Fat Shaming
...which allow a single process to contain a mixture of Arm64 and x86-64 code...
Fat binaries rear their (ugly) heads once more
After 32 years of maturation, even now, WINE is Not an Emulator, but it can work alongside them to run Windows apps on Arm Linux. WINE 10 is even more mature than it sounds. However, we fear that you may well have had your fill of vinological wordplay and it's probably turning bitter. This version improves the handling of …
As I understand it, not actually a fat binary. It's a simple Windows executable, compiled with some segments in ARM machine code and some segments in 86 machine code. When the 'Simple Windows Environment' on ARM Win11 hits a segment labeled '86, it's run through the hardware emulator built into ARM Win11.
Since the exe format is a standard PE file (which could by design include MacOS or Linux binaries if those OS would bother to include a loader), you can also fat-binary a pure Win32 or Win64 or DOS program in the file, but this isn't a new way of doing that, it's a new binary format, which is for programs that include a mixture of ARM and '86 code, and seamlessly switch between the two.
> In what is the WINE equivalent of "Will it run DOOM?"
Well, presumably, it's to run Doom, which I am told it will do. Or Quake or Fortnight or whatever's cool now.
Office isn't an app. It's a suite, and it includes things that extend Windows, like a Sharepoint client and Onedrive and things. That won't work because you can't extend an OS that's not there.
If you want the main standalone local apps, then yes, I think it will run Word or Excel or PowerPoint. If you want Outlook or Access, which get clever with networking and talking to other computers, possibly not.
I have never used Visual Studio so I can't directly comment, but... probably?
MS is wise to it now. So, as a test, I tried to install OneNote.
(Disclaimer: I hate OneNote. I find it grotesquely over-complicated when I want something small, simple and fast for notes.)
OneNote is _allegedly_ free but you can't download it. All you get is a stub installer which goes online, tries to fetch a bunch of (I think) .NET stuff, and then install that on the fly and pass control to it, and that then downloads actual OneNote.
It did not work on WINE 10.
Cardfile
Funny that. I am pretty sure it was an example application shipping with Windows 2 or 3 SDK. I seem to recall building it with the Zortech C/C++ v3 compiler.
If you couldn't grab cardfile.exe (and any required DLLs) from an older version of Windows, you might be able to build from the old source. ;)
I use OneNote on my WFH PC and I concur with your summary of it; back in Win 3.x/NT days I bought and used the beautifully-crafted Lotus Organizer - far superior in its usability and sophistication of design. Its failing was its lack of any facility to export its data in a usable, structured, cross-platform format.
I think Visual Studio may struggle to run in Wine. Caveat - I’ve not tried. However when you install it there’s a few things seemingly added to the OS (all sorts of debugging malarkey). Whilst these aren’t needed to edit and build, the installer may barf and not complete.
If you’ve not used Visual Studio, it’s worth a test drive. I use it for C++ development on Linux and it’s pretty good at that (all done remotely via ssh and gdbserver. It’s surprisingly effective for this use case). I also write in C# and build test on Windows but run on Linux. This is also surprisingly effective.
It is big and bloated but it’s pretty good.
It's still better than Evernote tho.
Bugger increased price by a whopping 600% on me, from RM50 annually to RM300. All of the sudden. Told them to sod off.
And btw, Office 365 apparently can run on Crossover Office. Not sure what they're holding back from the community Wine release, but it can be done.
> Onedrive and things. That won't work because you can't extend an OS that's not there
You don't need Wine to run OneDrive:
OneDrive Client for Linux supports OneDrive Personal, OneDrive for Business, OneDrive for Office365 and SharePoint.
see: https://ubuntuhandbook.org/index.php/2024/02/install-onedrive-ubuntu/
Generally, Windows installers won't try to fetch a bunch of .NET stuff if it is already installed. I don't run OneDrive on Windows, let alone on a linux distribution, but when you have this kind of problem you may get farther if you do a DOTNET installation first.
In August 2022, I tried to install Microsoft Word Home & Student 2021 standalone on Crossover. It didn't work. Although I was very specific about "standalone", I received the following response from support: "Unfortunately the newer versions of Office don't work in Crossover. I believe Office 2021 requires Windows 10 and Crossover is only to install Office in a Windows 7 32-bit bottle at this time which means that even some installer for Office 365 don't work. We are aware of these limitations and are working on improving these deficiencies in the future."
