# Advice on WINE



## mefizto (Oct 25, 2009)

Greetings all,

I have recently made the following post in another forum (edited):



> Greetings all,
> 
> Motivation
> 
> ...



As you can see, I have ruled out FreeBSD for lack of flash.  But, today I had an epiphany; since I do need to run WINE, why not run a web-browser under WINE also?

So my questions are:

1.  Will MS Office work under WINE in FreeBSD?
2.  Will any of the web-browsers work under WINE in FreeBSD?
3.  Is there anyone who has done 1. and 2. above who would be willing to help if I get into problem? (I have never used WINE).

Thank you,

M


----------



## BlueJayofEvil (Oct 26, 2009)

Hello and welcome to the FreeBSD forums!

1. Which version of MS Office specifically? A good place to check for compatibility in WINE is the WINE App Database. The link for MS Office directly is here.
I can't comment from experience as I do not have nor use MS Office (except at work.)

2. Firefox, Opera, and some others work in WINE. You can even use Flash in WINE (although it's not 100% perfect, it works.)
There's also some information in a few other threads (don't have links at the moment) that explain how to use Linux compatibility to achieve semi-native Flash on FreeBSD.

3. WINE is often hit-and-miss for many apps and also varies by platform and hardware (e.g. Linux and Nvidia graphics hardware might do better than FreeBSD and Intel graphics hardware.)
To help out better, we'd need to know what your hardware is, what version of FreeBSD you plan on using, WINE version, etc.

P.S.- If you do need to use WINE, it currently only works on 32-bit FreeBSD.

I hope this helps you some.


----------



## tbyte (Oct 26, 2009)

FreeBSD have flash 10 using nspluginwrapper and linux flash 10.


----------



## mefizto (Oct 26, 2009)

Gentlemen,

thank you for the welcome and the replies.

BlueJayofEvil,

1. As this is crucial requirement, I will pay for whichever version works, saying that, I do have Office2000 already.  Thank you for the links, but my understanding is that FreeBSD implementation is not equivalent with the one for Linux, and most testers used Linux.  That was, why I was wondering if  someone had first-hand experience.

2.  Good to know that the web-browsers work under WINE.  My understanding is that the Linux compatibility layer works on some hardware and not on other, and if I already have to use WINE . . .

3.  The hardware is, at least currently for the proof of concept T43:

   Intel Pentium M 750 (1.86GHz, 2MB L2 Cache, 533MHz FSB)
   14.0" SXGA (1400 x 1050) display
   5GB, 5400 RPM Hard Drive
   1GB DDR2 SDRAM
   CD-RW/DVD-RW (CD 24x Read, 16x Write) (DVD 3x Read, 2x Write)
   Ports: 2 USB 2.0, 1 ExpressCard slot, 1 PCMCIA card slot, 56K Modem, Ethernet LAN port, PS2 port, headphone jack, microphone jack, parallel port, VGA out port
   ATI X300 Graphics Card with 64MB RAM
   Intel PRO/Wireless 2915 802.11 a/b/g internal wireless card

Regrading the version of FreeBSD, I am not sure.  I have been using FreeBSD starting with v. 6.something, currently I am at 7.2.  The 8.0 looks very enticing on paper, but I am rather worried about .0 versions, especially seeing the number of beta and candidate releases 8.0 has gone through so far.

Please do not forget that this will be "production" computer, not one for experimenting with features.

tbyte,

It is my understanding that the nspluginwrapper is plagued with similar issues as Linux compatibility layer.   

Kindest regards,

M


----------



## tbyte (Oct 27, 2009)

mefizto said:
			
		

> Gentlemen,
> tbyte,
> 
> It is my understanding that the nspluginwrapper is plagued with similar issues as Linux compatibility layer.
> ...



It works for me on every hardware I've used and I have about 6 FreeBSD desktops at home and office. So it pretty much works and that's 7.2-S not 8.x 
And the only issue I have (not that it's not very annoying) is that no linux 3D (OpenGL/nvidia) application works. So no 3D  linux games which is very annoying but I can live for now with it


----------



## Oko (Oct 27, 2009)

mefizto said:
			
		

> Thank you for the links, but my understanding is that FreeBSD implementation is not equivalent with the one for Linux, and most testers used Linux.



Wine is very buggy peace of software. Of course it doesn't work the same on Linux and FreeBSD as they have different kernels and Wine has to use system calls. It 
doesn't work at all for instance on OpenBSD (even though it compiles fine) because OpenBSD is unforgiving and doesn't tolerate Wine bugs. 



My frank advice for you based on your posts is that you continue to use Windows as most applications you have to run are specific for that operating system. That doesn't mean that you are out of luck when it comes to security. You could get nice fan-less  miniITX board (used Soekris goes for under $30 on Ebay). Install OpenBSD. Set up PF and continue business as usual. Note that FreeBSD implementation of PF lacks behind OpenBSD and is not complete due to the deficiencies of the FreeBSD network stack. 

Best,
Oko

P.S. Wine after 10 years of development is at best beta quality software. 
By the time it becomes stable Windows 7 will brake backward compatibility and you will not be able to run Windows software on Wine.


----------



## fronclynne (Oct 27, 2009)

Oko said:
			
		

> P.S. Wine after 10 years of development is at best beta quality software.



That would indicate to me that it is a faithful implementation, at least.

Expecting a windows compatibility layer to be bug free would be like expecting a Saab 92 repro to not belch blue smoke.


