Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 12

Thread: Wine 1.5.23 Released With A Lot Of Work

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    13,397

    Default Wine 1.5.23 Released With A Lot Of Work

    Phoronix: Wine 1.5.23 Released With A Lot Of Work

    Wine 1.5.23 was released this morning as the latest bi-weekly development release...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTI4OTk

  2. #2
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    674

    Default

    2 types of boring unnews: cloud/virtualization and wine related. Both overrated.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    403

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mark45 View Post
    2 types of boring unnews: cloud/virtualization and wine related. Both overrated.
    Erm, running Office 2007 on Linux without any noticable flaws is pretty big deal to many.

    Another thing that stood out to me:

    Quote Originally Posted by http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=MTI4OTk
    - HTTPS support no longer dependent on OpenSSL.
    So I looked around on Winehq:

    Quote Originally Posted by http://wiki.winehq.org/Secur32
    One confusing thing is that winhttp and wininet don't use schannel, and instead use OpenSSL directly to implement SSL and TLS. This can lead to confusing differences in certificate verification between applications. Ideally, schannel would use crypt32 for certificate chain verification, and winhttp and wininet would use schannel.
    Looking in it's git tree I see commit: 'winhttp: Use schannel for HTTPS connection by defaul and get rid of OpenSSL dependency.'

    Which reminded me of this.

    Would have added value if this was mentioned in the article...

  4. #4

    Default

    I am quite happy with it, I'd like to see this fixed however.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    62

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rexilion View Post
    Erm, running Office 2007 on Linux without any noticable flaws is pretty big deal to many.
    But how do I game?
    I remember the procedure a few years ago :
    - have a readily available Windows installation (this quite defeat the purpose) to download and test warez games, with some large free space on your disk and a fast internet connection
    - crack the warez game, run it on Windows
    - optionnally virus scan the shit of everything before you've run it!
    - if it ran fine under Windows, try it under Wine
    - repeat until you find a game that works or is usable

    I don't have Windows anymore and when I did, I stayed all the time in it anyway.

    Lately I copied about 8 cracked games from a shared drive over the Internet, which supposedly run fine on Windows. Only a couple worked (and with some sound woes). But I'm running "Wine 1.4" which is maybe wrong. wine --version reports "wine-1.4" which confuses the hell out of me (where is the third number? 1.4.what? maybe 1.4.0 but I'm not sure)
    So.. should I add a wine 1.5 ppa and if so.. Where will I get the games. And can I get a free antivirus such as AVG for Wine?

    All these little questions make me not bother. I have Dosbox and that's it.. and I'm not even really using it because I find it painful (it doesn't even come with a text editor and lack most DOS commands)
    With all these concerns unsanswered, I have no reason to care for Wine. I'll wait for Steam Linux instead (well, I have it already but to run the flagship game, TF2, I have to upgrade from geforce 7 to geforce 8)

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    403

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by grok View Post
    But how do I game?
    I remember the procedure a few years ago :
    - have a readily available Windows installation (this quite defeat the purpose) to download and test warez games, with some large free space on your disk and a fast internet connection
    - crack the warez game, run it on Windows
    - optionnally virus scan the shit of everything before you've run it!
    - if it ran fine under Windows, try it under Wine
    - repeat until you find a game that works or is usable
    Yes, same here for the first few years. Ditching Windows felt kind off weird, even though I did not discover wine though.

    Quote Originally Posted by grok View Post
    Lately I copied about 8 cracked games from a shared drive over the Internet, which supposedly run fine on Windows. Only a couple worked (and with some sound woes). But I'm running "Wine 1.4" which is maybe wrong. wine --version reports "wine-1.4" which confuses the hell out of me (where is the third number? 1.4.what? maybe 1.4.0 but I'm not sure)
    So.. should I add a wine 1.5 ppa and if so.. Where will I get the games. And can I get a free antivirus such as AVG for Wine?
    Wine-1.4 is the latest stable wine branch. Which is at 1.4.1 right now or something. I use 1.5.22 which is still getting better for Office 2007.

    Who needs a virusscanner for Wine? Just ditch the prefix? Furthermore, you only run a game under wine not a full browser suite with it's vulnerable plugins. And since wine is a rewritten according to Windows convention, it does not carry all of it's vulnerablity's per definition.

    Quote Originally Posted by grok View Post
    All these little questions make me not bother. I have Dosbox and that's it.. and I'm not even really using it because I find it painful (it doesn't even come with a text editor and lack most DOS commands)
    With all these concerns unsanswered, I have no reason to care for Wine. I'll wait for Steam Linux instead (well, I have it already but to run the flagship game, TF2, I have to upgrade from geforce 7 to geforce 8)
    Yes, I agree native is nice. But I don't think that Office 2007 will have a native linux binary any time soon...

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    62

    Default

    Thanks, I can see more clearly through the mazes of branches (ubuntu 12.04 proposes me a choice between 1.2, 1.3 and 1.4)
    Just a few years back you would have wine 1.0.1 as a stable version or use a current branch instead.

    Yes I won't suffer browser risks, attacks on Windows services etc. but I wonder what happens if I just run an infected .exe. This way I find myself running malicious code (even with user rights only, but malware can content itself doing stuff that you can do as a mere user).
    Even with no browser, java, flash, RPC, adobe reader etc. vulnerabilities there's an issue if I just copy or download and run the code . I'm mainly thinking about dubious cracks and VST plugins as infection vectors on Windows. (and I'd hope Wine is so good it successfully run the malware, even if it's only contained into the equivalent of c:\documents and settings\ and all my user accessible data)

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    403

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by grok View Post
    Yes I won't suffer browser risks, attacks on Windows services etc. but I wonder what happens if I just run an infected .exe. This way I find myself running malicious code (even with user rights only, but malware can content itself doing stuff that you can do as a mere user).
    Even with no browser, java, flash, RPC, adobe reader etc. vulnerabilities there's an issue if I just copy or download and run the code . I'm mainly thinking about dubious cracks and VST plugins as infection vectors on Windows. (and I'd hope Wine is so good it successfully run the malware, even if it's only contained into the equivalent of c:\documents and settings\ and all my user accessible data)
    Just run 'ps aux' in a terminal and see if wineserver keeps running after you close your last windows app. If it is, something is keeping it running and you have to wipe your wineprefix.

    That is how I would handle it.

    However, I rely on wine to crash prematurely before *something* tries to do something smart

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Linuxland
    Posts
    4,722

    Default

    Separate user, chroot, and no Z: link to the linux fs would go pretty far in protecting from windows viruses.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    403

    Red face

    Quote Originally Posted by curaga View Post
    Separate user, chroot, and no Z: link to the linux fs would go pretty far in protecting from windows viruses.
    Yeah good start, but that would not solve your problem of malicious software connecting to X...

    You could also just run Windows in a VM











    *** ducks and hides ***

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •