Jonathan Ernst schreef: > Le dimanche 02 octobre 2005 à 15:45 -0600, Brian Vincent a écrit : > >>> I don't even know how to debug this-- or even if it needs >>> debugging-- as I don't know how to tell the difference between >>> how Wine would act if the libraries cannot be found because of a >>> lack of this update, and how Wine acts when the environment has >>> been correctly updated. >> >> My $.02 is if you're crazy enough to use a distro that requires >> everything to be compiled from scratch, then you better be capable >> of understanding everything that entails. The same goes for anyone >> compiling Wine from source. If that means editing /etc/ld.so.conf >> so the linker can find your libraries, then so be it. Otherwise, >> it's best to stick with the binaries.
Well, obviously, the ebuild + source tarball *is* my binary, as it were. It's not like I can effectively use SuSE or FC 4 rpms. So we 'crazy' source-based distro users can go jump, huh? Thanks :) . Funny, I'd call some of the 'pure' users on Wine-Users a lot crazier than I am, given some of the ways they try to use Wine.... >> >> Maybe we need to collect things like this into a "Release Notes" >> page on the wiki? In this case it would look something like, >> "GENTOO USERS: After placing the bullets in the chamber, pointing >> the gun at your foot, and typing emerge you'll need to make some >> small changes. As root, type "(echo '/usr/local/lib' >> >> /etc/ld.so.conf) && ldconfig -v". Well that was actually my ultimate question, since I'm working on docs-- if this was in fact a step I needed to find a way to perform, I would document it. But for that I'd have to know what to do, which required knowing the nature of the problem, which I didn't. >> >> WTF is with /var/tmp/portage/wine-20050930/image//usr/lib ... > > > Gentoo builds everything in some sandbox in /var/tmp and then copies > everything in the right places. Wine seems to think files will stay > in that directory altough they won't. However I'm quite sure > everything will work as expected. > > IMO you should open a bug in gentoo's bugzilla telling them to apply > a patch that removes this warning before to build wine as this > warning doesn't apply to gentoo users. OK, thanks for the pointer-- my main problem was knowing if the issue was the ebuild or the actual compilation process. bugzilla.gentoo.org (b.g.o.) I can handle. And thanks for the confirmation that everything ought to work normally (which I would have expected, despite the warning)-- but given our past and current issues with binary compilation, and given that we were specifically asked to check for anomalies in binary installation, I just wanted to be sure. > > Altough it can seem crazy to compile everything from scratch, I never > had to fix any paths in ld.so.conf under gentoo; if something works > well under gentoo, that'd be the emerge process configuration update > tool. It really depends on your usage needs as to whether compiling everything from scratch is crazy or not. Clearly a 500-seat or more enterprise workstation farm does not have the time or energy most of the time, but I do. And it gives me a nice sandbox to learn in, since Portage does generally work very well, and since I can see what it did, I can begin to 'understand everything that the compilation process entails'. But OK, enough chitchat, I'm off to post a bug for this-- I'll post the bug number here in case anyone wants to follow it. Thanks for the help, I'm looking forward to taking 20050930 for a spin. Holly P.S. --Jonathan, been meaning to ask you; is it possible for you to upload your public GPG to a server somewhere? It would be nice to get rid of the yellow "Unverified Signature" warning I get from Enigmail every time I read a mail from you. Obviously not critical but thought I'd ask. Holly
