I used to use Wine for things like running some Windows programs like a simple timer and some assembly language programs that are about 1/5 the size of C and C++ programs.
What do you think?
Only install wine the moment you need those assembly programs, not sooner.
2 Likes
For me, installing Wine (or similar libraries) is like drilling a pinhole in the dikes holding back the ocean! Over time, it will expand to become a real problem, not just a nuisance.
Why compromise your system security?
Only exception: your box is FULLY Air-Gapped from any external-reaching network, IMHO.
1 Like
I've never had any security issues with Wine.
2 Likes
I tend to agree.
I do not think Windows programs can infect Linux.
1 Like
Have you looked for Linux alternatives? If no then I would do that first. Personally I have had more luck with playonlinux than just Wine. Using neither is as good as a Linux program. Some functions are usually limited and sometimes the he gui is different/funny.
1 Like
I am waiting to hear from the assembly language site as to whether it will work with Wine.
And their answer.
Will Masm32 work with wine on an Ubuntu-Mate system?I think it will. If not, there are alternatives. You can run a VM with Windows under Linux with VirtualBox. It works really well. I created a VM with Windows XP last week. In this environment, masm32 runs flawlessly.
The one problem I have with playonlinux or lutris is that they make a prefix for each program (same with steam); so there's lots of duplication of libraries - and upgrades dont flow through as simply as when you have one (or only a few) prefixes.
That said - it can be very useful to have more than one prefix or a bespoke prefix for a particularly tricky application.
1 Like
You find more info here.
I think it'll work - but is it worth installing 1GB+ of libraries and compatibility layers to run a few small assembly programs if the C/C++ alternatives are much less than 1GB+ in size? Probably not.
2 Likes
Well my friend.
I love learning new things and I am generally a patient person.
I persevere also.
MASM produces bloated files that are larger than true low level assemblers.
This folklore does not fit the facts. In 16 bit code MASM can produce a 2 byte com file (int 19h) and in modern 32 bit PE (Portable Executable) files, it can produce a 1024 byte working window which is the PE specification minimum size for a PE file. Much of this folklore was invented in the middle 90s by people who could not ever write assembler code in MASM.
1 Like
Why not using assembler on Linux directly instead of on wine ?
2 Likes
I have a lot of friends at masm32 and developed a strong relationship with them.
It will be a lot of work, but so was learning Linux.
When I was done with "SEDCOM", back in 1976, I never looked back. That was an experience I did not want to relive.
Assembler language programming is NOT in my "wheelhouse"!
Do not be afraid.
With the Masm32 package, you already have code divided up into categories.
Examples are easy to assemble.