| ▲ | foresto 3 hours ago | |
You might consider Flatpak packaging. Flathub offers the org.winehq.Wine package, which you can use in the base and base-version fields of your own package's manifest. It wouldn't cause your code to be statically linked with Wine. Your package could then be distributed from your own flatpak remote. There was an announcement about a year ago of an effort to make a paid flatpak market, apparently to be called Flathub LLC. I don't know if that effort is still active. https://discourse.flathub.org/t/request-for-proposals-flathu... Winelib might also be worth considering, depending on how you are able to navigate the relevant licenses. https://gitlab.winehq.org/wine/wine/-/wikis/Winelib-User's-G... I think Qt would yield better results than Wine for most things. Since your comment suggests that you're making proprietary software, you would have to take special care with linking or else submit to the Qt Group's commercial license terms. | ||
| ▲ | TingPing 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | |
Most people can use the LGPL version of Qt. | ||
| ▲ | bobajeff 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | |
Flatpak can be pretty buggy with Wine I've had some programs misbehave cause it to eat up all my ram when using bottles for instance. | ||