On 4/20/22 04:13, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
On Mon, Apr 11, 2022 at 11:18:17PM -0500, Zebediah Figura wrote:
On 4/11/22 08:50, Michael Cronenworth wrote:
On 4/10/22 8:28 PM, Zebediah Figura wrote:
The first problem is that the location of runtime DLLs varies
wildly between distributions, and there's no common independent
way to detect it. We could potentially hardcode a few "guesses"
at the runtime path into Wine's configure script, but that
brings us to the second problem: there's no way to verify the
presence of runtime DLLs. We *are* the loader and lower-level
APIs and would have to bootstrap ourselves first, and this is
pretty much infeasible.
What does that variance between distros look like?
Fedora and SuSE put all binaries, including libgcc binaries, in
/usr/<arch>-w64-mingw32/sys-root/mingw/bin/.
Debian puts normal libraries in /usr/<arch>-w64-mingw32/lib/, and
libgcc binaries in
/usr/lib/gcc/<arch>-w64-mingw32/<version>-<variant>/, where
<version> is currently 10 and <variant> is win32 or posix.
Arch (well, the AUR) puts all binaries in /usr/<arch>-w64-mingw32/bin/.
Can't this just be yet another Wine ./configure flag? It's trivial
for the Fedora spec to set this correctly (using %{mingw64_sysroot}
from mingw{32,64}-filesystem).
Sorry for missing this reply. This is the current purpose of the
--with-system-dllpath flag, as I had described earlier in the same mail.
It's just a bit unfortunate because it means that MinGW packages can't
be automatically picked up by a user trying to compile Wine from source.
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