Seems like the last version of the Office core apps (Excel, Powerpoint, Word) that kind of run is Office 2016... You may get lucky with Office 365 according to some reports but it can't be too reliable as Office 2024, 2021, and 2019 all seem to be incompatible.
Personally, I paid for a Crossover license to run Office 2016 as I couldn't get it to install or run without crashing with "normal" Wine or PlayOnLinux.
> Personally, I paid for a Crossover license to run Office 2016
I can believe that.
Back in 2017 I needed Crossover to run Office 2003, but as the screenshot shows, the only part I want -- Word -- now runs perfectly, including installing the Service Releases.
I did have to reinstall it -- vanilla WINE could not pick up and incorporate the version installed under CrossOver.
No Office. the last version of Office it can run is from 20 years ago.
Apart from some games, my experience with Wine is that many Windows apps can "sort of run" under it. But not very well, lots of little things don't work, even if you play with bottles etc
The commercial side of Wine (CrossOver) claims to run Office 2010
https://www.codeweavers.com/compatibility/crossover/microsoft-office-2010
A better Windows than Windows. Linux is doomed. DOOOMED!
(I tried to run WINE on a laptop with drivers from Nvidia. Oh my goodness! Was there now ever much lament. Apparently it works better with the open source drivers installed but I couldn't really come up with a use case to justify the effort. Initially I wanted to run the Foscam configuration software in Linux. But they are perfectly configurable if you don't mind using cURL and some PDF documentation).
I have a bunch of IP cameras around the place. I bought my first Foscam based on the reputation that "Foscams are great cameras". Once I realized that you needed a proprietary Chinese app to configure them, it went right back to the vendor. All of my other cameras can be configured easily through a browser.
> Once I realized that you needed a proprietary Chinese app to configure them
Hmm, there is a selection of the open source software available on, say, GitHub, which use the CGI calls (aka a Web API) as per the document referenced by Sceptic Tank's comment.
> All of my other cameras can be configured easily through a browser
At least one chap tried a JavaScript web page to use the Fiscal API.
It'd be sad to think that none of those work.
Well....I have an MS Multimedia Viewer CD. The software is on the CD, along with the actual multimedia content.
So everything is on the CD so that WINE can run the application and the data....all off the CD.
The Viewer software is dated October 1993.....so this solidly in Windows 3.1 territory.......
....and it runs today on WINE 10 like a champ!!!
> Maybe: Licensing, activation issues
Exactly.
With a VM, I need to:
* pay for a licence for the guest OS
* install the guest OS
* install drivers to integrate with the host
* set up shared folders etc.
* keep that guest OS up to date, separately and as well as the host OS
* possibly keep it clean from malware
With WINE I don't need any of them. No licence, no updates, no anti-malware because no significant malware risk. The app accesses my normal local screen, and my local filesystem, at full speed. I can resize, maximise, minimise, etc. windows like native ones. I can have different windows on different physical screens, without faffing around with guest multihead.
I only spend the RAM and CPU cycles of the app itself, not a guest OS. These days my main desktop has 32GB and my main testbed laptops 16GB and 24GB, but modern versions of Windows in a VM want more RAM than ever.
It's easier, it's faster, the integration is better, it's less work, and it's cheaper.
I have used Windows VMs under both macOS and Linux in the past -- this is one of the virtues of Virtualbox: the same VM works on both without migration or conversion -- but it's more work and I just don't need to any more.
I do still use VirtualBox for other things, but not for this.
Games.
My fav old 32-bit games don't run correctly, if at all, in Win 10/11, and I don't want the Internet touching an unpatched instance of Win 7. Win 7 is EOL'd, so no current patches are available for it, yet I need an Internet connection to play my games with (non-local) players.
I suppose everybody's use case is different and specific. In my case the only "Windows legacy" I carry with me is PhotoShop. Now, I can already hear everybody shout that I'm a dinosaur. Sure. "We have Gimp!" Which no doubt is a great program and I comment its devs with fitting humility. But Gimp doesn't do it for me: since I bought my PS (yes, paid for it, so this one IS mine) I developed decades worth of muscle memory and work flows. The things I need to do are not important enough to go bloaty creative suite, plus I'm too recalcitrant (old?) to "like" continuously network connected WTF subscription models.
