How do you get all of the windows DLLs working under Wine?

I don't care how illegal it is.
I greatly appreciate all answers as I'm trying to get all of my games to work.

 

It doesn't work that way.

You are pretty much stuck with the compatibility as is, until a newer version is released, or someone has a workaround. There is no magic answer to get all games to work. Some people have better luck with Cedega, but its not free.

http://winehq.org/site/howto
http://www.transgaming.com/

 

I believe there could be a magic solution though it may be hard. Wine HQ says Wine is relatively simple to upgrade due to it's modular nature and it says that the code is 100% Microsoft free. It's obviously microsoft free to avoid copyright problems so i wonder what could be achieved or what has already been achieved if somebody didn't care about potential copyright problems?

 

I dabbled in it for a while, but in the end I gave up and just use the real thing
Is there a problem with dual booting Windows and Linux?

The problem is DirectX a Microsoft closed technology. Anything written in OpenGL and ported to Linux runs just as fast in my experience. I have a Linux version of Quake 3 that runs faster and appears less jerky than the Windows version on older machines

 

Unless/Until Microsoft decides to open source code for Windows...its not likely to happen.

 

mikkh: The reason why I don't dual boot is that my hard drive is fast but only 30 GBytes. To dual boot i'd say you need a minimum of 60 GBytes to avoid bumping into storage problems, I know because i tried it on my old desktop - 40 GBytes.

Adrynalyne: Microsoft doesn't need to make the source code opensource. All somebody has to do is compile the code into a higher level language, like C, modify it to work with Wine and leave no connections between them and the code so Microsoft can't trace it to the developer, The chinese do it all the time with Microsoft(r) Windows(r).

And it may not be that complex, you may just have to slot the DLLs' codes into Wine's code without modification but i don't know how to program in anything.

 

Well, I guess the big question remains then. If its so simple, how come nobody has seen it happen? Its certainly not something that nobody has thought about.

 

It would be bad for Microsoft if somebody came up with a solution. What would they do if somebody threatened their 50 Billion dollar monopoly to that extent i wonder?

 

Nothing, being that it won't happen.

Microsoft has limitless resources for lawsuits.

 

Honestly I don't know, my proposed partial method still stands though as you haven't disproven it.

I wasn't talking about murder, I was talking about bribes ect but i wouldn't be too surprised. This is specualtion.

 

Disproven what?


You need source code to compile. You can't just re-compile already-compiled code.

So yeah, MS needs to open up the code. Have you ever compiled anything? It comes from source.

 

Just to add to my last post, unless you have the source code, the best you can hope for is emulation. As we all know emulation is not the real thing, and therefore, will not work with everything, or as well as the real deal.

 

Once over I compiled some small game I wrote, a quiz, It worked. Then i got very frustrated trying to compile this morse code to english translater (i know, the pointlessness) and i kind of gave up but only to this day, I may start again.

Ok, I was wrong on one point, you don't use a compiler, you use a decompiler (wikipedia).

So it still stands.

 

So let me get this straight.

You think its as simple as decompiling to get the source code?

 

Well, the computer understands it when it executes it, why can't it understand it when it decompiles it?

 

Its not that simple, you think all programers would just allow any random fool with a decompiler to do that to there code, causing them to not make money on there own software?

 

Silly forum software! It put my post below yours after you posted so i'm reposting.

Well, the computer understands it when it executes it, why can't it understand it when it decompiles it?

 

Well, for one:

1. A smart programmer puts safeguards into protecting their code.
2. Decompilers cannot always recycle all of code. I dare say thats the rule, not the exception.

You have a very simplified view of how this works. Its not a simple process.

 

I guess that these safe guards are in the decompiler end, some kind of copy prevention code (not actual term), as the computer can read the instructions the code gives it.

I also guess the reason why they can't recycle all of the code is because the compiler cannot understand all of the high level language as all of the language might not have been coded into the decompiler.

So, I think a very very good decompiler that has no copy prevention code and can understand C with all of it's extensions would work well. Even if this isn't true you could just decompile most of the code and fill in the gaps.

 

It doesn't work that way (starting to feel like a broken record).

The copy protection is in the code, not the decompiler. Decompilers attempt to reverse engineer the code...some better than others, but there are safeguards that can be put in place to prevent decompilers from succeeding. Its not like unzipping a compressed file!

Anyway, I've other things to do today, so have fun.

 

Thanks, i'll look into it some more.

GEEK ON DUDE! (I can see you cringing)