The Whisky Application: Is it possible to update Wine, to the latest version?

[ferreira-ff]

Hello. Whisky is already very good and functional, at version 1.0.1. Regarding GPTK 0.0.2; well, let us wait and see, what Apple will do next. About Wine; Whisky uses the 7.7.0 version. Is there a way to update it, to the latest stable version?
Would it be possible to upgrade it, to the version WineCX22.1.1-8?

I am also having good results, with WineSkin; (Wrapper: Wineskin-2.9.1.9 & Engine: WineCX22.1.1-8 + Apple GPTK 0.2)

Again; thank you for the great work, from everyone involved. Kind regards to all.

[JoshuaBrest]

No, it's not possible as of yet.

Reason: the wine included with GPTK is modified in order to be compatible with dxmetal

[ferreira-ff]

I see. Well, thank you for the explanation. Let us wait for Apple to update the GPTK; maybe with the release of "Crossover / Wine 23", we will have nice improvements, both to Whisky and WineSkin.

Kind regards

[odahcam]

I'm eager for that as well, as of now I can't play my games :(

[JoshuaBrest]

It is now possible. We just won't do it until crossover (basically a paid version of whisky) moves to wine 9. We want to avoid undercutting them.

[LeaveNhA]

No offense, but LOL @JoshuaBrest.

[JoshuaBrest]

No offense, but LOL @JoshuaBrest.

Hey, if it were up to me, we would've been on Wine 9 ages ago. Unfortunately, even though it technically works, it's not perfect and a lot of apps just don't run. Trying to fix issues is not an easy task and requires lots of time.

If you care so much, go figure your own fork of whiskey and Wine. Just because we're open source doesn't mean our time is worth nothing. Please don't go to other open source softwares and demand features. It's free.

[Gcenx]

Wineskin wine builds are highly customized and are not for use by other third-partly projects, PortingKit by PaulTheTall is not considered a third-party project. These became branded to persuade other projects from using them.

Wineskin does support D3DMetal right after the release of game-porting-toolkit it simply wasn’t advertised until I was happy with it. Wineskin was also the first project to directly bundle D3DMetal once Apple updated there license.

The version of DXVK shipped with Whisky was taken from my fork.

[IsaacMarovitz]

After the release of CrossOver 23.5 included D3DM, I decided not to upgrade to Wine 8, at least not while we're using CrossOver's fork of Wine. This is to prevent the undercutting of CodeWeavers' revenue, as they weren't the most pleased about Whisky using their tech, and making the paid part (the user-friendly app) effectively free.

There are plans to switch from CrossOver's Wine to our own fork of mainline Wine, but this will take time, and it's not immediately on the horizon.

In the meantime, if you want to use D3DM with Wine 8, buy a CrossOver 23 license.

[NickStrupat]

If CrossOver’s fork is open-source and if you’re complying with the text of its license, then why do they get a say in what you do or don’t build with it?

@Gerzer I can see you are very into open source. The short answer is that they don't, but, Issac has decided that they don't want to compete with Codeweaver's paid software known as crossover. Codeweavers is also a big maintainer of Wine. It seems like Isacc doesn't want to drive them out of business or burn any bridges.

If you want, however, you are free to maintain your own version of Whisky and Wine that uses Wine 8. 😉

Realistically, CodeWeavers contributes to Wine because:

1. they sell a product that is built on it, so they're financially incentivized to improve it for their existing and potential customers, and (the important part...)
2. they are legally obligated, by Wine's license, to contribute those changes back into the Wine project.

I've seen a thousand comments that say how great they think CodeWeavers is for shepherding the Wine project. In reality, they have to if they want to improve the product (which wouldn't exist without the real open-source contributors who started Wine).

I'm not saying CodeWeavers is evil or anything. If you zoom out, they're just another software company that sells a product that's built using a bunch of open-source projects (and obviously some hard work). But the seemingly widely held belief that CodeWeavers is just out there fighting the good fight for the lowly mac gamer is (to me) silly.

Maybe I'm wrong about the above, but if I'm right there much less of a reason to avoid using the latest versions of Wine and the open-source parts of CrossOver.

[JoshuaBrest]

If CrossOver’s fork is open-source and if you’re complying with the text of its license, then why do they get a say in what you do or don’t build with it?

@Gerzer I can see you are very into open source. The short answer is that they don't, but, Issac has decided that they don't want to compete with Codeweaver's paid software known as crossover. Codeweavers is also a big maintainer of Wine. It seems like Isacc doesn't want to drive them out of business or burn any bridges.

If you want, however, you are free to maintain your own version of Whisky and Wine that uses Wine 8. 😉

Realistically, CodeWeavers contributes to Wine because:

1. they sell a product that is built on it, so they're financially incentivized to improve it for their existing and potential customers, and

2. they are legally obligated, by Wine's license, to make those changes directly into the Wine project.

I've seen a thousand comments that say how great they think CodeWeavers is for shepherding the Wine project. In reality, they have to if they want to improve the product (which wouldn't exist without the real open-source contributors who started Wine).

I'm not saying CodeWeavers is evil or anything. If you zoom out, they're just another software company that sells a product that's built using a bunch of open-source projects (and obviously some hard work). But the seemingly widely held belief that CodeWeavers is just out there fighting the good fight for the lowly mac gamer is (to me) silly.

Thank you for your input. This is open source software. If you wanna make a fork that uses crossover wine, you are free to do so.

[NickStrupat]

Yes, of course I am free to do so. Do you have any thoughts/opinions about what I said? I am genuinely curious if it makes sense and/or affects at all the way you think about CodeWeavers.

[JoshuaBrest]

Yes, of course I am free to do so. Do you have any thoughts/opinions about what I said? I am genuinely curious if it makes sense and/or affects at all the way you think about CodeWeavers.

From what I know CodeWeavers maintained wine even before it was licensed under GPL. This meant that if they wanted to keep it close sourced, they were able to do so. There was another company that tried to undercut codeweavers by using wine and keeping their changes closed source.

We are free to update to the latest crossover, but it could also put peoples jobs at CodeWeaver's at risk, which would put the development at risk too.

[Gcenx]

The only reason wine is still functional on macOS is due to CodeWeavers, without them it would quickly go back to being Linux only

Go ahead and build pure upstream wine straight from git (without any patches) and tell me how that works for you.

Even the upstream Winehq macOS packages I provide requires a number of hacks to make them somewhat viable on macOS/Rosetta2, those hacks come from CodeWeavers.