And think about this: WINE fits the *nix philosophy to a tee: it let's me do with my box what I want to do. Choice ©. Freedom™. It enables me to have my old, trusted, dedicated, and local version of PS (yes, 32 bit BTW) on my quick launch dock. Need to do something graphic? Click, PS starts, direct in its own window, like any other application on my box, just like it did for the past 20 odd years. Do your thing, save it anywhere in my *nix file system, hit my trusted Exit keyboard short cut, and move on. Every iteration of WINE I keep my fingers crossed whether it will still work and should apt-mark unhold
. Sometimes it needs fiddling, almost always connected to control-and-command or marked redundant
faeces. But up till now it still works. Happy and very grateful customer here. And wasn't that what computing was all about to begin with?
Battery?
I sit in total silence all day unless I boot my Windows VM up to run some specific application that I've not tried in WINE. At home, I have to put up with the fan noise. If I'm on site, I rush to get whatever I need done ASAP so I can turn the thing off again before I start thinking about working near a main socket.
It's also much much faster to use a program on my native desktop than hop in and out of a VM.
PortingKit has bundled WINE with some other bits already for Apple, but mostly for games. https://www.portingkit.com/benefits
I was playing Civilization II on an M4 Mac a week or so back. Miraculous that a x86 32-bit game written for Windows 95 was running 30 years later on a different OS and instruction set. I could see the binaries were Intel i.e. using Rosetta2 in Activity Monitor and either that or the OS emulation was a bit heavy on the CPU but otherwise it was great.
This one perchance? Although as it's Python why do I need WINE?
Mine's the one with the cheap plonk in the pocket >>====>
> Can I suggest a mention of Wine Bottles?
Actually, TBH, I have never used or needed it myself, but I have tried it.
Years ago, if a Windows app was balky under WINE, then a useful way to try to coax it into working was to work out any optional or aftermarket bits of Windows it wanted -- fonts, ODBC drivers, IE, compiler runtimes -- and get and install them under WINE _first._ *Then* install the app.
Having real MS DLLs available instead of WINE's replacement ones got some things working, or working better.
So the concept of Bottles -- keeping Windows apps isolated from one another -- is a bit back-to-front for me.
But, to be fair, WINE has changed a lot since then.
I'm pleased to see 10 coming down the pipe. I've been using WINE from about 1998 or so, and have (back in that time frame) contributed some work on the codebase. I have been playing rather a number of windows only video games in WINE since. (Notably WoW from about 2004 or so, Diablo, Wolfensteins, and a few others, recently FFXIV). MS office stuff up to 2000 *just worked* but after that there were specific patches required for some MS office code. (Crossover maintained them and did charge license fees for the full package *cough*) I'll note that I build my own WINE from the wine *staging* repositories, and I can point out that a) with the switch to Fedora 40 and Wayland based display (I included the X overlay for wayland) b) with the wayland components now built into WINE, and c) using a slightly out of date Nvidia card and proprietary drivers, I actually had 0 issues, and likely due to both mesa and Vulkan improvements I saw about a 12% increase in framerate.
Office wise I have an OLD copy of outlook that just works (circa 2002), although I do have it talking only to my own mail server. Visual Studio has a snap that works on linux -- I've used it on occasion to tear into code problems for someone I know who never learned why functions exist in codebases. I've found that anything Windows based that needs *direct* hardware access can be clunky on WINE and on occasion will not work.
The BEST tool in WINE when one has windows programs that start, but fail shortly after is to a) have multiple WINE prefixes, and b) keep a copy of WineTricks handy and *up to date*. 75% of the launch failures are having incorrect or missing NATIVE .NET components in the wine prefix.
But I may be far far far too familiar with how it works.
I'm asking for a friend, of course...
Trying to install and activate Wine on Rpi pulls up version 8.0, where the installation fails with a segfault. :-(
Programme website just says:
Download and Install Wine 10
Wine 10.0 source code is available at: WineHQ Download. Binary packages for various Linux distributions and macOS will be available soon on official repositories.
I've yet to find it on such a repository!
I have a very-much hacked version of the old DECUS game EMPIRE that I ported to MS-DOS in the mid-to-late 1980s. Unfortunately the only sources I have yet found in my archives/backups date to that era, full of MSFortran and MSASM files/idioms. Backporting to a Linux codebase is fraught with difficulties...
