[Bug 58161] New: Unimplemented function advapi32.dll.SystemFunction036 in LTSpice
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=58161 Bug ID: 58161 Summary: Unimplemented function advapi32.dll.SystemFunction036 in LTSpice Product: Wine Version: 10.5 Hardware: x86-64 OS: Linux Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: -unknown Assignee: wine-bugs(a)winehq.org Reporter: scallegari(a)arces.unibo.it Distribution: --- LTSpice has traditionally been a wine-friendly application. Not long ago, its website used to explicitly suggest using wine to run the application in Linux. Recently, LTSpice has become impossible to install because it stops with the error in subject. -- Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=58161 --- Comment #1 from Sergio Callegari <scallegari(a)arces.unibo.it> --- Followup: this seems to be a problem with the updating of the wine components when wine gets upgraded to a new version. Erasing the prefix and recreating it solves the issue. -- Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=58161 Austin English <austinenglish(a)gmail.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |julliard(a)winehq.org --- Comment #2 from Austin English <austinenglish(a)gmail.com> --- I think in the past we've considered bugs like this INVALID for development releases. Alexandre, what do you think? -- Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=58161 --- Comment #3 from Sergio Callegari <scallegari(a)arces.unibo.it> --- The most important point is clearly that the issue does not stay for the stable release, i.e. that when you update from one stable release to another it happens that some components remain in an inconsistent state in one of your wine prefixes. Yet, I don't know if there is any statistical data, but in my circle I would say that the vast majority of the wine users are on the development releases, because (1) this is what many distros ship by default; (2) the situation is so dynamic that getting bug fixes and enhancements early makes a difference; (3) the development releases have historically been rather solid. So, addressing this early (if possible) could still be helpfull to many. -- Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=58161 --- Comment #4 from Alexandre Julliard <julliard(a)winehq.org> --- (In reply to Austin English from comment #2)
I think in the past we've considered bugs like this INVALID for development releases. Alexandre, what do you think?
Sometimes when there are changes to low-level dlls, it's possible that the prefix needs to be re-created, or else forcefully updated with WINEBOOTSTRAPMODE=1. That can even happen between stable releases. I understand that it's annoying, but I'm afraid it can't be completely avoided. -- Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=58161 Louis Lenders <xerox.xerox2000x(a)gmail.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Resolution|--- |WONTFIX Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED CC| |xerox.xerox2000x(a)gmail.com --- Comment #5 from Louis Lenders <xerox.xerox2000x(a)gmail.com> --- (In reply to Alexandre Julliard from comment #4)
(In reply to Austin English from comment #2)
I think in the past we've considered bugs like this INVALID for development releases. Alexandre, what do you think?
Sometimes when there are changes to low-level dlls, it's possible that the prefix needs to be re-created, or else forcefully updated with WINEBOOTSTRAPMODE=1. That can even happen between stable releases. I understand that it's annoying, but I'm afraid it can't be completely avoided.
Let's resolve this as WONTFIX then. -- Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=58161 --- Comment #6 from Sergio Callegari <scallegari(a)arces.unibo.it> --- Would it then be enough to run `WINEPREFIX=... WINEBOOTSTRAPMODE=1 wine ...` to fix things? -- Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=58161 sewn(a)disroot.org changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |sewn(a)disroot.org --- Comment #7 from sewn(a)disroot.org --- This bug has been encountered by hundreds of my users. This bug was very inconvenient. If there is a way to programmatically check if `WINEBOOTSTRAPMODE` is required, let me know, so i can add a fix. -- Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
participants (1)
-
WineHQ Bugzilla