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