On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 6:17 PM, Alan W. Irwin <ir...@beluga.phys.uvic.ca> wrote: > On 2013-05-21 21:22+0200 André Hentschel wrote: > >> To finally answer this: pure wine64 can't run 32-bit applications, you >> need wine32 or a wow64 setup for this. > > > Thanks for that important clarification. That means I always need > 32-bit as standalone or as part of wow64. So regardless of that > choice I have to figure out the 32-bit library configuration > issues that have been introduced since wine-1.5.19. > > To answer another responder (Ričardas Barkauskas), my system is almost > entirely 64-bit with many 64-bit development packages installed so I > can build lots of different 64-bit packages on Linux. But wine is the > exception since from the above answer to my question, 32-bit wine is > always going to be needed, and that requires installation of 32-bit > libraries (which I only do because of my 32-bit wine needs). > > Before, I straightforwardly built wine32 (e.g., for wine-1.5.19) with > minimal issues with linking to a relatively small number of 32-bit > libraries that were required at that time. However, somewhere between > wine-1.5.19 and wine-1.5.30 (which I have patched as instructed for > the libwine creation issue that came up early in this thread for > 1.5.30) much more stringent requirements for 32-bit libraries were > introduced for the 32-bit build, and this is a problem for Debian > wheezy because many Debian wheezy library -dev packages (which create > *.so symlinks to the shared libraries and which typically also provide > static libraries) are not multiarch aware. The only way to beat this > that I am aware of is convert to a 32-bit system (which I definitely > don't want to do) or create the *.so symlinks to the 32-bit libraries > myself. I have created a script to do that (in the user's standalone > build tree to avoid contaminating system areas). After running that > script (attached if anybody else reading this thread in the future > finds it to be useful) I also execute > > export LDFLAGS=-L$(pwd) > > so those symlinks in the build tree are accessible to the linker. > > The 32-bit wine-1.5.30 configure script results are now much better; I > have reduced the number of missing 32-bit libraries from ~30 to 5. > The associated configure messages are > > configure: OpenCL 32-bit development files not found, OpenCL won't be > supported. > configure: libdbus 32-bit development files not found, no dynamic > device support. > configure: gstreamer-0.10 base plugins 32-bit development files not > found, gstreamer support disabled > > configure: WARNING: libjpeg 32-bit development files not found, JPEG > won't be supported. > > configure: WARNING: libpng 32-bit development files not found, PNG > won't be supported. > > At least I now have access to the 32-bit version of libfreetype which > allows fonts to be generated. I did the normal 32-bit build after > that configure step, and it looks like the result passes some minimal > tests such as being able to run winecfg. However, when I tried > running the Cygwin setup.exe from wineconsole, there were lots of > warning messages about no png. As a result, I plan to work some more > to get access to the 32-bit version of the png library before > configuring and building the 32-bit version of wine-1.5.30 again. > > If that search for a way to get access to the 32-bit png library is a > success, the missing libraries will be reduced to 4. In the past for > 32-bit builds I have gotten by without opencl and jpeg (according to > my dated notes) so I am not going to worry about them (unless someone > here advises me they have some importance I am unaware of). > > Can somebody advise me about the importance (or not) of the remaining > two missing 32-bit libraries (libdbus and gstreamer)? For example, > are they worth some extraordinary measures such as downloading the > binary i386 -dev package and extracting the static 32-bit versions > separately from that package?
For your purposes, libdbus/gstreamer probably aren't important. You should be aware that cygwin doesn't work terribly well under Wine, however. There are several open bugs: http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12104 http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=19800 http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=19801 http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=19858 http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=19859 http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=21424 http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=24018 -- -Austin
