Home > Windows > Wine 0.9.9 Released Wine 0.9.9 Released Submitted by Dylan 2006-03-05 Windows 26 Comments This is release 0.9.9 of Wine, a free implementation of Windows on UNIX. New features include better web browser support, recursive directory change notifications, debugger improvements, and lots of other bug fixes and under-the-hood improvements. About The Author Eugenia Loli Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker. Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli 26 Comments 2006-03-05 2:32 am kaiwai Too bad they don’t accept the patches maintained by Blastwave, as to allow it to compile, out of the box, on Solaris 2006-03-05 2:36 am MamiyaOtaru 2005 07 is the last release I can get to run WinMX. WinMX is an old app, and not mission critical for anyone, but it’s symptomatic of the sisyphean task the Wine devs face. It makes me leery of trusting Wine with important apps and yet at the same time I feel like standing up and cheering the devs. Maybe this will be the release that works with WinMX again (without any magic required). There’s always that hope driving my upgrade cycles 2006-03-05 3:02 am Dark_Knight Re: “2005 07 is the last release I can get to run WinMX. WinMX is an old app, and not mission critical for anyone, but it’s symptomatic of the sisyphean task the Wine devs face. It makes me leery of trusting Wine with important apps and yet at the same time I feel like standing up and cheering the devs.” Except in the case of P2P software there are alternatives such as Azureus, KTorrent, LimeWire, etc. I would rather Wine developers focus their resources and time on applications such as Premiere Pro 2.0 and ZBrush 2.0 where there is no Linux port offered by the developer. Edited 2006-03-05 03:08 2006-03-05 3:30 am JLF65 Also, sometimes the break is elsewhere. For example, WinRAR quit working with WINE due to increased checking in X11. WinRAR tries to open an offscreen bitmap to hold toolbar icons; it tries to make it huge in case the person (idiot) adds an insane number of icons to the toolbar, so it asks for a bitmap just under 33000 pixels wide. X11 only allows bitmaps to be 32767 wide since all coordinates in X11 are a 16bit word. Now under old versions of X11, it never checked if the bitmap asked for was too large – it simply made it. New versions check the boundaries and fail if they are greater than 32767. So now when WinRAR tries allocate its bitmap, it fails causing WinRAR to fail where it used to work. The WINE folks and the XOrg folks have been arguing over who needs to fix what. The XOrg folks think that the WINE folks should make some kind of work-around for huge bitmaps, and the WINE folks think the XOrg folks should allow bitmaps to be created at any size. 2006-03-05 3:51 am mmebane I’ve been following wine-devel for a while, and I think the consensus is that it is Wine’s fault. Last I remember reading about it was a couple of months ago, and I don’t think the fix ever went in. 2006-03-05 4:25 am Nathan O. Sounds to me like it’s WinRAR’s fault, but WINE’s problem. What happens if I try to make a bitmap 99*10^99999×99*10^99999? 2006-03-05 6:41 am luzr Sounds to me like it’s WinRAR’s fault, but WINE’s problem. What happens if I try to make a bitmap 99*10^99999×99*10^99999? It will fail on win32 as well – out of memory. 2006-03-06 6:50 pm mmebane Here’s the bug: http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3573 Here’s the link to the last email about the patch: http://www.winehq.org/pipermail/wine-devel/2005-November/042893.htm… From the thread: “This patch is a rewrite of the imagelist handling to not use a Nx1 grid, but a NxM grid with M definable in the source (currently 4).” “What Wine saves to stream is not binary compatible with windows. To make it compatible it has to be 4xN bitmap.” Someone asked about the status of this back in February, but got no reply. 2006-03-05 10:40 am bakanekov3 It’s most definitely WINE’s problem, that’s the compatibility layer, not X11. 16bitness may be a limitation of X11, but it’s not XOrg’s duty to make it behave like GDI just because WINE wants them to do so; that’s WINE’s problem to solve. 2006-03-05 2:49 am stephanem just do it guys. release 1.0 and give up and go do something else in life. 2006-03-05 3:01 am patrick_ Wine still has a lot of work. And, obviously, you’re not a programmer. This is old news… like 2 days old! I didn’t post it here because I thought someone else would, earlier. Still needs work… but getting better. 2006-03-05 3:41 am abhaysahai I am already using wine for 1) Running Windows version of firefox, for some windows specific sites like hsbc.co.in and http://www.raaga.com. 2) Lotus Notes 6.5 3) Company specific financial software. 