wine users - Jul 2010 - How many more RCs are you planning before wine-1.2?

Hello again.

Question as in topic.

Thanks in advance.

> Question as in topic.
>
I believe it is not about how many rcs but it will not be released
until the regressions fall below an acceptable number.

John

James_Huk wrote:
> Hello again.
> 
> Question as in topic.
> 
> Thanks in advance.
The announcement for today's release (1.2-rc7) says that barring any last
minute problems, this is probably the last one.

On Sat, Jul 10, 2010 at 5:24 AM, James_Huk <wineforum-user at winehq.org>
wrote:
>
> Question as in topic.
>
I believe Wine will not be releasing until I have time to finish the
next WWN.  I'm sorry to disappoint but I've got text to write and
assignments to get done first.  I'd give it another two months and
everything should be set for release along side the newsletter.

Hopefully you understand the importance of WWN and the reasons for
delaying the entire Wine project as a result.

No problem - I am not pushing anyone ;]

I asked because I wanted to know how much time is left for testing existing bugs
with current RCs (there are probably many bugs that are resolved already and
just needs to be retested and closed)

However now I am a bit confused - @eps do you mean that there will be about 8
more RCs (assuming 4 RCs per month) or that @dimesio is right, and today's
release will be the last one, and we will have to wait for two months before
next (stable wine-1.2) release?

James:

This week.  That's all, unless a serious bug is found, this is the LAST RC. 
AJ plans on releasing next week.  We have to pick a time and that is the one he
picked (read the Announcement.)

That means that you have to get really busy or convince him that there is a real
good reason to hold the release (like some really popular game/productivity
program does not function at all or an important function is not working.)

I have two patches that are waiting for release as well.  These affect many
programs.  Thay should have been in 1.2, but did not make it.

I'll have to get 'busy' myself this weekend and get the programs I
support tested and updated.

James McKenzie



-----Original Message-----
>From: James_Huk <wineforum-user at winehq.org>
>Sent: Jul 9, 2010 1:44 PM
>To: wine-users at winehq.org
>Subject: [Wine]  Re: How many more RCs are you planning before wine-1.2?
>
>No problem - I am not pushing anyone ;]
>
>I asked because I wanted to know how much time is left for testing existing
bugs with current RCs (there are probably many bugs that are resolved already
and just needs to be retested and closed)
>
>However now I am a bit confused - @eps do you mean that there will be about
8 more RCs (assuming 4 RCs per month) or that @dimesio is right, and today's
release will be the last one, and we will have to wait for two months before
next (stable wine-1.2) release?
>
>
>
>
>

James Mckenzie wrote:
> James:
> 
> This week.  That's all, unless a serious bug is found, this is the LAST
RC.  AJ plans on releasing next week.  We have to pick a time and that is the
one he picked (read the Announcement.)
> 
> That means that you have to get really busy or convince him that there is a
real good reason to hold the release (like some really popular game/productivity
program does not function at all or an important function is not working.)
> 
> I have two patches that are waiting for release as well.  These affect many
programs.  Thay should have been in 1.2, but did not make it.
> 
> I'll have to get 'busy' myself this weekend and get the
programs I support tested and updated.
> 
> James McKenzie
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> 
> > From: James_Huk <wineforum-user at winehq.org>
> > Sent: Jul 9, 2010 1:44 PM
> > To: wine-users at winehq.org
> > Subject: [Wine]  Re: How many more RCs are you planning before
wine-1.2?
> > 
> > No problem - I am not pushing anyone ;]
> > 
> > I asked because I wanted to know how much time is left for testing
existing bugs with current RCs (there are probably many bugs that are resolved
already and just needs to be retested and closed)
> > 
> > However now I am a bit confused - @eps do you mean that there will be
about 8 more RCs (assuming 4 RCs per month) or that @dimesio is right, and
today's release will be the last one, and we will have to wait for two
months before next (stable wine-1.2) release?
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> 

Frankly, there's plenty of good reasons for holding the release of WINE 1.2.

