note that we have other packages in the same situation (e.g.,
lilypond).
Regards,
--
Nicolas Goaziou 0x80A93738
Information forwarded
to
guix-patches <at> gnu.org
:
bug#27546
; Package
guix-patches
.
(Sun, 02 Jul 2017 11:44:01 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #14 received at 27546 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]
On Sat, Jul 01, 2017 at 09:41:37PM +0200, Nicolas Goaziou wrote:
> > Since we don't typically package development releases, how about
> > removing 2.11 and replacing it with 2.0.1?
>
> Thank you for the review.
>
> I do not mind, for all I need is the stable release. However, I'm not
> the one who packaged wine in the first place. Maybe its author has
> a different use case.
I see.
> Anyway, the patch implements the less invasive solution. We can also
> apply it for now and settle on the next stable release, whenever it
> happens. Note that we have other packages in the same situation (e.g.,
> lilypond).
IIUC, I think that's a good idea. We'll keep both versions of Wine until
the development releases reach "stable" status, then we'll drop the
development version.
Can you add a code comment that reminds us of this plan? :)
[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]
Information forwarded
to
guix-patches <at> gnu.org
:
bug#27546
; Package
guix-patches
.
(Sun, 02 Jul 2017 15:10:01 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #17 received at 27546 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
Leo Famulari <leo <at> famulari.name> skribis:
> On Sat, Jul 01, 2017 at 09:41:37PM +0200, Nicolas Goaziou wrote:
>> > Since we don't typically package development releases, how about
>> > removing 2.11 and replacing it with 2.0.1?
>>
>> Thank you for the review.
>>
>> I do not mind, for all I need is the stable release. However, I'm not
>> the one who packaged wine in the first place. Maybe its author has
>> a different use case.
>
> I see.
>
>> Anyway, the patch implements the less invasive solution. We can also
>> apply it for now and settle on the next stable release, whenever it
>> happens. Note that we have other packages in the same situation (e.g.,
>> lilypond).
>
> IIUC, I think that's a good idea. We'll keep both versions of Wine until
> the development releases reach "stable" status, then we'll drop the
> development version.
Sounds reasonable to me too.
As for the name, I would call the stable version “wine”, and the
development version “wine-next” (we’ve used this naming scheme on a few
occasions for other packages in the past.) That way users won’t get the
development version unless they explicitly ask for it.
Thanks,
Ludo’.
Information forwarded
to
guix-patches <at> gnu.org
:
bug#27546
; Package
guix-patches
.
(Sun, 02 Jul 2017 21:26:02 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #20 received at 27546 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]
Hello,
ludo <at> gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
> As for the name, I would call the stable version “wine”, and the
> development version “wine-next” (we’ve used this naming scheme on a few
> occasions for other packages in the past.) That way users won’t get the
> development version unless they explicitly ask for it.
Done. Here is the updated patch.
Regards,
--
Nicolas Goaziou 0x80A93738
[0001-gnu-wine-Add-stable-release.patch (text/x-diff, inline)]
From 0198473e04fd7f885a6ead5d2ecc5aa1962fd935 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Nicolas Goaziou <mail <at> nicolasgoaziou.fr>
Date: Sat, 1 Jul 2017 13:42:34 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] gnu: wine: Add stable release.
* gnu/packages/wine.scm (wine): Refer to stable release instead of development
one.
(wine-next): New variable.