I can run it in a VirtualBox MSDOS VM, but it'd be nice to have an alternative.
"I can run it in a VirtualBox MSDOS VM, but it'd be nice to have an alternative."
You might be better off looking at MS-DOS emulator like DOSBox and derivatives. One such derivative, DOSBox-X claims it can run dos based Windows 3.x/9x/Me which suggest graphics support should be more than adequate for a purely DOS application. The emulator runs under Windows, Linux (including on ARM processors), MacOS and is open source so other targets are possible (perversely is also runs under MS-DOS.)
You could run an x86 emulator like Bochs and run freedos etc and from the dos run your game. Qemu would also work I imagine.
> You might be better off looking at MS-DOS emulator like DOSBox
Ah, thanks for the hint. Once installed DOSbox looked familiar, I must have used it in the past. Still two niggles, to do with the 500's keyboard:
o no keypad, which I'd programmed to use as well as the classic QWE/A D/ZXC direction commands
o on my example at least, the spacebar needs a hefty hit to register, far more than I've become used to, just tapping the key with whichever thumb is most convenient at the time
> Still two niggles, to do with the 500's keyboard...
Get a USB keyboard and plug it into the 500 whenever you want the keypad and/or a more gamey space-bar.
It'll be weird (this is my keyboard - and this other, smaller, keyboard is my computer) but what is life without a little weird?
(You could just get a USB numeric pad or a "macro" keyboard and set it up, including a space key, or even build your own from scratch, but those options are going to cost more)
This post has been deleted by its author
I would love if ESRI ArcGIS Pro could be run in WINE. Everytime I have tried it seems to actively check for emulation and won't run.
But ESRI writes some of the most brittle software with the worst logging.
They probably don't want you using WINE because nothing will work because of bad programming practices!
After all, WINE doesn't really care about what kernel you use (yes, there is one optional component that directly interfaces with the video4linux module but that can be excluded) - it cares about being able to re-implement window's API and ABI, which Linux can't really assist with.
Such implementation is only possible with the help of many of these libraries (which cannot be compiled without GNU);
cups sane-backends fontconfig libsdl2 gnutls freetype libusb dbus ffmpeg gstreamer libcapi libpcap libunwind perl udisks binutils bison flex gettext glibc
Regardless, you're better off not soiling the freedom of your GNU system by running proprietary malware (there is some windows-only free software, but none of it is as good as other free software available for GNU, as anything good always gets ported to LiGNUx).
I run some (MS-Windows) "proprietary malware" on my Linux system hecause:
1. I already paid cash for it, from back in my MS-Windows days, AND, there is no Linux close-equivalent to it; and,
2. I have some niche MS-Windows freeware utilities which have no Linux close-(or even, not-close) equivalents to them.
>on my Linux system
`uname --operating-system`
Is it really yours if you don't control all of the software you use?
>I already paid cash for it
That is the sunk cost fallacy in action and you are continuing to pay with your freedom.
>there is no Linux close-equivalent to it
I personally haven't had any issue finding free software replacements for any kind of software and sure it's different, but it turns out that such software always turns out easier to use once you learn it, as it wasn't written in malice?
>> I already paid cash for it
> That is the sunk cost fallacy in action and you are continuing to pay with your freedom.
No. No, it is not "sunk cost fallacy". He has some software that he has chosen to run and his Linux setup allows him to continue getting use from it, without paying any further cost. He chose it freely and he happily uses it, freely, and seems to get all the value he requires from it.
> I personally haven't had any issue
As already noted here, and many, many times - one person's Use Case is not the same as every other person's Use Case. You have found software you like - good. He has found software he likes - equally as good.
> once you learn it
Ah, back to costs - you are forgetting to take into account the costs of retraining (including the erasure of long-earned "muscle memory") versus the value of the resultant gains. Admittedly, some people never get around to using any piece of software (or other things) long enough to actually gain "muscle memory", as they jump from one shiny to the next, but that is a topic for another day.
> always turns out easier to use
Not accusing *you* of anything, of course, but I'm sure you've come across people who acquire something (be it physical goods or - relevant here - costly retraining) who will proselytize in a desperate bid to avoid noticing that they have fallen foul of sunk costs, refusing to accept that maybe going back to their old ways might be easier and cheaper.
