Can i compile my program to executable file that can be run without wine ?
On Thu, 25 Sep 2003, flyker wrote:
Can i compile my program to executable file that can be run without wine ?
No.
Can i compile my program to executable file that can be run without wine
?
No.
-- Dimi.
Hmmm.... Than i don't see any reason to compile program using winelib. What is the difference between wine program.exe and wine program.exe.so ? I think the goal of winelib is to make independent executable. And i don't see any other goal.
On Thu, 25 Sep 2003, flyker wrote:
Hmmm.... Than i don't see any reason to compile program using winelib.
True, there's not much reason to do so other than: 1. being able to call Unix functions from your Win32 program 2. a warm and fuzzy feeling that you've "ported" the app to Linux :)
What is the difference between wine program.exe and wine program.exe.so
Right now, not much, other than one is in the PE format, the other in the ELF format. So the second one is in the native Linux binary format, which a lot a people seem to like (at an emotional level). The second one allows you do interact with the Unix environment, so it's not a compelete waste of time.
I think the goal of winelib is to make independent executable. And i don't see any other goal.
I agree, but this is not currently possible. We hope to get there someday (so it's a good thing if your app compiles under Winelib), but this is a post 1.0 goal.
Dimitrie O. Paun wrote:
I think the goal of winelib is to make independent executable. And i don't see any other goal.
I agree, but this is not currently possible. We hope to get there someday (so it's a good thing if your app compiles under Winelib), but this is a post 1.0 goal.
I don't see that happening, ever.
A Win32 program needs Win32 environment. Be that a registry, the Win32 APIs, or a forest directory structure and "My Documents" and "Program Files". While you may theoretically get the APIs by statically linking the DLLs into the executable, all of the rest are only available if Wine is installed on the machine. As such, I don't think a Winelib app will be able to ever live without a wine environment.
It is true that we can let go of the PE loader (in principle), but that is such a minor part of the grand scheme of things, that I don't see any reason to even attempt it.
As things stand, and it's certanly what I'm recommending to people - if all you want is to have your program function on an i386 Linux - just make sure the same PE works on Wine.
Shachar
On Fri, 26 Sep 2003, Shachar Shemesh wrote:
A Win32 program needs Win32 environment. Be that a registry, the Win32 APIs, or a forest directory structure and "My Documents" and "Program Files". While you may theoretically get the APIs by statically linking the DLLs into the executable, all of the rest are only available if Wine is installed on the machine. As such, I don't think a Winelib app will be able to ever live without a wine environment.
Of course, you will need wine installed. I wasn't clear in my response, but I thought he refered to the fact that now we have to start Winelib apps as: wine myapp.so
Ideally, we can just link it to a real executable, without all the wrappers that we have now. Not that it would change much, you will still need the DLLs, etc. but it would be a bit cleaner. Meanwhile, if you use winegcc you are isolated from all these ugly details...
On Thu, 2003-09-25 at 23:16, Dimitrie O. Paun wrote:
On Fri, 26 Sep 2003, Shachar Shemesh wrote:
A Win32 program needs Win32 environment. Be that a registry, the Win32 APIs, or a forest directory structure and "My Documents" and "Program Files". While you may theoretically get the APIs by statically linking the DLLs into the executable, all of the rest are only available if Wine is installed on the machine. As such, I don't think a Winelib app will be able to ever live without a wine environment.
I don't agree with this - there are shades of Win32ness. An app that is slowly being ported to be "native" may well need to be done in chunks. You can remove the registry requirements, teach it the FHS and so on, while still using HeapAlloc.
It's true there's little point just recompiling the app and saying "that's it", but obviously the value of winelib is not in allowing us to use ld.so instead of wine, it's in the ability to take a port slowly but surely, maybe never being completed but along the way getting sufficient integration for it not to matter.
Of course, you will need wine installed. I wasn't clear in my response, but I thought he refered to the fact that now we have to start Winelib apps as: wine myapp.so
Ideally, we can just link it to a real executable, without all the wrappers that we have now. Not that it would change much, you will still need the DLLs, etc. but it would be a bit cleaner. Meanwhile, if you use winegcc you are isolated from all these ugly details...
Yes, it'd be nice to get it documented somewhere why this is needed (maybe it already is).
As I understand it, the problem is that the libc linker would invoke static initializers which might rely on winelib being initialized (especially in c++ code) leading to badness if it isn't? Maybe the threading stuff gets involved too.
If it's just static initializers which are the problem, the obvious solution would be to make winelib initialize on demand - of course I say that, but I'm not going to do the work ;) I don't even know how hard it's be.
If it's because we need to override pthreads too, then I suppose magic tricks with the ELF GOT might help there. Deep voodoo beyond my skill at present though.
thanks -mike
Hmmm.... Than i don't see any reason to compile program using winelib.
True, there's not much reason to do so other than:
- being able to call Unix functions from your Win32 program
- a warm and fuzzy feeling that you've "ported" the app to Linux :)
You should not forget one big advantage of winelib apps: It is possible to debug them with GDB. If they are compiled as native WIN32 executables, you can only debug either the WIN32 part with a WIN32 debugger. Or you can debug the Wine part with GDB. But you can't debug both together.
Martin
On Thu, Sep 25, 2003 at 07:24:57PM +0400, flyker wrote:
Can i compile my program to executable file that can be run without wine
?
No.
Hmmm.... Than i don't see any reason to compile program using winelib. What is the difference between wine program.exe
That will run only on i386 and compatibles.
and wine program.exe.so
This can be compiled and run on PPC, Alpha, S390 whatever
? I think the goal of winelib is to make independent executable. And i don't see any other goal.
It's a first step in porting your app to Linux.
bye michael
-
Dimitrie O. Paun -
flyker -
Martin Fuchs -
Michael Stefaniuc -
Mike Hearn -
Shachar Shemesh