Hi All,
There were some reports that Windows programs which had been successfully run under earlier versions of Wine in Puppies published before Bionic Beaver would not run under Bionic Beaver. [I personally don't have a clear recollection of such problems --well, maybe: I have a dim recollection of one program not opening. But that program, itself, is circa 1998 and rather unique, so I may have classified it as "one off."] But having previously repackaged portable-wine using Version2013's wine-3.3_v2.1 for personal use, I've uploaded it.
You can find it, together with md5 and sha1 here: http://www.mediafire.com/?mso58025te7mz
As with my previous efforts, all credit should be given to Version2013 for his work in developing Wine pets for Puppy Linux, and to Shinobar and the Japanese Team for their creation of the portable vehicle. See this post, http://murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic. ... 452#971452 for details and instructions.
mikesLr
Portable Wine
Portable Wine version 3.3_v2.1 (Especially 4 Bionic & later)
Last edited by mikeslr on Sat 21 Apr 2018, 14:16, edited 1 time in total.
Thank you, festus, for the report.
Your post brought to my attention that this thread's title had been misleading. I've edited it.
It had been Version2013 practice to often (always?) publish four versions of each 32-bit Wine iteration. But recently, and at least for Wine 3.3, he compiled six versions: two using Puppy 4.31, two using Racy 5.5 and two using Tahrpup 6.0.5. The difference between each of the two under a compiling Puppy is whether it is "stripped" or not, with the recommendation that the "not stripped" version be used if assistance from WineHq might be important. The difference in compiling agents used, as far as I know, has to do with what glibc (and perhaps other foundations) will be available in the target operating system: Wine requiring newer glibc libraries "may" fail on older Puppies lacking such newer glibc libraries. See http://murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic. ... 240#985240.
Except for once when, half-way thru repackaging I realized that I had inadvertently downloaded a "not stripped" pet and was to lazy to start again, I start with a "stripped" pet. WineHq isn't likely to offer any help concerning a version of Wine modified not only to run as an SFS, but as an SFS configured to run as an External Application.
While there may be advantages in using a version of Wine expecting newer glibc's, before Bionic Beaver, I hadn't experienced any practical difference; and running multiple Puppies and Dogs, prefer one version which can have the widest application. The oldest Puppy I'm currently maintaining is Slacko 5.7. Hence, I chose Version2013's compilation of the stripped version compiled under Racy.
In short, I expect this build to be functional under any Series 5 or later Puppy.
mikesLr
Your post brought to my attention that this thread's title had been misleading. I've edited it.
It had been Version2013 practice to often (always?) publish four versions of each 32-bit Wine iteration. But recently, and at least for Wine 3.3, he compiled six versions: two using Puppy 4.31, two using Racy 5.5 and two using Tahrpup 6.0.5. The difference between each of the two under a compiling Puppy is whether it is "stripped" or not, with the recommendation that the "not stripped" version be used if assistance from WineHq might be important. The difference in compiling agents used, as far as I know, has to do with what glibc (and perhaps other foundations) will be available in the target operating system: Wine requiring newer glibc libraries "may" fail on older Puppies lacking such newer glibc libraries. See http://murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic. ... 240#985240.
Except for once when, half-way thru repackaging I realized that I had inadvertently downloaded a "not stripped" pet and was to lazy to start again, I start with a "stripped" pet. WineHq isn't likely to offer any help concerning a version of Wine modified not only to run as an SFS, but as an SFS configured to run as an External Application.
While there may be advantages in using a version of Wine expecting newer glibc's, before Bionic Beaver, I hadn't experienced any practical difference; and running multiple Puppies and Dogs, prefer one version which can have the widest application. The oldest Puppy I'm currently maintaining is Slacko 5.7. Hence, I chose Version2013's compilation of the stripped version compiled under Racy.
In short, I expect this build to be functional under any Series 5 or later Puppy.
mikesLr
Portable Wine version 3.3_v2.1 (Especially 4 Bionic & later)
Hi mikeslr,
Thanks for the above.
Wine is something that I have used in Puppy for many years but only ever to launch Windows Portable Apps
held in Windows XP or Win10. Using Portable wine means that nothing has to be installed in the Pup itself.