4) Diablo II LOD I do not use Cadega, but still am able to run all my required programs. With wine 0.99 I hope to run Quake 3 more smoothly ( right now it si gittery) and thank wine for making it possible. 2006-03-05 4:06 am m_abs Isn’t Quake 3 available native for linux? Though I don’t have it my self, it’s in Gentoo’s portage. 2006-03-05 4:17 am SlackerJack Yes it is and I have the native linux version of Quake3 on cd. I believe you need pak files from the cd to play it native like that though. 2006-03-05 2:52 pm Get a Life The pk3 files are interchangeable between Windows and Linux. That was really quite helpful when id went the stubborn route and sold Quake 3 Linux separately in retail, because retailers would drop the cost of the Linux version to $5-10 while the Windows version remained at a much higher price-point. 2006-03-05 3:27 pm cutterjohn Quake3 is available for linux, and even if it wasn’t now, the Quake3 source has been GPLed and released since summer. (Of course you’d have to provide your own map paks from say your windows Q3 cd or the demo…) 2006-03-05 10:09 am asabil Quake 3 has already a native linux version 2006-03-05 5:10 pm JLF65 Quake 3 has already a native linux version Yes, but some Q3 derivatives like American McGee’s Alice aren’t available. I play it via WINE in Fedora Core. 2006-03-05 4:08 am HagerR15 This is one of those programs that can’t be replaced with an OSS version since you need to be able to unlock the books you buy. Installed flawlessly and runs as is. Perfect. 2006-03-05 6:32 am captain numerica Gee, I wish there was a Win32 port of this! 2006-03-05 7:04 am Jarsto While I’m not exactly sure why it seems there is a Windows version of Wine. It’s currently at 0.9.8 but it’s bound to be updated to 0.9.9 You can find it here: http://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=6241&package_… 2006-03-05 7:35 am nimble That made me curious, so I had a look at the Wine FAQ: “Part of the rationale for these projects is to find out areas where Wine portability is lacking. This is especially true of the ReactOS project which is a reimplementation of the Windows kernel and should thus be able to reuse most of Wine dlls. Another reason for pursuing these projects is to be able to replace a single Windows dll with its Wine counterpart. Besides being a good test for the Wine dll, this lets us detect cases where we made incorrect assumptions about how the dlls interact.” So it’s mainly for helping with Wine development, but there could be actual use cases as well. With Wine you could install and try a program as a limited user, and without having to touch C:Program Files or the registry. You can even have multiple fake Windows installations. Wine incurs less overhead than a full virtual machine, and it doesn’t require additional licenses. And some programs might actually run faster on Wine, because Wine libraries might be implemented better than the originals. 2006-03-06 5:51 pm markbrophy Also, wine can run Windows XP apps that Windows 95 is unable to run (for various reasons). I can’t tell if wine runs on older versions of Windows or not, but if it did, it would make this extremely useful! -Mark 2006-03-06 11:34 pm xtaski Interesting line of thought… Wine could revitalize old, broken Win apps for Windows… 2006-03-06 5:35 am proforma >It’s most definitely WINE’s problem, that’s the >compatibility layer, not X11. 16bitness may be a >limitation of X11, but it’s not XOrg’s duty to make >it behave like GDI just because WINE wants them to >do so; that’s WINE’s problem to solve. This is why when you have dependencies like this and software changes the FOSS model sometimes doesn’t work as well. When we were having problems with content from an Apache web site they already had modified the code instead of using it out of the box and we had problems with their servers. They actually admited this to us and that is how we found out they changed the code. We had to find a different solution from someone else using a video streaming server solution as their servers worked. 2006-03-06 1:26 pm rakamaka My system: debian pure compiled myself. Why in the world someone wants to run Windows programs from Linux?? Besides for some game addicts, which are daily used programs, like OO, FF Wierless etc needs to be run from linux box?? I dont understand it from average user point. Dont be a momentorial geek, by using windows-wine-linux. Rather I will take pride in whatever working programs on my debian system. have you ever driven your car on railtracks???