The FACT that many applications (games) are suddenly losing the audio after
several minutes of play and then crashing to the desktop shortly thereafter is a
pretty good reason for holding the release of WINE 1.2.

James McKenzie wrote:
> tpreitzel wrote:
> 
> > James Mckenzie wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > > James:
> > > 
> > > This week.  That's all, unless a serious bug is found, this
is the LAST RC.  AJ plans on releasing next week.  We have to pick a time and
that is the one he picked (read the Announcement.)
> > > 
> > > That means that you have to get really busy or convince him that
there is a real good reason to hold the release (like some really popular
game/productivity program does not function at all or an important function is
not working.)
> > > 
> > > I have two patches that are waiting for release as well.  These
affect many programs.  Thay should have been in 1.2, but did not make it.
> > > 
> > > I'll have to get 'busy' myself this weekend and get
the programs I support tested and updated.
> > > 
> > > James McKenzie
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > > From: James_Huk <wineforum-user at winehq.org>
> > > > Sent: Jul 9, 2010 1:44 PM
> > > > To: wine-users at winehq.org
> > > > Subject: [Wine]  Re: How many more RCs are you planning
before wine-1.2?
> > > > 
> > > > No problem - I am not pushing anyone ;]
> > > > 
> > > > I asked because I wanted to know how much time is left for
testing existing bugs with current RCs (there are probably many bugs that are
resolved already and just needs to be retested and closed)
> > > > 
> > > > However now I am a bit confused - @eps do you mean that
there will be about 8 more RCs (assuming 4 RCs per month) or that @dimesio is
right, and today's release will be the last one, and we will have to wait
for two months before next (stable wine-1.2) release?
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > 
> > 
> > 
> > Frankly, there's plenty of good reasons for holding the release of
WINE 1.2.
> > 
> > The FACT that many applications (games) are suddenly losing the audio
after several minutes of play and then crashing to the desktop shortly
thereafter is a pretty good reason for holding the release of WINE 1.2.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> Repeatable example?
> 
> Most of the problems are caused by pulseaudio crashing, not Wine, BTW.  
> The driver may not fail, but it is causing Wine to crash.  That is not a 
> Wine problem but a poor implemenation of an unneeded driver.
> 
> James McKenzie

Ahem ... this forum has 3 different people experiencing premature and random
audio failure on 3 different applications after several minutes... and the
problem isn't PulseAudio or outdated OpenAL ...

don't worry... kinda like 1.0.1 there will probably be a 1.2.1  :-)

See http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=23588

Looks like Scott got a bit fancy with the gcc options, and needs
to revert back to the plain old ones.

@James McKenzie:

I see we are going a little off topic, but I must ask few things:

1. Do I understand correctly that you are planning OpenAL back-end in place of
(or in addition to) current ALSA/OSS/JACK/NAS sound back-ends?

2. Again - if I understand correctly, this back-end will work with
ALSA,OSS4,DirectSound and CoreAudio (and probably with any other audio subsystem
that have support for OpenAL)?

3. As for PulseAudio - I don't want to start flame here but... is it really
that hard to implement (I mean - as I understand it, there already is a patch
that adds support for it so...) Or you are not implementing it because you
don't like PulseAudio, and don't want it to spread?

I say again - I don't want to start a war here, I am not a fan of current PA
myself (however, I must say that I really like the idea of one API for all
systems - from the programmer point of view), but since it is spreading (we like
it or not) maybe you should reconsider support for it?

Thanks in advance for the answers.