In the screenshot below Bionic is running from the 3rd partition (sdd3) of a 4 partition USB3 stick.
Portable Apps is installed on the D: drive of Win 10 (sda6)
Your Portable Wine is held on a general purpose Linux partition sdb6
Both sda6 and sdb6 are set to automount.
The syntax for the desktop launcher is in the attached screenshot but I normally go on to substitute a Portable Apps
icon for the Wine icon and edit the text to read PortApps. Not all apps run in Linux particularly if they are hardware
related but most do. You can actually install, remove or update the Windows Apps whilst in Linux.
Nice to be able to run 64-bit VLC but Chromecast detection is currently problematic.
Screenshot:
Please press F11 to toggle into full-screen then click on link below;---
https://drive.google.com/uc?export=view ... VmpjMka9AB
Thanks for the above.
Wine is something that I have used in Puppy for many years but only ever to launch Windows Portable Apps
held in Windows XP or Win10. Using Portable wine means that nothing has to be installed in the Pup itself.
In the screenshot below Bionic is running from the 3rd partition (sdd3) of a 4 partition USB3 stick.
Portable Apps is installed on the D: drive of Win 10 (sda6)
Your Portable Wine is held on a general purpose Linux partition sdb6
Both sda6 and sdb6 are set to automount.
The syntax for the desktop launcher is in the attached screenshot but I normally go on to substitute a Portable Apps
icon for the Wine icon and edit the text to read PortApps. Not all apps run in Linux particularly if they are hardware
related but most do. You can actually install, remove or update the Windows Apps whilst in Linux.
Nice to be able to run 64-bit VLC but Chromecast detection is currently problematic.
Screenshot:
Please press F11 to toggle into full-screen then click on link below;---
https://drive.google.com/uc?export=view ... VmpjMka9AB
- Attachments
-
- Logo_PortableApps.png
- (16.22 KiB) Downloaded 3588 times
-
- Screenshot(1).png
- (22.83 KiB) Downloaded 3867 times
Regards ETP
[url=http://tinyurl.com/pxzq8o9][img]https://s17.postimg.cc/tl19y14y7/You_Tube_signature80px.png[/img][/url]
[url=http://tinyurl.com/kennels2/]Kennels[/url]
[url=http://tinyurl.com/pxzq8o9][img]https://s17.postimg.cc/tl19y14y7/You_Tube_signature80px.png[/img][/url]
[url=http://tinyurl.com/kennels2/]Kennels[/url]
Alternative to Portable Wine
Something seems to have changed in the structure of Wine with Series 4. I have not been able to create a functional Portable Wine. Perhaps someone with a greater command of bash scripting will be more successful. The previously published Wine portables based on Wine 1.6, 1.7, 2.16 and 3.3 are still available. But, if for whatever reason you need or desire to use Wine 4 without it, and Windows programs you install occupying perhaps Gbs of 'Puppy Space', you'll find a recipe for partial externalization here: http://murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic. ... 91#1027791
Untested. But I suspect that technique may also work with WOW, the 64-bit version of Wine.
Untested. But I suspect that technique may also work with WOW, the 64-bit version of Wine.
Re: Alternative to Portable Wine
I had trouble getting the decompressed PET file to turn into a SFS. Certain files would not be put into the file system. I figured out that the problem was with writing to symbolic links. The PET file referred to /usr/lib64, but that is merely a symlink to /usr/lib. I changed the name of the folder in the SFS, and it worked.mikeslr wrote:Something seems to have changed in the structure of Wine with Series 4. I have not been able to create a functional Portable Wine.
I also changed the /root/Choices to refer to the appropriate folder, /etc/xdg/rox.sourceforge.net , meaning EXE files automatically open in Wine.
I don't know if that was your problem with getting Wine 1.4 to work, but that is what I did to get a working Wine64 1.4 SFS file. I even added the Mono, Gecko, and Gecko64 files, and made a separate SFS file for the initial Wine Prefix (i.e. /root/.wine).
I hope this is helpful. I'm not including my SFS file because my upload is quite slow. But I think my directions are clear enough.
