Hi Alexandre, You said a few months ago Wine would soon detect whether to enable NPTL support at runtime rather than compile time. Presumably this will get in as part of the CodeWeavers merge. Do you know how long that might be? It seems every day people hit this problem and don't realise how to work around it. thanks -mike -- Mike Hearn <m.hearn(a)signal.qinetiq.com> QinetiQ - Malvern Technology Center
Mike Hearn <m.hearn(a)signal.qinetiq.com> writes:
You said a few months ago Wine would soon detect whether to enable NPTL support at runtime rather than compile time. Presumably this will get in as part of the CodeWeavers merge. Do you know how long that might be? It seems every day people hit this problem and don't realise how to work around it.
I'm working on it; the way we do it in Crossover is not really applicable to Wine (plus it's frankly ugly), but I'm working on the proper solution. It's still going to take some time. -- Alexandre Julliard julliard(a)winehq.com
If I remember correct, there were reports from people complaining about wine not running with LD_LIBRARY_PATH set, and --with-nptl fixed the problem. It wont work for all people that way.
Hmm, let me guess, you have two binaries and a shell script to figure out which one to run?
That's the idea yes; actually it's two sets of libraries and a script that tweaks LD_LIBRARY_PATH etc.
===== Sylvain Petreolle (spetreolle at users dot sourceforge dot net) ICQ #170597259 No more War ! "What if tomorrow the War could be over ?" Morpheus, in "Reloaded". For the Law of Oil and Fire, Im an European that lives in France. For all my Brothers and friends, Im a human living on Earth. ___________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? -- Une adresse @yahoo.fr gratuite et en français ! Yahoo! Mail : http://fr.mail.yahoo.com
The solution of this NPTL problem is somehow solved by the guys of apache. since 2.0.44 the configure script can autodetect nptl. So if you want to implement this feature you can "borrow" it from apache. ------------------------------- Erwin Wolff erwinwolffnl(a)microformatica.com
erwin wolff a écrit:
The solution of this NPTL problem is somehow solved by the guys of apache. since 2.0.44 the configure script can autodetect nptl. So if you want to implement this feature you can "borrow" it from apache.
Alexandre's goal is not only to detect it at compile-time (I'd think that it could be somewhat easy to do that). The trickiest part is to have a binary that can run with or without NPTL, with or without LD_KERNEL_ASSUME, etc. Vincent
Oh, sorry, should have thought of this before. If it were possible to reliably detect NPTL breakage in the configure script, would you accept a patch to add this temporarily? Some of the people hitting this problem have very little technical knowledge, editing wineinstall , make distclean etc is a bit beyond them, especially if they don't know where to get help in the first place. If so, I don't suppose you know of any handy ways to detect it that we can put in a configure check? thanks -mike On Fri, 2003-05-09 at 17:59, Alexandre Julliard wrote:
Mike Hearn <m.hearn(a)signal.qinetiq.com> writes:
You said a few months ago Wine would soon detect whether to enable NPTL support at runtime rather than compile time. Presumably this will get in as part of the CodeWeavers merge. Do you know how long that might be? It seems every day people hit this problem and don't realise how to work around it.
I'm working on it; the way we do it in Crossover is not really applicable to Wine (plus it's frankly ugly), but I'm working on the proper solution. It's still going to take some time.
Mike Hearn <mike(a)theoretic.com> writes:
Oh, sorry, should have thought of this before. If it were possible to reliably detect NPTL breakage in the configure script, would you accept a patch to add this temporarily? Some of the people hitting this problem have very little technical knowledge, editing wineinstall , make distclean etc is a bit beyond them, especially if they don't know where to get help in the first place.
Well, you can detect the lib in use at compile time but that isn't necessarily what will be used at run time, things like changing the kernel or even simply setting LD_ASSUME_KERNEL differently will break it. So I'm not convinced it's really more reliable. The real problem IMO is that we don't have NPTL rpm packages. -- Alexandre Julliard julliard(a)winehq.com
Well, you can detect the lib in use at compile time but that isn't necessarily what will be used at run time, things like changing the kernel or even simply setting LD_ASSUME_KERNEL differently will break it.
This is true. Unfortunately, with the current state of Linux packaging today, the assumption is that if you don't have a package available for your exact distro and version, you need to compile from source. So, for users without an RPM available, they will compile it and get this check/fix.
So I'm not convinced it's really more reliable. The real problem IMO is that we don't have NPTL rpm packages.
