Hello,
With the activation of ARM and PPC arches in Fedora going forward this introduces a
minor issue for the mingw-wine-gecko package. It has a, not completely required,
Requires on wine-common. Since Wine does not support PPC (and should not be expected
to) there is no wine-common package
Version 2.47 is currently in beta and wine-gecko needs another round of backports
for successful building.
A Fedora 23 build fails due to missing D3D11 definitions. At least
"CD3D11_SHADER_RESOURCE_VIEW_DESC" is required.
Erik, could you work on getting the backport in Fedora 22/
Michael Cronenworth schreef op vr 24-07-2015 om 11:11 [-0500]:
> Hello,
>
> Another wine-gecko update brings another set of updated headers
> needed to build it.
Hey Michael,
I just prepared updated mingw-headers/mingw-crt packages containing all
changes required to get the lates
Hello,
Another wine-gecko update brings another set of updated headers needed to build it.
The following header files must be updated to their latest version.
locationapi.h
textstor.h
msinkaut.h NEW
msinkaut_i.c NEW
d2d1_1helper.h
versionhelpers.h NEW
sdkddkver.h
The locationapi library must
eas: you should now be able to build wine-gecko and wine on f18
Regards,
Erik
___
mingw mailing list
mingw@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/mingw
s the wine maintainer can build and push updated
>versions of mingw-wine-gecko and wine itself to f18
>
> Does this sound like a good plan to you folks?
Okay, so with the test mass rebuild completed we're about to enter step
3 of the plan. The test mass rebuild showed that all b
place for the time
> the packages have to spend in updates-testing)
> 4. Afterwards the wine maintainer can build and push updated
> versions of mingw-wine-gecko and wine itself to f18
>
> Does this sound like a good plan to you folks?
>
>
&g
esting)
4. Afterwards the wine maintainer can build and push updated
versions of mingw-wine-gecko and wine itself to f18
Does this sound like a good plan to you folks?
Sounds fine to me.
CC'ing wine/gecko maintainer.
___
mingw mailing list
Erik van Pienbroek schreef op zo 21-07-2013 om 16:12 [+0200]:
> 1. Update mingw-w64 in rawhide and f19-updates-testing to
>today's snapshot
I forgot to mention that today's mingw-w64 snapshot also resolves an
issue where certain binaries (like webkitgtk3's GtkLauncher-3.exe)
couldn't be execut
the packages have to spend in updates-testing)
4. Afterwards the wine maintainer can build and push updated
versions of mingw-wine-gecko and wine itself to f18
Does this sound like a good plan to you folks?
Regards,
Erik van Pienbroek
___
min
On 07/13/2013 01:06 PM, Erik van Pienbroek wrote:
For comparison, here's the difference between F18 and F19:
Fedora 18: 20121110 snapshot, r5451
Fedora 19: 20130614 snapshot, r5904
What are your opinions about pushing a more modern mingw-w64 snapshot to
Fedora 18?
If we don't update, F18 will
Michael Cronenworth schreef op do 11-07-2013 om 14:42 [-0500]:
> In order to have wine-gecko build on F18 it needs at least the following
> upstream commits.
>
> http://sourceforge.net/p/mingw-w64/code/5500/
> http://sourceforge.net/p/mingw-w64/code/5505/
> http://sourceforge.ne
In order to have wine-gecko build on F18 it needs at least the following
upstream commits.
http://sourceforge.net/p/mingw-w64/code/5500/
http://sourceforge.net/p/mingw-w64/code/5505/
http://sourceforge.net/p/mingw-w64/code/5512/
http://sourceforge.net/p/mingw-w64/code/5530/
http://sourceforge.net
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=577951
Andreas Bierfert changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=577951
--- Comment #33 from Jon Ciesla 2012-03-21 08:40:12 EDT
---
Git done (by process-git-requests).
--
Configure bugmail: https:/
Status Whiteboard|BuildFails |
Flag||fedora-cvs?
--- Comment #32 from Andreas Bierfert
2012-03-21 05:56:07 EDT ---
New Package SCM Request
===
Package Name: mingw-wine-gecko
Short
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=577951
--- Comment #31 from Andreas Bierfert
2012-03-21 05:55:32 EDT ---
The directories are owned by wine-common. I will add a requir
/gecko/ and
%{_datadir}/wine/ ? If none of the core wine packages do, might want to have
both mingw32-wine-gecko and mingw64-wine-gecko own these directories to make
sure they get removed on uninstall.
By the way, if you want to get rid of some more rpm boilerplate code, these are
no longer needed
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=577951
--- Comment #29 from Andreas Bierfert
2012-03-21 05:35:18 EDT ---
Thanks for picking it up so fast. I have made scratch builds
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=577951
Michael Cronenworth changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
---
Hi Andreas, lets get wine-gecko in Fedora!
$ md5sum rpmbuild/SOURCES/wine-mozilla-1.5-src.tar.bz2
e1d9ba8914582d382b808332e4db0a54 wine-mozilla-1.5-src.tar.bz2
# wget $SOURCE0
$ md5sum $SOURCE0
e1d9ba8914582d382b808332e4db0a54 wine-mozilla-1.5-src.tar.bz2
Your spec looks great. Let's
-wine-gecko.spec
http://fedora.lowlatency.de/review/mingw-wine-gecko-1.5-1.fc17.src.rpm
koji:
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3914963
changes:
- upgrade to latest wine gecko (1.5)
- cleanup spec including changes from comment 25
I have prepared an upgrade to wine 1.5.0 for f17
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=577951
--- Comment #26 from Andreas Bierfert
2012-03-11 17:44:23 EDT ---
Thanks for the info. I will try to upgrade to latest wine
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=577951
--- Comment #25 from Erik van Pienbroek
2012-03-10 11:00:46 EST ---
Hey Andreas,
The mingw-w64 toolchain has just been added t
to change mingw-wine-gecko spec file to work
> with the current MinGW toolchain in Fedora
This is not possible. MinGW is not sufficient for Wine Gecko compilation.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You
be in F16.
