Slashdot Mirror


Wine Goes 64-Bit With Wine64

G3ckoG33k writes "Wine (Wine Is Not an Emulator) is a popular way to run Windows programs on Linux, and it has an impressive compatibility list. After 15 years of development it reached version 1.0 a few months ago. Now, Wine developer Maarten Lankhorst has succeeded in running 'Hello World' in 64-bit, natively! The 64-bit variety is unexpectedly named Wine64."

43 of 385 comments (clear)

  1. GCC changes by JohnFluxx · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Hmm, it required changes to GCC.

    Anyone know why?

    1. Re:GCC changes by QuantumG · · Score: 3, Informative

      Support for Microsoft's ABI no doubt.

      --
      How we know is more important than what we know.
    2. Re:GCC changes by Trepidity · · Score: 5, Informative

      Judging from this post, it looks like the changes involved support for mixed Windows/Linux calling conventions on x86-64 (i.e. specifying on a per-function basis whether to use the Windows or Linux calling convention).

    3. Re:GCC changes by Bromskloss · · Score: 5, Interesting

      What are the Windows and Linux calling conventions?

      --
      Swedish plasma phys. PhD student; MSc EE; knows maths, programming, electronics; finance interest; seeks opportunities
    4. Re:GCC changes by QuantumG · · Score: 5, Informative

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X86_calling_conventions

      See "Microsoft x64 calling convention"

      --
      How we know is more important than what we know.
  2. Wine64??? by brxndxn · · Score: 5, Funny

    How the hell are we supposed to know what that means?! I would've named it Beer.

    --
    --- We need more Ron Paul!
    1. Re:Wine64??? by Clay+Pigeon+-TPF-VS- · · Score: 4, Funny

      I think its fine calling it WINdows Emulator 64.

      --
      Viral software licensing is not freedom, it is in fact GNU/Socialism.
    2. Re:Wine64??? by blincoln · · Score: 5, Funny

      How the hell are we supposed to know what that means?! I would've named it Beer.

      If WINE were a Microsoft product, this new 64-bit version would be called WINE32 in order to fit in with the revised Windows system-folder naming standard. The 32-bit version would be renamed to WINO64.

      --
      "...always new atoms but always doing the same dance, remembering what the dance was yesterday." -Richard Feynman
    3. Re:Wine64??? by baka_toroi · · Score: 5, Funny

      i WIll Not get a jokE

    4. Re:Wine64??? by neo8750 · · Score: 5, Funny

      you must be new here...

    5. Re:Wine64??? by Yvan256 · · Score: 4, Funny

      Whoosh64

    6. Re:Wine64??? by Bill,+Shooter+of+Bul · · Score: 4, Funny

      Obviously, you've read the bottle before drinking one.

      --
      Well.. maybe. Or Maybe not. But Definitely not sort of.
  3. LUK by Artem+S.+Tashkinov · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Wine introduces quite a big overhead when running memory intensive applications so I think Linux Unified Kernel is what really needs attention. With this project you can use unmodified core Windows libraries thus getting the best possible compatibility.

    1. Re:LUK by QuantumG · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Meh. You can use unmodified Windows libs in WINE too.. the point, that you obviously missed, is that you can run Windows apps without Windows libs (or Windows) using WINE.

      --
      How we know is more important than what we know.
    2. Re:LUK by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

      you know what would be really cool? a linux distro that focused *only* on wine, and windows programs.

      i mean the absolute minimum you could possibly have to get a usable wine session - no underlying desktop environment, no python, no perl, no bsh/zsh/csh, no headers, just the kernel, wine, and popular windows freeware like 7-zip, utorrent, ffdshow, media player classic, dvdshrink, firefox.. a complete replacement for windows that actually runs software that people want and are already familiar with.

      no, i don't want to install a 4.5gb distro. i want linux without all the bloat from crap i'll never ever want nor need to run the windows programs i like, and not the painfully different and bizarrely bloated linux versions.

      i'd run this in a heartbeat.

      how sad and hilarious, right now i use nothing but open source software on windows, and my footprint is MUCH less than linux to do the same. i tried to install the smallest linux distro i could and still get a usable wine session.. 1gb worth of software later i'm up to the point that xp can do with 250mb.