By all means, fight the good fight for free software - even just for GNU-only, if that is your thing - but be careful about flinging around claims about individuals falling foul of this-or-that-fallacy just to justify your preaching.
>He has some software that he has chosen to run
"He has a proprietary pistol that he has chosen to shoot his feet with and sometimes strike others with proprietary shrapnel".
>his Linux setup allows him to continue getting use from it
Linux has nothing to do with the running of the software as WINE doesn't care what kernel you run - WINE interfaces with many libraries including GNU ones.
>without paying any further cost
He has to continue paying with his freedom, which is more valuable than money.
>He chose it freely and he happily uses it, freely
The choice was not a free one, as the software is under a nonfree license.
>get all the value he requires from it.
It extracts value from him.
>one person's Use Case is not the same as every other person's Use Case
Maybe, but many use cases overlap.
>You have found software you like - good
I have found software that respects my freedom - good, that also happens to be very functional.
>He has found software he likes - equally as good.
He has found software that does not respect his freedom - that is a bad thing.
>you are forgetting to take into account the costs of retraining
Even taking into account the costs of retraining, hardware replacement etc etc etc, free software always turns out to be cheaper than proprietary software over a medium term (over the short term there is a fairly large cost of escaping proprietary shackles, but the cost is due to the shackles and not anything else) - after all, why would a proprietary master not jack up the costs as much as possible when their victims deem saying no and (usually trivial) retraining too expensive?
>Not accusing *you* of anything >who will proselytize in a desperate bid to avoid noticing that they have fallen foul of sunk costs, refusing to accept that maybe going back to their old ways might be easier and cheaper.
Despite your accusation, freedom has demonstrated to have no sunk costs (heck, the software is usually gratis) and to be easier and cheaper - it's nice to have a computer that actually works properly and always obeys me too.
Once a business has switched to real free software competently, they realize just how much money and issues proprietary software had costed them in comparison.
Proprietary software is known to operate poorly, be hard to operate, to be full of antifeatures and be expensive, thus "easier" and "cheaper" are not the relevant words.
>fight the good fight for free software - even just for GNU-only
Unfortunately, no other large group really cares about ensuring that the software is actually free, thus the only fight is for GNU.
"That is the sunk cost fallacy in action and you are continuing to pay with your freedom."
Hold on there! Are you saying that in order to be free one shouldn't have the freedom to use the software of their choice where that includes S/W they have paid for.
Looking here at my Linux laptop there's certainly some GNU stuff in it. There's also stuff like KDE which certainly isn't GNU and without doing a full trace-back I don't know to what extent it relies on the GNU underpinnings - and I've better things to do with my time than find out. There are one or two bits and pieces which have been increasingly broken due to the underlying GTK stuff so the reliance on GNU could even be something of a liability.
But one thing I do know is that, GNU or not, they are all seen on the Linux kernel and not Hurd.
>in order to be free one shouldn't have the freedom to use the software of their choice
In order to be free, the software one runs needs to serve them and not some other master first.
Only then you are free to use whatever software of your choice, however you would like to.
There is nothing I can do to stop people from shooting their feet with proprietary malware and blasting proprietary shrapnel all over the place - all I can do is make a recommendation not to do so.
>that includes S/W they have paid for.
There is no problem with selling free software; https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/selling.en.html
It's quite bizarre to pay for a copy of software that doesn't serve you, or even to run such even if you got a copy gratis.
>my Linux laptop
That is a proprietary kernel, thus such laptop isn't yours.
Linux certainly doesn't run by itself either; https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/init/main.c#n1513 (but of course you know better than the Linux developers themselves (Linus has stated that Linux is only a kernel multiple times, although he has recently decided to start accepting credit for things he didn't do)).
I suspect you run systemd/Linux or the systemd OS for short.
>There's also stuff like KDE which certainly isn't GNU
Running `equery g --depth=3 plasma-meta` I see a lot of GNU dependencies, so yes KDE requires GNU to work, while KDE doesn't need Linux to work, as it runs on certain BSDs.
If you feel like calling your system KDE/Linux (although it unfairly doesn't mention GNU) or just KDE, that's fine - but it's somewhat strange to even mention "Linux", unless you want to give Linus credit, as Linux is mostly irrelevant to computer usage (it doesn't have a visible interface).
