|
OpenBSD Packages and Ports Installation and upgrading of packages and ports on OpenBSD. |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
|||
Can i use wine in OB 5.0 ?
It seems there is no wine package availabe for OB 5.0.
Sincerely! |
|
|||
Correct. There was a working port at one time (prior to OpenBSD 5.0...), but discussion on ports@ indicates that wine no longer works:
http://marc.info/?t=128751273800007&r=1&w=2 ...nor does it appear that it will in the near future. |
|
|||
I just want to use wine to run some windows program.
|
|
|||
Wine is no longer available, & it is unclear if it will ever again be available on OpenBSD. You will need to look for other alternatives.
|
|
|||
It seems there is no any alternatives using OB(qemu is VERT slow). I can use VirtualBox and Wine using FreeBSD.
I really donot understand why Wine doesnot work on OpenBSD ?! Last edited by sw2wolf; 23rd March 2012 at 06:11 AM. |
|
|||
OpenBSD 5.0 wine and qemu
I could compile wine 1.1.19, 1.3.37 and 1.5.3 (with several patches) in my OpenBSD 5.0, but it's not run. Only run in the old wine version (1.1.19).
Qemu is very slow but if you install kqemu (QEMU accelerator module): pkg_add -vi kqemu If you want to load this kernel module at boot time, add the following lines to /etc/rc.securelevel : if nm /dev/ksyms | grep mp_lock >/dev/null; then if [ -r /usr/local/lib/kqemu/kqemu_mp.o ]; then echo ' kqemu'; /sbin/modload /usr/local/lib/kqemu/kqemu_mp.o fi else if [ -r /usr/local/lib/kqemu/kqemu.o ]; then echo ' kqemu'; /sbin/modload /usr/local/lib/kqemu/kqemu.o fi fi If you want a user to be able to use this module, add them to the group _kqemu (vi /etc/group). The QEMU Accelerator (KQEMU) is a driver allowing a user application to run x86 code in a Virtual Machine (VM). The code can be either user or kernel code, in 64, 32 or 16 bit protected mode. __ Matias Colli UNIX SysAdmin |
|
||||
Kqemu is not available with OpenBSD after 5.0-release. It was deprecated upstream, and did not function properly on OpenBSD in any case.
Review the CVS log: http://www.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/cvswe...Attic/Makefile |
|
|||
No virtualization
No virtualization for OpenBSD :-(
Matías Colli Perito Informático Forense M.N. A-128 COPITEC http://estudiopericialinformatico.blogspot.com Last edited by matiasbsd; 18th February 2014 at 07:49 PM. Reason: The signature |
|
|||
Necro and blatant advertising aside, I'm gonna say something that probably won't go over well with a lot of people but it needs to be said.
The next time you feel the need to complain about OpenBSD not having a port/package for something, don't. Instead, go read the Porter's Handbook and write up the port yourself. It's really not all that difficult and it's OK if your first couple of ports really aren't that good. You will get helpful comments back and you will get better at writing up ports. And then, magically, that thing you were gonna complain about will be supported by OpenBSD. Anybody can write up a port. Yes, it's work. But anything worthwhile is work. And you just might find that you enjoy it. And at least then you can say you tried, even if it fails. That's a lot more useful than just complaining. And maybe, just maybe, you'll prevent someone else from complaining in the future. |
|
|||
porting wine to OpenBSD?
Quote:
I took a stab at it years ago, fixed a couple superficial compile errors but then it got hard. I don't recall the details, but someone else who was working a little on it wrote something about differences with mmap and wine wanting to put things at a fixed address or something like that. Windows makes assumption about how virtual memory is laid out IIRC (e.g. > 2GB belongs to kernel, depending on certain settings, including settings compiled into the application binary!). Seems to me there were issues then with lack of kernel threads then too, which shouldn't be an issue now (though maybe there's some work to port to OpenBSD's threads?). FreeBSD did it because someone did the work for FreeBSD. You can probably look at their mailing lists to gauge how much work it is. Then again there may be things in OpenBSD that make it harder, I don't know. I've had the thought to try again sometime, but now I'm running amd64. I'm not sure 64 bit windows support is worth anything to me. For that matter, I'm not sure how well wine works with 64 bit programs. Running win32 wine on amd64 I think will always be impossible. Unless I'm mistaken, OpenBSD has made the design decision never to support 32 bit programs on amd64 arch. IMO that's good. When I used slackware I found annoying little complications and clutter caused by the need to support both kinds of binaries, e.g. the names of the library directories. Why even bother when you have the source and can recompile/port? I can see it if all you have is binaries but that's not a use case worth spending much effort to support IMO. But by all means give it a shot. If you do make sure to scan the ports mailing lists for past efforts and make sure you're starting with all patches done before. I don't know if everything is in the current port or not. Last edited by thirdm; 19th February 2014 at 04:24 PM. Reason: win32 -> windows. i.e. I meant 64 bit windows applications in that sentence. |
|
|||
Sure. I don't necessarily disagree with that. Virtualization is definitely difficult but that doesn't mean it's impossible. Personally, I'd prefer to see someone port Virtualbox over Wine, but that's just my opinion. My original point was that fly-by complaints without work attached are better off unsaid.
Quote:
Quote:
My original post was designed to slow people down from knee-jerk complaining. Instead of complaining, think: "hey, maybe I can do something." And then do that something. Blah, this is probably too off-topic. So let's get back on topic with the next post. |
|
|||
Quote:
http://marc.info/?l=openbsd-ports&m=128751415019617&w=2 http://www.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/cvswe...Attic/distinfo ... only that the credible people working on it aren't anymore, and therefore the port's been removed from source control. Where's the discussion saying they wouldn't take a port if someone somehow managed one, or that base changes are required that wouldn't be accepted? |
|
||||
Quote:
|
|
|||
Perhaps this is what you were remembering...
Quote:
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp..../match=openbsd |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Wine: Your Experiences | ninjatux | Off-Topic | 10 | 4th June 2013 12:48 PM |
WINE - DragonFlyBSD | klanger | Other BSD and UNIX/UNIX-like | 2 | 13th May 2010 09:44 PM |
Wine OpenBSD | Oko | OpenBSD Packages and Ports | 11 | 4th November 2009 11:19 PM |
wine error | hamba | FreeBSD Ports and Packages | 12 | 1st December 2008 11:50 AM |
Wine on OpenBSD 4.3 | WeakSauceIII | OpenBSD Packages and Ports | 10 | 25th May 2008 07:03 PM |