Edit: To be clear, I used the Wine64 4.0 PET from version2013 in his Wine Pet thread. Just go towards the end and follow any link to his site, and it will have all of the Wine versions.
64Wine as sfs
G'day trlkly,
Your post tells me you've done what I'm trying to do:
Run 64-bit wine as an sfs based on version2013's 64bit-pet.
I'm using the wine64-4.1.2.pet and have created a "full" sfs from the expanded pet, following your steps (I hope) and taking care with pet-sym-links that disappear in an expanded pet.
I have just tried this sfs in BionicPup64.
I ran winecfg in a terminal which created the root/.wine directory.
But the only programs that would run from this via either system directory (system32 and syswow64) were notepad and explorer, and wordpad from the WindowsNT Accessories directory.
Other Windows programs included in Wine gave error messages when run in a terminal (screenshot - if readable).
In my 32-bit Wine (4.0 from version2013) I run various Windows-based programs as a combined sfs, which will run in a few 64-bit Pups, but not all.
I'm trying to get wine64 running to install these programs in a 'pure' 64-bit Wine+programs sfs.
Have you been able to install a range of MS-based programs in your Wine64 sfs?
I wondered if wine64 needs the 32-bit directories (mentioned as included by version2013 in his Wine thread)?
David S.
Your post tells me you've done what I'm trying to do:
Run 64-bit wine as an sfs based on version2013's 64bit-pet.
I'm using the wine64-4.1.2.pet and have created a "full" sfs from the expanded pet, following your steps (I hope) and taking care with pet-sym-links that disappear in an expanded pet.
I have just tried this sfs in BionicPup64.
I ran winecfg in a terminal which created the root/.wine directory.
But the only programs that would run from this via either system directory (system32 and syswow64) were notepad and explorer, and wordpad from the WindowsNT Accessories directory.
Other Windows programs included in Wine gave error messages when run in a terminal (screenshot - if readable).
In my 32-bit Wine (4.0 from version2013) I run various Windows-based programs as a combined sfs, which will run in a few 64-bit Pups, but not all.
I'm trying to get wine64 running to install these programs in a 'pure' 64-bit Wine+programs sfs.
Have you been able to install a range of MS-based programs in your Wine64 sfs?
I wondered if wine64 needs the 32-bit directories (mentioned as included by version2013 in his Wine thread)?
David S.
- Attachments
-
- 64wine-412-sfs-Bionic64pup-issues.jpg
- various program windows when trying the wine64 sfs
- (130.7 KiB) Downloaded 1913 times
Re: mikeslr
I don't have any problem running the 3.3_v.2.1 build. As I understand it, version2013 uses the following designations to identify the Puppy Version he compiled Wine under: v.1 - puppy 431; v.2 - racy 5.5 and v.3 - tahrpup 6.0.5 PAE. I've always used his v.2 pets: (a) I wasn't running any Puppies published before racy and (b) figured that version2013 was publishing different builds because those compiled on newer Puppies might/would not be backward-compatible with older Puppies. I haven't noticed any problem with forward-compatibility. The "racy" compiles have functioned in Puppies from Lupu (32-bit) thru XenialPup64. Remember, however, the reason I built the 3.3 portable, http://murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic. ... 245#989245kuman11 wrote:mikeslr,
Which Portable wine would be best to use in your Slacko 5.7.CE?
-
ttuuxxx
- Posts: 11171
- Joined: Sat 05 May 2007, 10:00
- Location: Ontario Canada,Sydney Australia
- Contact:
2.16 can be found at http://smokey01.com/ttuuxxx/Wine-Portable/
ttuuxxx
ttuuxxx
http://audio.online-convert.com/ <-- excellent site
http://samples.mplayerhq.hu/A-codecs/ <-- Codec Test Files
http://html5games.com/ <-- excellent HTML5 games :)
http://samples.mplayerhq.hu/A-codecs/ <-- Codec Test Files
http://html5games.com/ <-- excellent HTML5 games :)
How do I uninstall it?!
Howdy!
