Can Wine be installed in a web server to run a Windows appl?

[rggchri]

I am looking to install a Windows application on my web site (Linux Debian 4.0), offering restricted access to my web site users :
- has it any technical sense ?
- can Wine be the interface between the server Linux and the Windows application ?
- user access would be through a bridge with my web site (Joomla-based)

Thanks for advice !

[rggchri]

- has it any technical sense ?
Normally no jpsotta.  Wine is not really recommend that kind of operation.

- can Wine be the interface between the server Linux and the Windows application ?

Yes and no.  Wine not what you call light.   Next problem is lot of windows programs require graphical to operate.  This means X11 server of some form.   So really not light.

Wine is for running Windows applications not really bridging.  It pure running the application server would take responsibility for control.

- user access would be through a bridge with my web site (Joomla-based)

You will find access control better handled by native tools.  Less overhead.   Samba can provide lookups on MS ADS servers.   Basically there is no form of secuirty look-up Linux cannot already do natively.

Even vpn connections there are open source ways of doing them.

Final one that kills this idea is that Wine does not control the Linux network stack in any way.   So cannot force traffic to be redirected to it.

Simpler to stick to webserver controls.  Its far more stable less cpu load and less likely to play up jpsotta.

http://httpd.apache.org/docs/2.2/howto/auth.html You will find most open source webservers provide secuirty control modules like these.  It will do a far better job in stablity than what you are thinking about jpsotta

[PuffyBSD]

On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 3:03 AM, jpsotta <wineforum-user@...> wrote:
> I am looking to install a Windows application on my web site (Linux Debian 4.0), offering restricted access to my web site users :
> - has it any technical sense ?

This is a REALLY BAD idea.
> - can Wine be the interface between the server Linux and the Windows application ?
even if it does somehow work, I cant see it being stable
> - user access would be through a bridge with my web site (Joomla-based)
>
> Thanks for advice !
>
>
>
>
>
>

[rggchri]

So, it is a bad idea !
I will be very disappointed !

However, is there any way to share a Windows application between a few remote users, even only one at a time ?
I was thinking to use a website as common base : is there any host system based on Windows that could better support that "bad idea" ? (natively equiped with X11)

VPN can be a solution, but in that case my own PC become the server and shall shall remain ON 24/24h

Thanks for your advices to rein the right path !

[Martin Gregorie-2]

On Wed, 2009-11-11 at 09:06 -0600, jpsotta wrote:
> So, it is a bad idea !
> I will be very disappointed !
>
> However, is there any way to share a Windows application between a few remote users, even only one at a time ?
> I was thinking to use a website as common base : is there any host system based on Windows that could better support that "bad idea" ? (natively equiped with X11)
>
You can use a standard Windows PC, though there may not be any way to
stop more than one person accessing it at the same time. Look at VNC -
it can be used to provide a remote desktop on a *nix, Mac or Windows
client that connects to a *nix, Mac or Windows server.

Alternatively, run one or more copies of Windows in virtual machines on
a *nix system and access them remotely via VNC or ssh with X.11
forwarding.


Martin

[PuffyBSD]

On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 4:22 AM, oiaohm <wineforum-user@...> wrote:

> - has it any technical sense ?
> Normally no jpsotta.  Wine is not really recommend that kind of operation.
>
> - can Wine be the interface between the server Linux and the Windows application ?
>
> Yes and no.  Wine not what you call light.   Next problem is lot of windows programs require graphical to operate.  This means X11 server of some form.   So really not light.
>
> Wine is for running Windows applications not really bridging.  It pure running the application server would take responsibility for control.
>
> - user access would be through a bridge with my web site (Joomla-based)
>
> You will find access control better handled by native tools.  Less overhead.   Samba can provide lookups on MS ADS servers.   Basically there is no form of secuirty look-up Linux cannot already do natively.
>
> Even vpn connections there are open source ways of doing them.
>
> Final one that kills this idea is that Wine does not control the Linux network stack in any way.   So cannot force traffic to be redirected to it.
>
> Simpler to stick to webserver controls.  Its far more stable less cpu load and less likely to play up jpsotta.
>
> http://httpd.apache.org/docs/2.2/howto/auth.html You will find most open source webservers provide secuirty control modules like these.  It will do a far better job in stablity than what you are thinking about jpsotta
>
>
>
>
>
>

[rggchri]

Thank you, Martin, to give me some hope !