    3. Re:LUK by David+Gerard · · Score: 4, Funny

      Winux!

      --
      http://rocknerd.co.uk
    4. Re:LUK by schnikies79 · · Score: 4, Informative

      ReactOS

      The general idea is similar to what you are looking for. It's nowhere near finished and they have been working on for god knows how long, but who knows. Someday perhaps.

      --
      Gone!
    5. Re:LUK by TheSlashaway · · Score: 5, Funny

      Whine!

    6. Re:LUK by sumdumass · · Score: 5, Funny

      I almost forgot about Gentoo. That's probably the best idea of all.

      Because of an almost masochistic love for a challenge. I think everyone should at least attempt to role their own kernel and desktop from scratch in an early Slackware type of way. But I think that is just me.

    7. Re:LUK by fractoid · · Score: 4, Informative

      It's what Lindows was until MS sued them into the ground, they changed their name to Linspire and went very very quiet about running windows apps.

      It's good to be the king!

      --
      Rampant carbon sequestration destroyed the Dinosaurs' tropical paradise. I'm here to help repair the damage.
    8. Re:LUK by Al+Dimond · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I run Linux at home and Windows at work, and seem to spend an increasingly large portion of my time on either platform in Firefox. Firefox works better on Windows than Linux. Embedded media that's automatic on Windows gives me a "plug-in needed" notification and a link to a page with nothing useful on it on Linux. I haven't had to do it for a while, but last I remember helper application selection was done in a way that made absolutely no sense on Linux.

      Lots of programs have quirky GUI layout and proportion issues on Linux but not on Windows... I think a lot of that has to do with font rendering, which is largely out of the programs' control. But to some degree it's harder in X because there's a better chance that the DPI will be set to what it actually is instead of fixed to one of two allowed artificial values.

      Windows GUIs are getting harder to make, though, because the programming style suggested by current VS versions and languages (as compared to old-school VB) is getting more and more complicated, and forcing more stuff into programmers' minds at once instead of less. Not to mention that you have to worry about more imperative concerns now while laying out forms, which really ought to be a declarative process (and mostly is in old VB... more accurately, you don't have to worry about your code being executed in design mode unless you really want it to). I should note that I don't have tons of GUI programming experience, these are just impressions formed from working with a few VB5 projects and a few VS projects at work.

  4. Does it run by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    ...Cygwin? Hah! Tricked you!

    1. Re:Does it run by eihab · · Score: 4, Interesting

      ...Cygwin? Hah! Tricked you!

      As a matter of fact it did in 2002, might still be the case.

      --
      If you can't mod them join them.
  5. Huzah! by DoofusOfDeath · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I was going to joke that a game I've wanted to work in Wine for a long time, Astral Masters, will still not work, but in a more glorious way.

    But that joke felt petty. The truth is, these guys have pulled of something pretty amazing. Congrats, guys.

  6. impressive compatibility list by theshowmecanuck · · Score: 4, Insightful

    impressive compatibility list

    Not that impressive, unless all you want to do is game. If adding an application to its compatibility list is just a popularity contest, and it seems that is all that it is, of course the fan boys interested in games will vote the most. Others will just use the 'other' operating system to run applications that they need to use in order to make a living (since they won't be able to outvote fanatic gamers). Linux/Gnu has to relax more, not less, in order to allow people to NOT have to rely on some emulator or flaky reverse engineering to make business tools work. Relax on APIs so that it is easier to port business applications over to Linux. Until that time there will never be a 'year of the Linux desk top'. People just want to use their tools, not build them.

    --
    -- I ignore anonymous replies to my comments and postings.
    1. Re: impressive compatibility list by KasperMeerts · · Score: 4, Insightful

      So you want to destroy the very mindset that created Linux in the first place? The kernel is released often and early.
      And that's great! Because bugs are squashed so much faster and features are tested immediately. It's up to distributions to act like a "buffer" between this and the end users.