My suggestion at this point is to change mingw-wine-gecko spec file to work
with the current MinGW toolchain in Fedora; once the mingw-w64 toolchain is
imported it is easy to convert it over.
I would be happy to review this package if you make these changes.
Note that similar to t
Summary|Review Request: |Review Request:
|mingw32-wine-gecko - MinGW |mingw-wine-gecko - MinGW
|Gecko library required for |Gecko library required for
|Wine|Wine
version:
http://fedora.lowlatency.de/review/mingw-wine-gecko.spec
http://fedora.lowlatency.de/review/mingw-wine-gecko-1.2.0-3.fc16.src.rpm
http://fedora.lowlatency.de/review/mingw32-wine-gecko-1.2.0-3.fc16.noarch.rpm
http://fedora.lowlatency.de/review/mingw64-wine-gecko-1.2.0-3.fc16.noarch.rpm
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=577951
--- Comment #21 from Erik van Pienbroek
2011-06-21 14:37:28 EDT ---
Very nice to see that you based this package on the new Min
leave feedback.
Once all pieces of cross/mingw64 are in rawhide I hope someone will review:
http://fedora.lowlatency.de/review/mingw-wine-gecko.spec
http://fedora.lowlatency.de/review/mingw-wine-gecko-1.2.0-2.fc16.src.rpm
http://fedora.lowlatency.de/review/mingw32-wine-gecko-1.2.0-2.fc16
On Sun, 2011-04-10 at 16:35 +0200, Kai Tietz wrote:
> The trunk version is a stable version. We on mingw-w64 are using
> rolling releases. Which means our trunk is in general stable. New
> features are prepared in our experimental tree and first after making
> sure that they are stable enough, we m
Kai Tietz schreef op zo 10-04-2011 om 16:35 [+0200]:
> 2011/4/10 Erik van Pienbroek :
> > I'm okay with switching to the trunk branch, but I don't know how stable
> > the trunk branch is at the moment and whether compatibility-breaking
> > changes are expected in the coming months. Perhaps the ming
ooking forward to see
>> this happening for F16.
>>
>> I would also like to finally introduce wine gecko with this happening.
>> However, while trying to build/patch version 1.2.0 to work with the
>> fedora cross toolchain I came across a couple of issues which lead me
> I would also like to finally introduce wine gecko with this happening.
> However, while trying to build/patch version 1.2.0 to work with the
> fedora cross toolchain I came across a couple of issues which lead me to
> the following requests:
>
> o Can we build the headers with --
CC||ja...@codeweavers.com
--- Comment #19 from Jacek Caban 2011-03-16 16:39:45
EDT ---
Hi all,
I'm maintainer of Wine Gecko. We've just released the new version:
http://www.winehq.org/pipermail/wine-devel/2011-Ma
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=577951
--- Comment #18 from Nerijus Baliunas
2011-02-06 21:04:50 EST ---
Regarding error in Comment 12 - it seems it tries to compile
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=577951
Andreas Bierfert changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=577951
--- Comment #16 from Stephen Kitt 2010-11-24 09:55:02 EST ---
I don't know what's causing the problem in Comment 12, but I have
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=577951
--- Comment #15 from Nerijus Baliunas
2010-11-23 20:25:42 EST ---
This patch does not help on F14, I still get error as in Comm
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=577951
--- Comment #14 from Erik van Pienbroek
2010-11-17 15:38:05 EST ---
The build can be fixed by applying this small patch:
--- j
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=577951
Jason Tibbitts changed:
What|Removed |Added
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=577951
--- Comment #12 from Nerijus Baliunas
2010-08-15 08:20:36 EDT ---
After applying the patch there is another error when compilin
CC||st...@sk2.org
--- Comment #11 from Stephen Kitt 2010-08-05 01:19:54 EDT ---
Applying the following patch should fix the build (it truncates the last
component of the generated versions):
--- wine-gecko-1.0.0.orig/config
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=577951
--- Comment #10 from Nerijus Baliunas
2010-07-13 09:14:03 EDT ---
http://fedora.lowlatency.de/review/mingw32-wine-gecko-1.0.0
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=577951
--- Comment #9 from Andreas Bierfert
2010-07-07 00:29:50 EDT ---
It has not been submitted upstream yet. It however is included
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=577951
Nerijus Baliunas changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=577951
--- Comment #7 from Andreas Bierfert
2010-07-02 11:39:57 EDT ---
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2290258
J
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=577951
Orion Poplawski changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=577951
Andreas Bierfert changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=577951
--- Comment #5 from Andreas Bierfert
2010-03-30 01:08:21 EDT ---
Also take a look here:
http://wiki.winehq.org/Gecko
(In rep
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=577951
--- Comment #4 from Erik van Pienbroek 2010-03-29
17:10:22 EDT ---
See the discussion on the fedora-mingw mailing list from nov
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=577951
--- Comment #3 from Richard W.M. Jones 2010-03-29 16:58:21
EDT ---
I might have a look at this tomorrow, but I'm interested to
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=577951
--- Comment #2 from Erik van Pienbroek 2010-03-29
16:44:39 EDT ---
Hi,
I'll leave the review up to somebody else as this packa
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=577951
Erik van Pienbroek changed:
What|Removed |Added
54 matches
Mail list logo