----------



## mefizto (Oct 27, 2009)

Gentlemen,

once again, thank you for your responses.

tbyte,

if I decide to proceed as suggested below, would you be willing to help if I have problems with the nspluginwrapper?

oko,

I understand what you re saying, and trust me, I am not trying to use an OS for OS's sake, I am trying to solve  prticular problem - OS's malwre vulnerability.  Your solution, of course, works at home, but we are talking about a laptop here. Also please note that the only functionality required is Word, Exel, and PowerPoint.

Considering the above, what would you thing about the following solution: install XP into a jail under some virtualization software, and disable all services connecting to Internet?  I know that I may sound paranoid, but it is no fun to having to re-install OS from scratch, restore files from backup while under time pressure needing to deliver to the customer.

Could you please point me to a suitable Soekris board for home use?  Currently, I use my main computer, which must be on if I want to work on the laptop.

Kindest regards,

M


----------



## tbyte (Oct 27, 2009)

mefizto said:
			
		

> Gentlemen,
> 
> once again, thank you for your responses.
> 
> ...



I saw a HOWTO for nspluginwrapper and flash 10 by somewhere on the forums. It should be more than enough as I didn't needed any howtos, it's simple enough 

PS: Found it: http://forums.freebsd.org/showthread.php?t=5786


----------



## hedwards (Nov 1, 2009)

To be perfectly honest, probably the best way to get an answer would be to just install it and see how it goes. The main reason being that from time to time there'll be a bug that effects one area of a program and not others, and it's entirely possible that something you need isn't working.

It's also worth mentioning that as Codeweavers gets closer to releasing the FreeBSD version of Crossover office in a non test form, the likelihood of a given bug being fixed will go up somewhat as they go to fix bugs for customers.

P.S. It's a real shame that clients expect those formats, DOCs in particular shouldn't ever be distributed as they represent a security risk as well as being somewhat unreliable when shared between versions of MS Office.


----------



## mefizto (Nov 2, 2009)

Dear tbyte,

thank you for the link.

Dear hedwards,

thank you for the information about Codeweavers, that may be worth a wait.

Kindest regards,

M


----------



## kpedersen (Nov 2, 2009)

I do find that sometimes Openoffice actually turns out to display .doc files more "correctly" than Office 2000 running in WINE.

I put this down to some odd font problems in WINE and I assume it's rendering isnt 100% accurate either. Openoffice however is designed (among other things) to be a decent .doc editor whereas WINE is a bit hacky.

Btw, I found that Office 2000 and 97 to be the only ones that can run on FreeBSD WINE without.... fiddling lol

Hope this helps.


----------



## rhyous (Nov 2, 2009)

So, if you want this as a desktop have you considered/tried to run PC-BSD? 

Last I tried, flash was working in its latest release by default.  It is basically just FreeBSD already tweaked for a desktop environment.


----------



## TzunTzai (Nov 3, 2009)

Yea, give PC-BSD a run for ultimate FreeBSD Desktop usage. No worry install and PCBSD 8.0 is a nice improvement! (I'm running 8.0-Alpha right now! Nice!)


----------



## rhyous (Nov 3, 2009)

And it really is FreeBSD underneath. You can still do anything to it that you can to a normal FreeBSD box as far as I know.


----------



## DutchDaemon (Nov 3, 2009)

Isn't the ports system kind of at odds with PC-BSD's PBIs (installing in different places and such)?


----------



## mefizto (Nov 3, 2009)

Dear kpedersen,

I have tested the OpenOffice, and I have about 80% success with the compatibility.  It is the 20%, formatted with equations, tables, and the like, that have problems.  That is why I cannot completely rid myself of Office.

Dear rhyous, TzunTzai,

I am used to build the FreeBSD from ports, and I understand that PC-BSD uses something resembling Windows (PBI?).  Will I have a problem?

Kindest regards,

M


----------



## TzunTzai (Nov 4, 2009)

Yep. PC-BSD 8.0 now offers a "Ports Console" which I think provides the ability to install/run ports/packages inside a "jail" which completely separates any manual installation from the standard PC-BSD PBIs. Which is great actually. PBIs, ports, and packages used to interfere with each other. 

PC-BSD is great! Just wish they offered a choice of Window Manager or Desktop during installation. KDE is their standard... becoming more and more bloated per release. Ah well... FreeBSD is good for me.

Although, PC-BSD has a built in network management system that walks all over wpa_supplicant.conf. Hopefully someone ports Network Manager (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NetworkManager) to FreeBSD soon. 





			
				DutchDaemon said:
			
		

> Isn't the ports system kind of at odds with PC-BSD's PBIs (installing in different places and such)?


----------



## TzunTzai (Nov 4, 2009)

You shouldn't have any problems at all. As a matter'a fact, I'm pretty impressed with how "up to date" PC-BSD keeps the PBIs. There's a nice PC-BSD community that works to keep things current. 

.PBI are to PC-BSD what .EXE or .MSI are to Windows. They're PCBSD's version of an all in one installation file. 

You can search the PBI directory for existing software. You can also visit the PC-BSD forum to put in PBI requests... or if you have experience building ports, you can even create your own PBI! 

http://www.pbidir.com





			
				mefizto said:
			
		

> Dear kpedersen,
> 
> Dear rhyous, TzunTzai,
> 
> ...


----------



## rhyous (Nov 4, 2009)

I don't think ports are at odds with PBI.

Yes, it is probably not best to install and application through ports and through a PBI, though as mentioned they are working on making that a non-issue.

PC-BSD is targetting users who maybe aren't quite at the compile every application from source level and may not even be at "comfortable at the command line" level.

Also, PBIs install a lot faster than compiling from ports.

So they are addressing a completely different need.

When I build a server, I use FreeBSD and ports.
When I build a desktop, I use PC-BSD and PBIs (and only use ports when a PBI doesn't exist, which is getting more rare).


----------