We do, over at newrpms.sunsite.dk iirc, the biggest problems being that I think they depend on ALSA (not sure why) and that nobody knows about them unless they visit IRC. Plus they are for Redhat only (but really it's mostly redhat users with the problems). Perhaps it'd be easier to simply place a prominant warning on the winehq homepage with pointers to newrpms.sunsite.dk
On Fri, 9 May 2003, Mike Hearn wrote:
We do, over at newrpms.sunsite.dk iirc, the biggest problems being that I think they depend on ALSA (not sure why) and that nobody knows about them unless they visit IRC. Plus they are for Redhat only (but really it's mostly redhat users with the problems).
Perhaps it'd be easier to simply place a prominant warning on the winehq homepage with pointers to newrpms.sunsite.dk
Please don't -- we have a place on SF where we have packages, let's not complicate things. In fact, our RedHat RPMs are NTPL read, this is what the release notes say: Notes: This release is compiled for a fully patched installation of Red Hat Linux 8.0, including (but not limited to) the glibc-2.3.2-4.80.6 errata package. It may or may not work with the original glibc package installed by Red Hat Linux 8.0. The problem is that many people build from source, and ./configure doesn't do the expected thing: detect the requirements for the current system. -- Dimi.
Dimitrie O. Paun a écrit:
On Fri, 9 May 2003, Mike Hearn wrote:
We do, over at newrpms.sunsite.dk iirc, the biggest problems being that I think they depend on ALSA (not sure why) and that nobody knows about them unless they visit IRC. Plus they are for Redhat only (but really it's mostly redhat users with the problems).
Perhaps it'd be easier to simply place a prominant warning on the winehq homepage with pointers to newrpms.sunsite.dk
Please don't -- we have a place on SF where we have packages, let's not complicate things. In fact, our RedHat RPMs are NTPL read, this is what the release notes say:
Notes: This release is compiled for a fully patched installation of Red Hat Linux 8.0, including (but not limited to) the glibc-2.3.2-4.80.6 errata package. It may or may not work with the original glibc package installed by Red Hat Linux 8.0.
No they're not. Trust me :) As I just said, the different glibc-2.3.x packages shipped by RH for RH8 do not work with NPTL. ./configure is not called with --with-nptl in my RPMs. The results on other distros (eg, RH9) are probably not too good. What we need is effectively a set of RPMs for RH9 on SF.net. The RPMs on newrpms.sunsite.dk are built with ./configure --with-nptl, so they would probably qualify. They are derived from my packages, themselves derived from the one RH shipped with RH8.
The problem is that many people build from source, and ./configure doesn't do the expected thing: detect the requirements for the current system.
That's true. The same thing could be said regarding OpenGL versions, depending on the supplier of the driver and include files on both the compilation machine and where it is run. Vincent
On May 9, 2003 04:18 pm, Vincent Béron wrote:
What we need is effectively a set of RPMs for RH9 on SF.net. The RPMs on newrpms.sunsite.dk are built with ./configure --with-nptl, so they would probably qualify. They are derived from my packages, themselves derived from the one RH shipped with RH8.
I would feel a lot more confortable about those packages if you give them your blessing, since you are our RedHat packager. If you do, they should be named consistently with the other packages, and uploaded to SF, so we don't have to point people in other directions. -- Dimi.
Mike Hearn a écrit:
Well, you can detect the lib in use at compile time but that isn't necessarily what will be used at run time, things like changing the kernel or even simply setting LD_ASSUME_KERNEL differently will break it.
This is true. Unfortunately, with the current state of Linux packaging today, the assumption is that if you don't have a package available for your exact distro and version, you need to compile from source. So, for users without an RPM available, they will compile it and get this check/fix.
Problem is, this assumption is often true. The LSB is supposed to help with the file location part, but functionnality-wise, the glibc-2.3.1 shipped with RH8 doesn't use NPTL, while the version (IIRC) shipped in Debian unstable did a few months ago. So if your package (RPM, deb, tgz, anything via alien) is compiled to use it, it can be unusable on some of the other distros, even when installed packages versions are the same (because of different configuration choices by distros).
So I'm not convinced it's really more reliable. The real problem IMO is that we don't have NPTL rpm packages.
We do, over at newrpms.sunsite.dk iirc, the biggest problems being that I think they depend on ALSA (not sure why) and that nobody knows about them unless they visit IRC. Plus they are for Redhat only (but really it's mostly redhat users with the problems).
Perhaps it'd be easier to simply place a prominant warning on the winehq homepage with pointers to newrpms.sunsite.dk
What would be better is to have them moved to Sourceforge, alongside the other ones. Some small things would need to be improved though (documentation is not built, for example). I should have a working RH9 setup early next week (if time permit), so I may tackle it. Vincent
participants (8)
-
Alexandre Julliard -
Dimitrie O. Paun -
Dimitrie O. Paun -
erwin wolff -
Mike Hearn -
Mike Hearn -
Sylvain Petreolle -
Vincent Béron