Where is the specfile documented nowadays?

[Bill Medland]

I've just come back to WineLib after a long time and discovered that things
have changed a bit.

(As a result my code finds the builtin dll but complains that it loaded the
so but the dll is not found; I guess it hasn't been named or something)

I guess we need to update the winelib documentation and the "binary dlls"
part.

As I understand it the spec file format has changed significantly over the
past year and half the contents go somewhere else.  In particular all that
seems to go in the spec file nowadays is the entrypoint and the actual
functions.

Can someone point me at the current documentation or is there none.

Bill

[Sylvain Petreolle]

Go at:
http://www.winehq.com/Docs/winelib-user/spec-file.shtml
or look at chapter 3.4 of the winelib documentation.

--- Bill Medland  a écrit : > I've just come back
to WineLib after a long time and discovered that
> things
> have changed a bit.
>
> (As a result my code finds the builtin dll but complains that it
> loaded the
> so but the dll is not found; I guess it hasn't been named or
> something)
>
> I guess we need to update the winelib documentation and the "binary
> dlls"
> part.
>
> As I understand it the spec file format has changed significantly
> over the
> past year and half the contents go somewhere else.  In particular all
> that
> seems to go in the spec file nowadays is the entrypoint and the
> actual
> functions.
>
> Can someone point me at the current documentation or is there none.
>
> Bill

___________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!? -- Une adresse @yahoo.fr gratuite et en français !
Yahoo! Mail : http://fr.mail.yahoo.com

[Bill Medland]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Sylvain Petreolle" 
To: "Bill Medland" ; "wine-devel"

Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2002 3:52 PM
Subject: Re: Where is the specfile documented nowadays?
> Go at:
> http://www.winehq.com/Docs/winelib-user/spec-file.shtml
> or look at chapter 3.4 of the winelib documentation.

Why do you think I asked?
For how long has it been impossible to include the name, mode etc?
Does the rsrc still work
do the imports still work?
etc.

The one answer that no-one has yet provided is "man winebuild"
> --- Bill Medland  a écrit : > I've just come back
> to WineLib after a long time and discovered that
> > things
> > have changed a bit.
> >
> > (As a result my code finds the builtin dll but complains that it
> > loaded the
> > so but the dll is not found; I guess it hasn't been named or
> > something)

(Fixed now)
> > I guess we need to update the winelib documentation and the "binary
> > dlls"
> > part.
> >
> > As I understand it the spec file format has changed significantly
> > over the
> > past year and half the contents go somewhere else.  In particular all
> > that
> > seems to go in the spec file nowadays is the entrypoint and the
> > actual
> > functions.
> >
> > Can someone point me at the current documentation or is there none.

man winebuild

(I guess we ought to do something about winemaker too; it still names things
as libxxxx.so)
> > Bill
>
> Do You Yahoo!? -- Une adresse @yahoo.fr gratuite et en français !
> Yahoo! Mail : http://fr.mail.yahoo.com

Bill

[Martin Wilck]

Am Mit, 2002-09-25 um 01.48 schrieb Bill Medland:
> (I guess we ought to do something about winemaker too; it still names things
> as libxxxx.so)

Can you be more specific? I thought with my latest patches these issues
with winemaker were settled.

Martin

[Bill Medland]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Martin Wilck" 
To: "Bill Medland" 
Cc: "wine-devel" 
Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2002 6:08 AM
Subject: Re: Where is the specfile documented nowadays?
> Am Mit, 2002-09-25 um 01.48 schrieb Bill Medland:
> > (I guess we ought to do something about winemaker too; it still names

things
> > as libxxxx.so)
>
> Can you be more specific? I thought with my latest patches these issues
> with winemaker were settled.

I'll be back to you when I get a chance to check exactly what I am doing and
what happens (in a couple of hours).
> Martin
>
> --
> Martin Wilck                Phone: [phone]
> Fujitsu Siemens Computers   Fax:   [phone]
> Heinz-Nixdorf-Ring 1     mailto:[e-mail]
> D-33106 Paderborn           http://www.fujitsu-siemens.com/primergy

Bill

winemaker (WAS Where is the specfile documented nowadays?)