GNU/Linux gives credit to GNU and to Linus, but I like writing GNU/Linux-libre to proudly proclaim that I'm running a 100% free OS.
>have been increasingly broken due to the underlying GTK stuff
I used to used KDE, but it had too many bugs and krashes and breaks every single update until you're finished compiling every single library, while desktop environments that use GtK tend to actually work and not break and handle partial updates just fine.
>reliance on GNU could even be something of a liability.
Yes, sadly some developers think relying on the solid rock of freedom is a liability and go for the sinking sand of inferior software under weak licensing.
>they are all seen on the Linux kernel and not Hurd
Implying that Linux is more than a kernel reinforces the terrible confusion.
KDE does not interface with Linux, it interfaces with libraries (GNU libraries and others), which in turn interface with glibc (there is also one other library that optionally can interface with Linux), which implements a lot of internal functionality and calls out to Linux-libre (or Hurd) via SYSCALLs as needed.
Most software doesn't care about what kernel you use and rather cares about interfacing with GNU libraries.
GNU is developed to work with both the GNU Linux-libre and Hurd kernels identically (it's just a matter of adding support in glibc and gcc), although it happens to work with proprietary versions of Linux too (the SYSCALL, /dev/ and /sys interfaces are exactly the same after all).
"It's quite bizarre to pay for a copy of software that doesn't serve you, or even to run such even if you got a copy gratis."
You have utterly missed the point that OP has already paid for the software which does what they want and by choice wihes to continue using it.
You cannot rationally argue for freedom to choose by denying freedom to choose.
">my Linux laptop
That is a proprietary kernel, thus such laptop isn't yours."
WTF?????????
I'm guessing you're a recent convert to/discoverer of FOSS.
>which does what they want
But does it really?
>by denying freedom to choose.
Suggestions to not throw away your freedom, or to cease continuing to do so, doesn't amount to the denying of freedom.
>WTF?????????
Yes, ironically the poster child of "open source" isn't even fully source available!
`Linux, the kernel developed and distributed by Linus Torvalds et al, contains non-Free Software, i.e., software that does not respect your essential freedoms, and it induces you to install additional non-Free Software that it doesn't contain. Even after allegedly moving all firmware to a separate project as of release 4.14, Linux so-called "sources" published by Mr Torvalds still contain non-Free firmware disguised as source code.`; https://www.fsfla.org/ikiwiki/selibre/linux-libre/
One such example of proprietary software in Linux is the following software disguised as arrays of numbers with no source code; https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/arch/powerpc/platforms/8xx/micropatch.c (GPLv2-only is NOT the license as there is no source code, or written offer for source).
There's plenty more, but just one is proof enough.
>I'm guessing you're a recent convert to/discoverer of FOSS.
All discoverers of "FOSS" have been mislead.
"FOSS" is an attempt to be neutral between freedom (free software) and licking the boots of corporates ("open source"), but fails to be neutral; https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/floss-and-foss.html
you could do worse to write for a Wine (say) target and fiddle later to fix any Windows incompatibilities. You could ship your app with a Wine runtimes to support Linux (Unix), MacOS and Windows.
Ironically you might ultimately say Windows was a kernel implemention of Wine (Windows Is Not Doing Only Wine Services ;)
Speaking of kernel, to run Adobe suite licensed (subscribed) etc you will need kernel level running DRM which will never happen on Linux. Perhaps, if Adobe people magically notices how much Windows waste their suite with horrible overhead, they may ship something for RHEL/SUSE first.
I wonder if future coverage of Wine could go into more details about the cross-pollination between Wine and Steam's Proton? One the one hand, Proton seems to run many many Windows-only games and they have the $ and a huge vested interest to get it done. On the other hand, Proton's Windows API calls are going to be going out mostly to DirectX and the subset of Windows systems services that are relevant to games. So how much is more general-purpose WINE "bettered" by Proton and how closely do the projects track each other and/or collaborate?
I have some old games (the Nancy Drew series - excellent, highly recommended) that only seem to run properly under some VERY old versions of Wine. (I use PlayOnLinux to do this easily.) On Ubuntu 22.04, using Wayland, they won't go full-screen, just take up a 640x480 "window" (not a real window, can't move it), which is half under the dock.
How would I get them to go fullscreen again like they did on Ubuntu 20.04?