In that he came in a roundabout way - When the owner is able to come in a roundabout way [twisted pathway] he [the worker] will be afraid that now [any moment] he may come.

Had it taught [just the case of] a gentile - A gentile who is transporting flagons of wine.

And do whatever he wants - Even if he did not inform him that he is distancing himself it would be forbidden.

The argument is with lime - With a seal of lime, which is white, in that case the Rabbis are concerned that [the gentile] will pierce [the seal of the barrel], since it [the lime] is white one cannot differentiate between new and old [seals]. {R. Shimon argues that one could tell from the inside of the lid that the filled in hole would not be to exactly the same depth as the rest}

But with cement - That is initially dark and even when it dries out, it still doesn't turn white for a day or two, everybody agrees we are not concerned for piercing [alone of the seal] because the resealing of the pierced hole would be distinguished against the rest of the seal, it would only be forbidden [if the amount of time taken would be] to open, and reseal a new lid and dry out

and is not his sealing recognisable - If he pierces a hole, behold it is apparent.

Whether above - That this is new, and the sealed lid is old.

Whether below - When a Jew opens the sealed lid he will see the bottom of that [new] seal[ed hole], that above has been smoothed by the gentile and the seal levelled, but below [at the bottom of the hole] he is unable to rub [and smooth] it, and it will be noticed.

Rather if you say it is lime - that the Rabbis [are disputing], it is not recognisable that he resealed the top, so how could it teach [it is noticeable] whether above or below.

It is sound - The hole gets filled at the bottom just like at the top {i.e. filled all the way through and neatly levelled off at both ends} . Cholim (Dayan I Gukovitzki: Tirgemei Halaz) Solder\Weld in old French.

Is it not obvious - The author of the Mishne closed in accordance with him [R. Shimon's opinion]. Is Rava coming to tell us something that is [documented] in a Mishne?

I might have thought - That the case [at the end of the Mishne] that he was eating together with him at the table is the conclusion of the statement of R. Shimon, and he [R. Shimon] is the one teaching it. And this is how to understand the Mishne: R. Shimon states in order that he can open reseal and dry out, {continuing R Shimon's opinion with} he was eating with him etc.. And this is not an independent closing statement by the author of the Mishne {which would determine the Halacha}. Therefore Rava teaches us it is an independent concluding statement.

And now we have established the Halacha like R. Shimon that we are not concerned for sealing - a pierced hole which can be done without effort, because it can be discerned, and additionally entirely opening the lid, that R. Shimon is concerned for, we do not establish [the halacha] like him, because that type of forging involves effort, and we have established in (Chapter) Eiyn Mamidim (earlier daf 31a) the halacha is in accordance with R. Eliezer whom is not concerned for the forgery of [even] a single seal. For why did we not question him from [our case here of] sealed barrels in the hand of gentiles {where there is concern even according to R Shimon of possible forgery}.

Because of the slot - Extremely narrow hole in the bung of the barrel, to enable the wine vapours to escape. There is a concern that perhaps it may have been somewhat bored and he [the gentile] will have tasted of the wine.