On 12/09/2015 03:17 PM, Joseph Bisch wrote: > Hi, > > It looks like libwine or libwine-development should be a dependency of > winetricks, since winetricks doesn't appear to run without wineserver, > and wineserver is part of libwine. See this page for the package info: > [0]. > > It looks like you can trace the dependency chain from wine to libwine > on Wheezy and earlier releases, but starting with Jessie, libwine is > no longer part of the recursive dependencies of wine.
No, not exactly. Even in Jessie/Stretch libwine is always installed if you install wine, because: - wine depends on wine32 OR wine64 - wine32 depends on libwine:i386 [1] - wine64 depends on libwine:amd64 So you'll always end up with a libwine (or several), the question is only from which architectures they are. What I suspected is that only wine64 and libwine:amd64 are installed, and winetricks can't cope with that. And I verified that - indeed this results in the mentioned problem. So you either install wine32 additionally to the already installed wine64 (recommended), or you do the following (with only wine64 installed: export WINESERVER=/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/wine/wineserver export WINEPREFIX="$HOME/.wine64" winetricks The same/similar is true for the -development packages. I'd suggest to maybe add the wine64-only workaround to the README and change the depends to the following: wine32|wine32-development|wine64|wine64-development This removes unnecessary duplicates and expresses that 32-bit is preferred to 64-bit and stable to -development. However IMO it is NOT feasible to only depend on 32-bit packages, because they are not available in every setup. Greets jre [1]: simplifying with "i386" and "amd64" here, but this matches exactly the system the bug was reported from: e.g. wine32 is available on /some/ 32-bit architectures and depends on libwine of the same architecture.