---
gnu/packages/wine.scm | 21 ++++++++++++++++++---
1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/gnu/packages/wine.scm b/gnu/packages/wine.scm
index 1fb2c542c..63f8869bd 100644
--- a/gnu/packages/wine.scm
+++ b/gnu/packages/wine.scm
@@ -55,14 +55,14 @@
(define-public wine
(package
(name "wine")
- (version "2.11")
+ (version "2.0.1")
(source (origin
(method url-fetch)
- (uri (string-append "https://dl.winehq.org/wine/source/2.x"
+ (uri (string-append "https://dl.winehq.org/wine/source/2.0"
"/wine-" version ".tar.xz"))
(sha256
(base32
- "0g6cwjyqwc660w33453aklh3hpc0b8rrb88dryn23ah6wannvagg"))))
+ "10qm0xxqzvl4y3mhvaxcaacrcs8d5kdz5wf0gbxpmp36wnm4xyvc"))))
(build-system gnu-build-system)
(native-inputs `(("pkg-config" ,pkg-config)
("gettext" ,gettext-minimal)
@@ -159,3 +159,18 @@ integrate Windows applications into your desktop.")
(package-arguments wine))))
(synopsis "Implementation of the Windows API (64-bit version)")
(supported-systems '("x86_64-linux"))))
+
+;; TODO: This is wine development version, provided for historical reasons.
+;; We can remove it as soon as a new stable release is out.
+(define-public wine-next
+ (package (inherit wine)
+ (name "wine")
+ (version "2.11")
+ (source (origin
+ (method url-fetch)
+ (uri (string-append "https://dl.winehq.org/wine/source/2.x"
+ "/wine-" version ".tar.xz"))
+ (sha256
+ (base32
+ "0g6cwjyqwc660w33453aklh3hpc0b8rrb88dryn23ah6wannvagg"))))))
+
--
2.13.2
Information forwarded
to
guix-patches <at> gnu.org
:
bug#27546
; Package
guix-patches
.
(Mon, 03 Jul 2017 07:37:02 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #23 received at 27546 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
Hello,
Nicolas Goaziou <mail <at> nicolasgoaziou.fr> skribis:
> From 0198473e04fd7f885a6ead5d2ecc5aa1962fd935 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Nicolas Goaziou <mail <at> nicolasgoaziou.fr>
> Date: Sat, 1 Jul 2017 13:42:34 +0200
> Subject: [PATCH] gnu: wine: Add stable release.
>
> * gnu/packages/wine.scm (wine): Refer to stable release instead of development
> one.
> (wine-next): New variable.
[...]
> +;; TODO: This is wine development version, provided for historical reasons.
> +;; We can remove it as soon as a new stable release is out.
> +(define-public wine-next
> + (package (inherit wine)
> + (name "wine")
^~--
Should be “wine-next”.
Otherwise LGTM, thank you!
Ludo’.
Information forwarded
to
guix-patches <at> gnu.org
:
bug#27546
; Package
guix-patches
.
(Mon, 03 Jul 2017 16:20:02 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #26 received at 27546 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
Hello,
ludo <at> gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
>> +;; TODO: This is wine development version, provided for historical reasons.
>> +;; We can remove it as soon as a new stable release is out.
>> +(define-public wine-next
>> + (package (inherit wine)
>> + (name "wine")
> ^~--
>
> Should be “wine-next”.
Fixed.
> Otherwise LGTM, thank you!
Pushed. Thank you.
Regards,
--
Nicolas Goaziou 0x80A93738
Reply sent
to
Alex Kost <alezost <at> gmail.com>
:
You have taken responsibility.
(Tue, 18 Jul 2017 12:46:02 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Notification sent
to
Nicolas Goaziou <mail <at> nicolasgoaziou.fr>
:
bug acknowledged by developer.
(Tue, 18 Jul 2017 12:46:02 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #31 received at 27546-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
Hi, Nicolas. I've noticed this "bug" is still opened. In case you
didn't know: you can close any bug by sending a message to
<NNNNN-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org> (as I am doing with this message).
--
Alex
bug archived.
Request was from
Debbugs Internal Request <help-debbugs <at> gnu.org>
to
internal_control <at> debbugs.gnu.org
.
(Wed, 16 Aug 2017 11:24:03 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
This bug report was last modified 7 years and 311 days ago.
Previous Next
GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham,
1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd,
1994-97 Ian Jackson.