wine: add x86_64 target with i686 support

[Rosalie241]

I'm sorry about the closure of the previous PR, I made a mistake and I couldn't restore the branch due to my stupidity, won't happen again.

[abenson]

If you can update this to wine 3.12, that'd be great.

Using this in conjunction with the expected libGL 18.x updates, DXVK, etc, and it all works great!

[nathanielhorn]

I've tested this version as well and it build succesfully including dxvk/vulkan support. everything runs great. hope this gets merged soon

[abenson]

Needs a bump to 3.13, but I think it's great

[Rosalie241]

@abenson there's already a PR to bump the wine version: #1206

[abenson]

But wine64..

[Rosalie241]

@abenson wine64 doesn't need to be bumped since it's from the same source as wine32.
EDIT: win -> wine

[abenson]

Well, when that PR gets merged, this one will conflict and you'll have to rework it anyway.

[Rosalie241]

@abenson it isn't much work for me to "rework" this PR
(I probably do this wrong but it works)
I clone this repo(void-linux/void-packages)
then I apply my patch(with version number modified)
git commit # with my message
git checkout -b [branch]
then I do a force push to my fork and the PR will be updated

[Sacules]

I'm very interested in this, hope it gets merged soon 😃

[Rosalie241]

I hope it'll be merged soon too!

…

On 08/04 04:54, Sacul wrote: I'm very interested in this, hope it gets merged soon 😃 -- You are receiving this because you authored the thread. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: #540 (comment)

[ghost]

any status on this? :(

[Rosalie241]

I have no idea, I updated the PR to solve the conflict(thanks for reminding me!) Other than that, no word from the maintainer(s) yet sadly

…

On 31.08 12:30, Yardanico wrote: any status on this? :( -- You are receiving this because you authored the thread. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: #540 (comment)

[Hoshpak]

I'm afraid this can't be merged because xbps-src does not support what you are trying to do right now. Currently the only option seems to be to create separate wine and wine64 packages, thus losing the WoW64 functionality. Currently I'm experimenting a bit with xbps-src to be able to give you a substantiated explanation of why it most likely won't be accepted. (Or possibly prove my assumptions wrong, we will see)

[Hoshpak]

So my computer just finished compiling all the dependencies, I will begin from the start so that everyone gets the full picture:

Void never had true multiarch support the way Debian or other distributions implemented it. The only thing that comes somewhat close to it is the building of the -32bit packages which is more of a hack. It uses the i686 binaries built by the i686 builder and repackages them as x86_64 binary packages with the `-32bit' suffix. So building the wine package the way proposed in this PR would require the necessary builds to have run on the i686 builder first and the multilib repository to be enabled during the build. Since both is the case in the current configuration, that would work if the template hits the builders.

However void-packages is built on the premise that it is possible to bootstrap everything from sources without requiring any preexisting binary packages. So I should be able to always just clone this repository, not use any of the mirrors and build a whole system from the sources. That's also the reason why packages that require themselves to bootstrap something have two versions of them in the repository, one being binaries provided by upstream which can be used to bootstrap and build the package from source, the other one being the source of the packages which can then be built. Now if I try to compile wine with this template without using the existing repositories, it will fail because xbps-src can't find any of the -32bit packages. There is no template for them and xbps-src can't detect that it should build the packages without suffix for i686 first to have them available. That's what was referred to in https://github.com/voidlinux/void-packages/pull/11534 as

bootstrap issues

The proper solution for this would be to implement true multiarch support in Void which would be a huge amount of work and extend xbps-src to make it possible to depend on packages for a different architecture and then automatically (cross)compiling the necessary packages for the specified architecture.

[Vintodrimmer]

Could you include the ability to apply the staging patches too, please?

[Rosalie241]

@Vintodrimmer already did that! https://github.com/tim241/void-packages/tree/wine-staging-wip

just change the version number & hashes to compile the version you want 👍

EDIT: while I'm at it, I'll write some basic instructions on how to do this

# clone the void-packages repo
git clone https://github.com/void-linux/void-packages --depth=1
cd void-packages

# for wine
export "$(cat srcpkgs/wine/template | grep 'version=' )"
curl https://patch-diff.githubusercontent.com/raw/void-linux/void-packages/pull/540.patch -o wine.patch
sed -i "s|4.0|$version|g" wine.patch
patch -p1 < wine.patch

# If you want to add staging
curl https://github.com/tim241/void-packages/commit/65232c520f893250a45733efebd812c39c16cbee.patch -o wine-staging.patch
patch -p1 < wine-staging.patch

# (optional) change the wine version
export WINE_VERSION="desired wine version"
sed -i "s|$version|$WINE_VERSION|g" srcpkgs/wine/template

the first build will fail(due to hash mismatch) but you can change the hashes in srcpkgs/wine/template

[yjp20]

@tim241 can you edit the changes for new wine template

[Rosalie241]

@youngjinpark20 done 👍

[yjp20]

@tim241 thanks for your good work 🥇

[Vintodrimmer]

Ping @maxice8 .

Is there anything still stopping this from getting into the repos?

[Rosalie241]

@Vintodrimmer

Is there anything still stopping this from getting into the repos?

yes, read #540 (comment) and #540 (comment)

[maxice8]

On Sun, Feb 03, 2019 at 07:39:13AM -0800, Vintodrimmer wrote: Ping @maxice8 . Is there anything still stopping this from getting into the repos? -- You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: #540 (comment)

Don't ask me, i have no interest in this.

[Gottox]

superseded by #11895

[Rosalie241]

@Gottox Why? This PR (and yours presumably) is never gonna be merged due to #540 (comment) and #540 (comment) ?