https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=40835
Bug ID: 40835 Summary: PulseAudio support with NetBSD Product: Wine Version: 1.9.12 Hardware: x86 OS: NetBSD Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: minor Priority: P2 Component: winepulse.drv Assignee: wine-bugs@winehq.org Reporter: adrien_fernandes2@hotmail.com
Created attachment 54798 --> https://bugs.winehq.org/attachment.cgi?id=54798 Output of the compilation
Hello, I am making a package from scratch for NetBSD using pkgsrc so my objective is to make it fully functional whatever the user wants to use (thanks to options).
Everything is perfect EXCEPT for a problem when building with PulseAudio support.
NetBSD 7.0.1 (GENERIC.201605221355Z) i386
https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=40835
Andrew Eikum aeikum@codeweavers.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |aeikum@codeweavers.com
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Eikum aeikum@codeweavers.com --- I don't think that function is anything critical to the operation of winepulse. We should be able to check for it at configure-time and #ifdef it out if it's not available.
https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=40835
--- Comment #2 from Adrien Fernandes adrien_fernandes2@hotmail.com --- Created attachment 54819 --> https://bugs.winehq.org/attachment.cgi?id=54819 fix
Here is the fix I made thanks to #winehq.
But it seems that the error will be fixed by NetBSD developpers very soon. I tried PulseAudio with this fix and it perfectly works.
https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=40835
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Eikum aeikum@codeweavers.com --- (In reply to Adrien Fernandes from comment #2)
But it seems that the error will be fixed by NetBSD developpers very soon. I tried PulseAudio with this fix and it perfectly works.
Do you mean NetBSD is going to implement the pthread_mutexattr_setprotocol API?
https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=40835
--- Comment #4 from Adrien Fernandes adrien_fernandes2@hotmail.com --- Yes
https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=40835
super_man@post.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |super_man@post.com
--- Comment #5 from super_man@post.com --- Do you have a open bug report open for this issue somewhere?
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=40835
Sagawa sagawa.aki+winebugs@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |sagawa.aki+winebugs@gmail.c | |om
--- Comment #6 from Sagawa sagawa.aki+winebugs@gmail.com --- As Adrien Fernandes suggested in comment #4, pthread_mutexattr_setprotocol(3) was introduced in NetBSD 8.0 and later[1]. NetBSD 7.2 has reached end of support as of June 30, 2020[2].
It seems we can close this bug, right?
[1] https://github.com/NetBSD/src/commit/7cf7644fc70bb001b08d50689e7edbb0f09433c... [2] https://www.netbsd.org/releases/formal.html
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=40835
--- Comment #7 from Ken Sharp imwellcushtymelike@gmail.com --- Does compilation succeed now?
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=40835
--- Comment #8 from Sagawa sagawa.aki+winebugs@gmail.com --- Unfortunately, no at this point.
pthread_mutexattr_setprotocol(3) is indeed implemented, which allows the part to compile successfully. However, since Wine 10.12[1], we've been using pthread_mutexattr_setrobust(3), although it's not implemented in NetBSD[2].
I was trying to report a bug related to setrobust(3), and I came across this bug report. I wonder if it might be clearer to handle setrobust(3) in a separate report.
[1] https://gitlab.winehq.org/wine/wine/-/commit/04e440fa120207a2675f8f10619bfaf... [2] https://gnats.netbsd.org/cgi-bin/query-pr-single.pl?number=49269
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=40835
Austin English austinenglish@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Resolution|--- |NOTOURBUG Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
--- Comment #9 from Austin English austinenglish@gmail.com --- (In reply to Sagawa from comment #8)
I was trying to report a bug related to setrobust(3), and I came across this bug report. I wonder if it might be clearer to handle setrobust(3) in a separate report.
Yes, please.
Since this was fixed in upstream NetBSD, marking as "NOTOURBUG".
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=40835
Austin English austinenglish@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|RESOLVED |CLOSED
--- Comment #10 from Austin English austinenglish@gmail.com --- Fixed upstream -> Closing.
-
wine-bugs＠winehq.org -
WineHQ Bugzilla