Tried the portable, wasn't for me, couldn't get it to work, wanted to load a standard wine sfs, uninstalled (searched and deleted) the portable as well as I know how, ran sfs_load and loaded the new wine sfs after a reboot.
Then I ran winecfg
And I still get
I've now unloaded the sfs.
Please tell me how to get rid of any trace of the portable wine so that i can run this sfs.
Tried the portable, wasn't for me, couldn't get it to work, wanted to load a standard wine sfs, uninstalled (searched and deleted) the portable as well as I know how, ran sfs_load and loaded the new wine sfs after a reboot.
Then I ran winecfg
And I still get
Code: Select all
wine: chdir to /mnt/home/wine-portable-2.16/wine-data : No such file or directory Please tell me how to get rid of any trace of the portable wine so that i can run this sfs.
Hi steve_s,
Not sure what you did to install portable-wine, or uninstall it. The installation instructions (in short) were download the tar.gz, unpack it, right-click the resulting folder and select "register" [or, if 'register' didn't appear when the folder was right-clicked, select Look inside, and then Left-click the register script]. Installation only installs a couple of files which should be uninstallable via Menu>Setup>Puppy Package Manager >uninstall>wine-portable-1.0.
I also don't know where you obtained the wine.sfs as version2013 only publishes pets. Did you package your own?
It is probable that the only significant file is /usr/bin/wine.sh.
At any rate, to completely remove any traces of wine-portable, first unload the wine.sfs you mentioned and/or uninstall any wine. [You can sfs-load/install it after you've cleared your system of any 'ghosts' of wine-portable].
Open Menu>file-system>pfind file finder. Type wine into the search box and select System files as the location to search. Then file browse to any file reported and delete it/them. Probably not worth deleting pixmaps/icons. But do delete any /usr/share/applications/wineXXX.desktop files.
Then do it again, this time using wine.sh as your search term.
Not sure what you did to install portable-wine, or uninstall it. The installation instructions (in short) were download the tar.gz, unpack it, right-click the resulting folder and select "register" [or, if 'register' didn't appear when the folder was right-clicked, select Look inside, and then Left-click the register script]. Installation only installs a couple of files which should be uninstallable via Menu>Setup>Puppy Package Manager >uninstall>wine-portable-1.0.
I also don't know where you obtained the wine.sfs as version2013 only publishes pets. Did you package your own?
It is probable that the only significant file is /usr/bin/wine.sh.
At any rate, to completely remove any traces of wine-portable, first unload the wine.sfs you mentioned and/or uninstall any wine. [You can sfs-load/install it after you've cleared your system of any 'ghosts' of wine-portable].
Open Menu>file-system>pfind file finder. Type wine into the search box and select System files as the location to search. Then file browse to any file reported and delete it/them. Probably not worth deleting pixmaps/icons. But do delete any /usr/share/applications/wineXXX.desktop files.
Then do it again, this time using wine.sh as your search term.
Thanks! I had started that, then realized i had backed up my safe file right before I had installed the portable wine. So I cheated and swapped saves.mikeslr wrote:Hi steve_s,
Not sure what you did to install portable-wine, or uninstall it. The installation instructions (in short) were download the tar.gz, unpack it, right-click the resulting folder and select "register" [or, if 'register' didn't appear when the folder was right-clicked, select Look inside, and then Left-click the register script]. Installation only installs a couple of files which should be uninstallable via Menu>Setup>Puppy Package Manager >uninstall>wine-portable-1.0.
I also don't know where you obtained the wine.sfs as version2013 only publishes pets. Did you package your own?
It is probable that the only significant file is /usr/bin/wine.sh.
At any rate, to completely remove any traces of wine-portable, first unload the wine.sfs you mentioned and/or uninstall any wine. [You can sfs-load/install it after you've cleared your system of any 'ghosts' of wine-portable].
Open Menu>file-system>pfind file finder. Type wine into the search box and select System files as the location to search. Then file browse to any file reported and delete it/them. Probably not worth deleting pixmaps/icons. But do delete any /usr/share/applications/wineXXX.desktop files.
Then do it again, this time using wine.sh as your search term.
but thank you for posting that, cause it'll help someone that wasn't as lucky with their save file! Appreciated!