""
Alternatively, run one or more copies of Windows in virtual machines on
a *nix system and access them remotely via VNC or ssh with X.11
forwarding.
""


- What are those virtual machines used to run copies of Windows? Something similar to Wine ? Specific SW packages simulating PC HW ?

- copies of Windows : as standard Home XP for instance ?

- could this *nix system be the host of my website ?

- my Joomla-based website offers "wrapping" of an iFrame to another application : could this application be the one running on the copie of Windows ? thus forming a bridge for selected users to access this Windows application ?

Is all that too much speculative ?

[Martin Gregorie-2]

On Wed, 2009-11-11 at 14:23 -0600, jpsotta wrote:

> Thank you, Martin, to give me some hope !
>
> ""
> Alternatively, run one or more copies of Windows in virtual machines on
> a *nix system and access them remotely via VNC or ssh with X.11
> forwarding.
> ""
>
>
> - What are those virtual machines used to run copies of Windows?
>   Something similar to Wine ? Specific SW packages simulating PC HW ?
>

No, nothing like WINE. WINE is not a virtual machine. Its a service call
translator that converts the Windows service calls made by your program
into Linux service calls. Its complex because there isn't always a 1:1
mapping between the two.

I meant something like Xen or VMware's products, or even the Windows
Virtual PC. This is a software emulation of PC hardware - you run a copy
of Windows inside it. The point is that a server can run multiple VMs
and control access to them.

> - copies of Windows : as standard Home XP for instance ?
>
Yes all these VMs can run XP.

> - could this *nix system be the host of my website ?
>
I don't see why you couldn't run Apache and have it use programs in a VM
to manage a set of pages, just as it might use an Application Server,
e.g. Tomcat, to manage a different set of pages.

> - my Joomla-based website offers "wrapping" of an iFrame to another
> application : could this application be the one running on the copie
> of Windows ? thus forming a bridge for selected users to access this
> Windows application ?
>
Well, not really. I don't know Joomla, but from a quick look at its
website it sits behind a web server such as Apache. Apache serves web
pages to web browsers while Joomla is a content management system that
handles the maintenance and storage of those pages. I think VMs would
sit alongside Joomla rather than being managed by it.

> Is all that too much speculative ?
>
In the following I have assumed that you're trying to provide remote
access to a standard desktop application. If this is the case, you still
need a locking mechanism, as described below, to stop multiple logins
even if there's only one copy of the application in one VM or on one PC.

Accessing the application via a web server sounds complex to set up and
manage and could be costly too. Bear in mind that, apart from Xen and
KVM, which are Open Source, the other VMs are commercial products and
you'll need to install and manage at least one copy of Windows in the
VM. In addition, you'll probably have to write or configure a locking
system that prevents two web users from trying to use the same VM at the
same time.

This is why I was suggesting that you use ssh or VNC. Both require the
user to login to a specific user, so this goes quite a long way to
stopping users from interfering with each other. You'd still need to set
up a locking system that prevents a second user from connecting to a
login which is already in use, but that's bound to be easier than
stopping two web users from accessing the same VM.

Don't forget that as far as the web server is concerned, *THERE IS NO
CONNECTION* between successive page requests from a user and that
application servers are designed to stop multiple users from interfering
with each other by creating a session for each user, often by using
cookies.

At the other end of the scale we find your Windows application in a VM:
the VM doesn't care whether one or several users are sending it
requests, but Windows and the application are both designed to handle
requests from one user in front of one screen, so all the separation of
users MUST be handled by something that sits between the web server and
the array of VMs.


