Marcus Meissner wrote: > > In article <ax%R6.33895$hV3.53576@newsfeeds.bigpond.com>, > David Rowe <voicet@bigpond.com.au> wrote: > >1) Why does winemaker (after ./configure, make etc) produce a library and > >sym link as the output, e.g. why not an executable. > > This is the usual invokation method of WINE binaries. Do not worry. This is an excellent question. Is there any reason why you couldn't just link the required Wine emulation functions into the executable without the aid of the symlink/wine executable? BTW, this would make a great FAQ question if it isn't already one. I tried to build my own program manually without the aid of winemaker, and I got an "undefined reference to main". So, I created a wrapper.c file which included a regular main() function, and called WinMain from there. When I tried to run the executable, the program exited with a message about a buffer overrun in libwine. I know that in the past, Winelib devel was done by linking with the wine libraries, and no symlink was required. Is it just safer to have the symlink/wrapper? I know that these days, there are so many other shared libraries required, that requiring the wine executable is no big deal. At what point was it mandatory to have the wine symlink for winelib apps? Just curious. I can see one advantage is that you can configure identical behavior for all your wine apps by modifying ~/.wine/config. -Donn -----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =----- http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! -----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =----- _______________________________________________ wine-users mailing list wine-users@winehq.com http://www.winehq.com/mailman/listinfo/wine-users