[Bill Medland]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Martin Wilck" 
To: "Bill Medland" 
Cc: "wine-devel" 
Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2002 6:08 AM
Subject: Re: Where is the specfile documented nowadays?
> Am Mit, 2002-09-25 um 01.48 schrieb Bill Medland:
> > (I guess we ought to do something about winemaker too; it still names

things
> > as libxxxx.so)
>
> Can you be more specific? I thought with my latest patches these issues
> with winemaker were settled.

OK.  Here is where I have a slight problem.  (I am quite prepared to accept
that it may be because I am not thinking, I am missing or I am just an
idiot).

I am trying to create a wrapper around an existing shared object.
testprog.exe is a windows exe that uses three functions exported by
shfile.dll
testprog is a linux executable which uses the same three functions exported
by shfile.so (I guess I should have called it libshfile.so but never mind
that for now)
I want a wrapper that sits around shfile.so so that it can be called by
testprog.exe under wine.

So I have a proxy wrapper (proxy.c) that uses libdl to load the shfile.so
and redirect the calls, and I have a shfile.spec (which I am quite prepared
to rename shfile.dll.spec, libshfile.dll.spec or whatever)

Now I want to use winemaker to set up the build environment.

winemaker --nosource-fix --dll --nomfc -I/home/cvswine/wine/include -ldl --s
ingle-target shfile.dll --nogenerated-specs --nowrap .

and I presume that the resulting so has to be installed as
/usr/local/lib/wine/shfile.dll.so (at least if it isn't there then it
doesn't get loaded).

But winemaker seems to be setting things up so that it will create
/usr/local/lib/libshfile.dll.so.

I guess the point is that I am not trying to create the so that "is" the
executable (if you know what I mean); I am trying to create a true dll
replacement.
> Martin
>
> --
> Martin Wilck                Phone: [phone]
> Fujitsu Siemens Computers   Fax:   [phone]
> Heinz-Nixdorf-Ring 1     mailto:[e-mail]
> D-33106 Paderborn           http://www.fujitsu-siemens.com/primergy

winemaker (WAS Where is the specfile documented nowadays?)

[Martin Wilck]

Am Mit, 2002-09-25 um 20.57 schrieb Bill Medland:
> OK.  Here is where I have a slight problem.  (I am quite prepared to accept
> that it may be because I am not thinking, I am missing or I am just an
> idiot).

You are moving in realms that I've not yet dared enter :)
> But winemaker seems to be setting things up so that it will create
> /usr/local/lib/libshfile.dll.so.

This is because winemaker was designed to create winelib DLL
replacements. I guess linking lib/wine/shfile.dll.so to lib/libshfile.so
might do the job - right? Perhaps you also need to create an empty
shfile.dll in your Windows\System directory, but now I am demonstrating
that I'm ignorant.

Perhaps winemaker should be fixed such that both lib/wine/xyz.so and 
lib/libxyz.so are created. That'd be a fairly easy hack.

Martin

winemaker (WAS Where is the specfile documented nowadays?)

[Francois Gouget]

On 26 Sep 2002, Martin Wilck wrote:
> Am Mit, 2002-09-25 um 20.57 schrieb Bill Medland:

[...]
> > But winemaker seems to be setting things up so that it will create
> > /usr/local/lib/libshfile.dll.so.
>
> This is because winemaker was designed to create winelib DLL
> replacements.

Actually the reason why winemaker was creating libshfile.dll.so files is
that this once was the right thing to do (even further in the past
libraries did not even have the dll extension). But now the names to be
used are:

for executables:   myhello.exe.so
for libraries:     mylib.dll.so

The patch I sent yesterday should make winemaker use the new scheme. The
reason why the lib prefix has been dropped is because one is not
supposed to link against Winelib dlls in the Unix sense. Instead you
must import them using the '-l' option of winebuild. Dropping the 'lib'
prefix makes this more obvious. `

[Francois Gouget]

On 25 Sep 2002, Martin Wilck wrote:
> Am Mit, 2002-09-25 um 01.48 schrieb Bill Medland:
> > (I guess we ought to do something about winemaker too; it still names things
> > as libxxxx.so)
>
> Can you be more specific? I thought with my latest patches these issues
> with winemaker were settled.

There are still a lot of places to fix. I sent a patch to fix them but
there was conflicts and I did not have time to resend it :-(

I'll do it now so that it's done.