PATCH: fix for RPM

[Pavel Roskin]

Hello, Kristian!

I have downloaded the latest Wine RPM from http://wine.dataparty.no/
It doesn't work at all, at least in the configuration without Windows.
The trace shows that Wine cannot load KERNEL32.dll because it looks in 
/tmp/wine-rpm-root/usr/lib/wine/ instead of /usr/lib/wine/:

08072a70:warn:module:BUILTIN32_dlopen cannot open .so lib for builtin 
kernel32.dll: /tmp/wine-rpm-root/usr/lib/wine/kernel32.dll.so: cannot open 
shared object file: No such file or directory
08072a70:warn:module:MODULE_LoadLibraryExA Failed to load module 
'C:\WINDOWS\SYSTEM\KERNEL32.dll'; error=2
08072a70:trace:heap:RtlFreeHeap (40370000,00000002,40370e50): returning 
TRUE
08072a70:err:module:PE_fixup_imports Module (file) KERNEL32.dll (which is 
needed by C:\windows\IsUninst.exe) not found

Wine should not be configured with the /usr prefix.  The prefix should 
only be changed to $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/usr during the install.

I'm copying my message to the list, because I'm afraid that the RPMs on
http://wine.dataparty.no/ are not really maintained.  I remember seeing
the same error a few months ago, I just didn't have time to report it.  
How can this error remain unfixed for months, if it makes Wine useless?

This patch has been tested.  The resulting RPM works.

==================================
--- wine.spec.unstrip
+++ wine.spec.unstrip
@@ -18,14 +18,14 @@
 %setup -q

%build
-./configure --without-curses --prefix=$RPM_BUILD_ROOT/usr \
+./configure --without-curses --prefix=/usr \
        --sysconfdir=/etc/wine
 make depend
 make CFLAGS='-O2 -Wall'

%install
 rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
-make install
+make install prefix=$RPM_BUILD_ROOT/usr
 mkdir -p $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/etc/wine
 cp documentation/samples/config $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/etc/wine/config
 cp tools/fnt2bdf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/usr/bin
==================================

[Vincent Béron]

Le mar 18/06/2002 à 11:49, Pavel Roskin a écrit :
> I'm copying my message to the list, because I'm afraid that the RPMs on
> http://wine.dataparty.no/ are not really maintained.  I remember seeing
> the same error a few months ago, I just didn't have time to report it.  
> How can this error remain unfixed for months, if it makes Wine useless?

Kristian should now how many people downloads each versions. As to why
it hasn't been fixed before, a few ideas: people install from the
.tar.gz, people install from their distro, people fix it each time,
people have another RPM source, people use Debian. Or (it is a
possibility, although I think it's very unlikely) Kristian has ignored
previous patches.

But is this list appropriate for questions about third-party Wine
packaging?
> This patch has been tested.  The resulting RPM works.

I agree the patch looks good.
> -- 
> Regards,
> Pavel Roskin

Cheers,
Vincent

[Pavel Roskin]

Hi, Vincent!
> Kristian should now how many people downloads each versions. As to why
> it hasn't been fixed before, a few ideas: people install from the
> .tar.gz, people install from their distro, people fix it each time,
> people have another RPM source, people use Debian. Or (it is a
> possibility, although I think it's very unlikely) Kristian has ignored
> previous patches.

Actually, I have received the reply from Kristian already.  He writes that
the patch will be applied.  My guess is that there is that most people
didn't have time, motivation or qualification to fix this RPM given the
existance of alternatives.
> But is this list appropriate for questions about third-party Wine
> packaging?

I'm sorry if it's not.

[Francois Gouget]

On 18 Jun 2002, Vincent Béron wrote:
> Le mar 18/06/2002 à 11:49, Pavel Roskin a écrit :
> > I'm copying my message to the list, because I'm afraid that the RPMs on
> > http://wine.dataparty.no/ are not really maintained.  I remember seeing
> > the same error a few months ago, I just didn't have time to report it.
> > How can this error remain unfixed for months, if it makes Wine useless?
>
> Kristian should now how many people downloads each versions. As to why
> it hasn't been fixed before, a few ideas: people install from the
> .tar.gz, people install from their distro, people fix it each time,
> people have another RPM source, people use Debian. Or (it is a
> possibility, although I think it's very unlikely) Kristian has ignored
> previous patches.
>
> But is this list appropriate for questions about third-party Wine
> packaging?

If it does not get fixed, then it should be removed from the WineHQ
download page. There's no point into directing people to broken
packages.

--
Francois Gouget         [e-mail]        http://fgouget.free.fr/
               RFC 2549: ftp://ftp.isi.edu/in-notes/rfc2549.txt
                IP over Avian Carriers with Quality of Service