Martin

[rggchri]

Thank you, Martin, for all these details, that increase my hope !

I start to look around your interesting suggestions :

- My webserver host run Debian 4.0 that should have embedded Xen 3.0.3.
Since 3.0, Xen can run Windows, either Intel or AMD HW virtualizations.
- so I should be able to load XP and after install my Windows application on it (I still have to grab the detail procedure !)
- I find less details on KVM

....... and still some work to clarify the access !

Thank you, Martin,  for your support !

[rggchri]

http://www.jcraft.com/weirdx/  jpsotta  This is not really web based.

It uses webbased to provide a X11 server that connects to a Linux server by ssh.  Ie normal system wide secuirty.

Integrating into web sites is a messy process.  Always remember Wine is not light you don't normally run it on production web servers due to increasing risk of Denial of Service  due to load.  Same applied to running virtual machines running XP.

Hosting windows applications or native X11 applications on a webserver should be the very last thing you think about doing.   All other options should be explored first.  Javascript applications can do a lot way lighter.  Ie client machines can do some of the processing.   This is important for you poor server.

[rggchri]

Hello Martin and oiaohm,

Following your informations, here is as I understand my problem, in fact splitted in 3 points :

-1- install a Windows Application AP on the Linux Debian host of my domain. This seems to me the most problematic, since both Wine and Virtual Machine solutions are likely to be messy to implement, too deep inside the server system and/or to have CPU load limitations.
  So, there I am still in the blue sky, even perhaps black !

-2- Establish a graphical X Window Protocol from the AP to the X server of the authorized user : this seems to be a rather "common" thing, and solutions may be driven by the outcome of point 1 above.

  Microsoft Windows XP probably includes already this X protocol, is it true also for the other side, in the Web server ?
  The JCast WeirdX Java plugin would have to be installed inside each known potential user of my system, that could be difficult, unless this is an automatic download upon the connection request. However, a pure Java solution may ease the solution of point 1, but I don't know how !

-3- Grant access to the AP only for a given user, from a short list, upon his request, for a time limited session : the Linux host is certainely well equiped for that, the point to clarify is how, I, the administrator, can configure all that. I shall study in deepth the first advice of oiaohm.

  What is not clear for me is the relationships (and perhaps the operational advantages) there are between this AP authorization organization and my web site that resides just beside that. The authorized user navigates also between my web pages, and my website has already a registration system for specific member : so, is there something I can reuse or put in a common box ?

Anyway, Martin and oiaohm, I thank you again, your inputs help me to better understand my problem : my AP is Windows-based, and may be I should subscribe a domain on a Windows server !

[Martin Gregorie-2]

On Thu, 2009-11-12 at 07:23 -0600, jpsotta wrote:
> The JCast WeirdX Java plugin would have to be installed inside each
> known potential user of my system, that could be difficult, unless
> this is an automatic download upon the connection request. However, a
> pure Java solution may ease the solution of point 1, but I don't know
> how !
>
This is a Java application?

In that case, why not install a Linux Java JVM and use that to run your
application as a normal Linux application? It should 'just work' unless
you're using JNI to execute Windows-specific code.
 
OpenJava comes as standard with many distros and the Sun JDK is an easy
install. This may make also simplify multi-user access, though that
depends on  the way your application is written: if it is written for
use by only one user at a time, like most desktop applications, then
you'll still need to run a copy for each user and arrange things so that
that a user always accesses 'his' copy.

> What is not clear for me is the relationships (and perhaps the
> operational advantages) there are between this AP authorization
> organization and my web site that resides just beside that. The
> authorized user navigates also between my web pages, and my website
> has already a registration system for specific member : so, is there
> something I can reuse or put in a common box ?
>
The problem is one of avoiding many users connecting to an application
that has no understanding of many users all interleaving requests to it.