      Besides, there are absolutely no ABI problems with open-source programs. And if you respond by saying that Linux needs this closed-source binaries then again, you would understand Linux wrong. We manage pretty good ourselves.

      --
      As long as there are slaughterhouses, there will be battlefields.
    2. Re: impressive compatibility list by Bert64 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Games are the most popular things for running in wine, because they are the biggest thing generally missing on the systems that run wine...
      For most other types of app there are linux native versions which run better than alien binaries running under wine.

      --
      http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
  7. Re:PowerPC arch? PlayStation 3? by AJWM · · Score: 4, Informative

    Don't hold your breath, because WINE Is Not an Emulator. Unless you've got some PPC Windows programs around, that is. It doesn't emulate the x86, just intercepts the OS and library calls.

    --
    -- Alastair
  8. Linux is first again... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    It looks as though Linux users will have native 64-bit Windows applications before most Windows users.

  9. Re:PowerPC arch? PlayStation 3? by rdwald · · Score: 4, Informative

    Getting Wine to run on a processor architecture not native to Windows would require emulating an x86 processor. Say it with me: Wine Is Not an Emulator.

  10. In the distant future by rolfwind · · Score: 3, Insightful

    most apps will run on most platforms without extra work. Or so I hope (desktop or notebook, don't see a way to make a destop app fit on a phone w/o work). They'll have an interpreted code, like lisp, which gets compiled (once, not at runtime) for whatever specific platform it's actually running on. It can be fast, doesn't have to be slow this way.

    So it won't actually be like a script. Java tried to be this universal gateway, but it just never really took off for real apps like a language should. Various libraries like QT attempted to overcome the problem. Then there is the POSIX standard, which wouldn't be bad if it was really followed.

    I just feel it's ridiculous in this day and age being tied to windows/unix/os x/some operating system because of an app made for it. It seems backwards. It's like being tied to route 66 because that's the only road your car will drive on.

  11. Who really uses it though ? by billcopc · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Every time I read about Wine, I shrug and/or roll my eyes. I've tried many times to use it, but it simply does not work for the handful of Windows apps I actually need. I gave it another try just a few months ago, and I was again left high and dry, so I turned yet again to virtual machines. At this point, I have stopped caring about the project.

    For the inevitable flamers among you, here's the short list of Windows apps I need, that Wine fails to support:

    - Photoshop CS3
    - Office 2007
    - MSIE 6/7

    IE6 runs, sure, but leaks memory like there's no tomorrow, so I have to kill -9 it after a few minutes lest I face a swap-spiral of doom. And don't try to tell me to use The Gimp and OO.o, I don't need "A photo editor" and "An office suite", I need those specific apps because those are the formats my peers and clients use. If it were just me in my little bubble, I'd be quite happy with unbranded alternatives, but my rent doesn't pay itself.

    Now one would think that these major apps would be high on the priority list, as I'm hopefully not the only (commercial) web guy trying to use Linux as a serious desktop, and getting them to run perfectly would effectively make Windows redundant for a large number of people, not just web devs. I find it puzzling that Wine can run something like World of Warcraft, but not MS Outlook. Don't get me wrong, I loves me some Warcrack, but it doesn't pay my bills.

    --
    -Billco, Fnarg.com
    1. Re:Who really uses it though ? by Drinking+Bleach · · Score: 4, Funny

      IE6 runs, sure, but leaks memory like there's no tomorrow, so I have to kill -9 it after a few minutes lest I face a swap-spiral of doom.

      So it's just like Windows!

    2. Re:Who really uses it though ? by Quarters · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Maybe in your haste to spew out your idiotic response you missed the part where the poster logically mentioned that he does not work alone. Have you ever tried to open a 16bbp, LAB color, layered, Photoshop CS3 document in GIMP? The second the poster gets a PSD file from a client or a coworker he's screwed if WINE can't load the correct version of Photoshop. Before you come back and say "Well he should just teach his clients and coworkers to use a more open format" please provide a list of open formats that store layers, adjustments, filters, etc.. - all of the tweakable settings you would need to properly adjust source art. A collapsed PNG is great for final delivery, but it sucks as a source art storage/collaboration format.