James McKenzie wrote:
> oiaohm wrote:
> 
> > As long as we don't get to rc 99 or something else insane its
fine.
> > 
> > Wine 1.0.0 had 5 rc before release.    If we want to be binary worring
to future release it would be funny if it ends up a round 10 rc's.
> > 
> > But as always by wine policies stables are only released as such when
they are done to the selection criteria.
> > 
> > This is not the Wine Lead Maintainers rules.   This is rules of wine. 
Yes it annoys the hell out code-weavers who pays the Wine lead maintainers wage.
> > 
> > Yep the poor Wine Lead Maintainer does not need any more back set
people saying are we there yet.  He has enough pressure.
> > 
> > tpreitzel we(ie people doing support for wine) are not exactly sure
where that audio bug is.  Wine running on pure ALSA no pulseaudio it does not
appear happen.   Suspect scheduler issues where wine takes the lion share of CPU
leaving nothing for pulseaudio.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> oiaohm:
> 
> It is AJs opinion (and many of the other wine developers) that 
> pulseaudio is completely unnecessary.  I agree.  Add a layer to the 
> audio subsystem, and delay will develop.  The community, outside of the 
> few folks that love pulseaudio, are looking towards openal.  Yes, it is 
> coming back and it will be the audio equivalent of opengl.   This will 
> reduce the number of layers needed to support audio. 
> 
> As to the Direct Sound support in Wine, it will plug into openal when 
> all is done.  Then it will be up to the vendors to build in this type of 
> support in hardware.
> 
> As to the 'skip to my lou' problems, this will NOT hold up Wine 1.2
as
> it has been stated, "This is not a Wine problem.  Disable and junk 
> pulseaudio and the problem goes away.  WE are not going to fix other 
> people's brokenness."  This has been demonstrated with the broken 
> Catalyst drivers from AMD/ATI (and we do have support from them to fix 
> it, they just don't know where to start.)
> 
> This problem is not Wine's as Sound works just fine on my Mac, and it 
> has the most crappy audio drivers known.  I can and do play games on 
> this system as well as develop on it.
> 
> So, come Friday, unless there is a major show stopper, Wine 1.2 will be 
> released.  Crappy sound drivers will not stop it.  Switch to ALSA or OSS 
> or CoreAudio and ditch pulseaudio.
> 
> James McKenzie

Lets take Average Joe overview having this problem:
"This isn't even able to play sound in my game?? 
Lets go back to 1.0.1 and spray the word."

And since PA is in more and more distros today, you'll have a ton of average
joes...

The sudden audio problems in rc7 are well understood and a fix
is already available - it was in the ubuntu packaging, not in wine.
See http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=23588

Right, pulse audio problems are not at all sudden, we've been
living with them for some time.

The kernel problem and the ubuntu packaging problem all came
uncomfortably close to 1.2's release timeframe, muddying the waters...

Thanks for the answers.

It seams that OpenAL is the way to go (even for PulseAudio it would seam - as
there is a backend for it in newer OpenAL releases).

One thing though - there are very few sound cards that support OpenAL hardware
acceleration (as far as I know that would be Creative X-Fi, Asus Xonar (here I
am not sure), Razer Barracuda (again  - not sure about this) and probably some
other professional cards - EMU Series fox example) and none of this have any HW
acceleration on Linux. And at least Creative products have driver issues on
Windows systems (especially Vista and above), so I wouldn't count this will
be ported to Linux/*BSD/Solaris at all, although at one point Creative stated
that they are planning to support hardware acceleration on X-fi cards, through
OpenAL... but this was few years back - now they got financial problems so I
don't think this is ever going to happen, and even if it would - how many
users have those (rather expensive) cards? 5%, maybe 10%? And there is a reason
for that - I myself was a "fan" of cards with HardwareMixing (well
dmix wasn't working at all back then) and Hardware accelerated 3D sound, I
have quite a few "high-end" products of its time (SoundBlaster AWE64,
Live! 5.1, Live! 7.1 and Aureal Vortex au882x), but since CPU power increased
there is very little difference in sound quality (if any) between integrated
Realtek "HDA" and expensive X-Fi (on normal speakers or headphones - I
don't know about 10000 dollars stuff - but again, how many users have such
expensive setup?), so most users don't buy these expensive cards. In other
words - I wouldn't count on Hardware Accelerated OpenAL in near future (if
it ever going to happen for Integrated devices at all...)