There are a few ways to solve this problem for a Java application, but
all require some redesign, easiest approach given first:

- run it via JWS (Java Web Start), which will let your application
  run on a user's PC. It downloads the JRE as needed together with the
  application and supporting jar files. This doesn't need any change to
  your code but does assume there are no common data files that you
  don't want to distribute. Web login would stop unauthorised downloads.

- rewrite it as an applet. This will cause it to be run locally on your
  user's system. This needs minor changes to the application but also
  assumes there are no common data files that you don't want to
  distribute.Web login would stop unauthorised access to the applet.

- rewrite it as a client/server system. The client stays on your host.
  Graphical clients are delivered to users via JWS or are applets. You'd
  need to add a login and authentication dialogue if the client is
  delivered via JWS. Web login would stop unauthorised access to the
  applet.

- rewrite it to run under an application server, e.g. TomCat, and use
  your web server as the user interface. The rewrite might be quite
  extensive, but your web server can already deal with logins and
  user authentication.
 

Martin

[rggchri]

hello, Martin

I really do not understand your last message !

- Java JVM's are usefull to run Java piece of code on various machine/OS, but I don't see what help JVM can provide to run Windows Application in a Linux environment.

It seems I am going back to the beginning of my bad idea !

[Martin Gregorie-2]

On Thu, 2009-11-12 at 13:45 -0600, jpsotta wrote:
> hello, Martin
>
> I really do not understand your last message !
>
> - Java JVM's are usefull to run Java piece of code on various
> machine/OS, but I don't see what help JVM can provide to run Windows
> Application in a Linux environment.
>
You seemed to be saying that its a Java program. Is it? If not, why
mention Java?


Martin

[rggchri]

Not sure, if I got that right, but with that weirdx plugin things sound quite reasonable:

You need to run some weirdx server together with your joomla server. The weirdx server runs linux applications and transmits their graphical output to the user's web browsers, which of course need to have some weirdx plugin installed.

That sounds feasible. The linux application in question would then be "wine something.exe". Can't say much about the user authentication, you mentioned.

[rggchri]

jpsotta wrote:
> hello, Martin
>
> I really do not understand your last message !
>
> - Java JVM's are usefull to run Java piece of code on various machine/OS, but I don't see what help JVM can provide to run Windows Application in a Linux environment.
>
> It seems I am going back to the beginning of my bad idea !

A Java application is a Java application. It's not (usually) bound to an OS. So a .jar (the most common extension for Java applications) should be able to run on Windows, Linux, Mac... Anything that is able to run the program that can run Java programs, basically (also known as the Java VM).

[rggchri]

I use VirtualBox (an open source free download) with WinDoze XP Pro (which came with an older machine) on opensuse 11.1.  It runs Apache and Java seamlessly, but is much slower than running native Linux apps, even using both processors.  Win32 apps run slower than on Wine, but many won't run on Wine at all, and VirtualBox/XP runs everything, even ones that need USB access.

[rggchri]

That's normal, it's a normal installation of Windows in an (x86) virtual machine, after all.

As for the programs that "won't work under Wine", please make a new topic explaining what programs won't work, with terminal output (see the Wine FAQ on the Wiki).

[FatButtLarry]

@jpsotta: Depending on the scope of deployment, I'm not convinced WeirdX is
a horrible idea, especially considering the X display can come from any X
server (so any Linux/Unix server -- not necessarily the same logical box as
the Joomla server).

Not sure what level of automation WeirdX supports, but if it does... I've
seen shadier deployments.  If you try it, document your success and make
sure it's not open to the world wide web.

-Tres

On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 8:15 PM, DaVince <wineforum-user@...> wrote:

> That's normal, it's a normal installation of Windows in an (x86) virtual
> machine, after all.
>
> As for the programs that "won't work under Wine", please make a new topic
> explaining what programs won't work, with terminal output (see the Wine FAQ
> on the Wiki).
>
>
>
>
>
>

--
- Tres.Finocchiaro@...
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.winehq.org/pipermail/wine-users/attachments/20091112/354a249b/attachment.htm>