    3. Re:Who really uses it though ? by Savage-Rabbit · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Now one would think that these major apps would be high on the priority list, as I'm hopefully not the only (commercial) web guy trying to use Linux as a serious desktop, and getting them to run perfectly would effectively make Windows redundant for a large number of people, not just web devs. I find it puzzling that Wine can run something like World of Warcraft, but not MS Outlook. Don't get me wrong, I loves me some Warcrack, but it doesn't pay my bills.

      If you can't use the Linux native alternatives to Photoshop CS3, Office 2007, MSIE 6/7 under Wine you should use Windows, or consider something like the VMware/Parallels simulators. That's what most Linux users I know do. If you simply can't stand the sight of Windows the only other alternative would be OS X where you at least get native CS 3 and MS Office. Wine is a third party implementation of the Windows API created without any help from Microsoft and even the repackaged versions like CrossOver Office don't support MISE and Office 2007 all that well. This should not surprise anybody, for most Linux users Office 2007 and MISE aren't high on the priorities list.

      --
      Only to idiots, are orders laws.
      -- Henning von Tresckow
    4. Re:Who really uses it though ? by Hal_Porter · · Score: 3, Interesting

      That's like escaping from prison and then spending all your time in a small basement apartment.

      --
      echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
    5. Re:Who really uses it though ? by testerus · · Score: 3, Insightful

      This should not surprise anybody, for most Linux users Office 2007 and MSIE aren't high on the priorities list.

      According to Codeweaver's Top Lists Internet Explorer 7 has 294 votes and $3866.44 pledges (rank 3 and 11). Microsoft Office 2007 has 219 votes and pledges of $9026.44 (rank 5 and 1) respectively. I would not call that minor.

  12. Re:bad move by Mr+Z · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I don't agree w/ Eric on this one. The shift from 32-bit to 64-bit systems has been darn near seamless as compared to previous transitions. That's a far cry from the 8-to-16 jump or the 16-to-32 jump.

    Honestly, most people can't tell that they've shifted from 32-bit to 64-bit. If there wasn't a dialog box or a sticker that told them they'd switched, they wouldn't know.

    Now this wouldn't be /. without a bad car analogy. Going from 8-bit to 16-bit was like going from horse-drawn buggies to the early Model Ts--a big change. Going from 16-bit to 32-bit was like going from these early, slow cars to the more recognizable cars of the 30s onward. Cars that actually had starters and drove at reasonable speeds. Each step provided a noticeable difference in the travel experience and it brought with it a whole new round of infrastructure requirements.

    Going from 32-bit to 64-bit is like going from a gasoline engine to a hybrid. Sure, it's a change in the underlying mechanism, but it doesn't fundamentally change the driving experience all that much.

  13. Kudos by gatkinso · · Score: 4, Insightful

    For asking about something which you are unfamiliar.

    Such an attitude is refreshing, usually you just run into folks like the AC below who are a-holes.

    However the link provided down below in this thread is a great place to start reading. Have fun!

    --
    I am very small, utmostly microscopic.
  14. or just use CodeWeavers CrossOver. by toby · · Score: 4, Informative

    Which supports all of the above for a small cost.

    Any dollar NOT spent on Microsoft makes the world a better place.

    --
    you had me at #!
    1. Re:or just use CodeWeavers CrossOver. by testerus · · Score: 4, Informative

      Neither Photoshop CS3 nor Internet Explorer 7 work using Crossover. Also it does not support all applications of Microsoft Office 2007.

    2. Re:or just use CodeWeavers CrossOver. by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Which supports all of the above for a small cost.

      Except that it doesn't. Let's check their compatibility database:

  15. Re:WHY?? by Daengbo · · Score: 3, Informative

    Low memory prices started the rapid uptake of Vista 64 in about April. This trend has continued. 64-bit will be the default setup for ISVs by next year when Windows 7 comes out (though it will be available in both 32 and 64 bit versions). Windows 8 is said to be 64 bit only. Win7 will promote 64-bit during the transition.

    Agree with the Win6.5 comment, though.