Hiho,
I've noticed another side effect introduced by http://source.winehq.org/git/wine.git/commit/da340169d6518cf42f1cbe169fbf120..., and I'm not sure if its intentional, or if its a bug.
For WOW64 builds all manpages were installed in the 64-bit build step before. After the commit, some manpages (those in loader/) also get installed in the 32-bit build step.
Here are some logs for comparison: - before: http://repos.wine-staging.com/all/20151021-0141-arch-x64/build.log - after: http://repos.wine-staging.com/all/20151101-0726-arch-x64/build.log (search for "wine.1" for example)
When both builds end in the same package (like on Archlinux) this doesn't matter, however there are plenty of distributions which ship the 32-bit and 64-bit parts in different packages. Having a few manpages in one and the rest in the other is at least a bit unusual, but could also lead to package conflicts.
Should this be considered a bug, or is it up to package maintainers to workaround this issue? And what would be the preferred solution to fix this? I don't really want to reintroduce install-man-pages just after it was removed...
Best regards, Sebastian
Sebastian Lackner sebastian@fds-team.de writes:
Hiho,
I've noticed another side effect introduced by http://source.winehq.org/git/wine.git/commit/da340169d6518cf42f1cbe169fbf120..., and I'm not sure if its intentional, or if its a bug.
It's intentional, in the sense that the manpages should go along with the corresponding binary. So the wine manpage is installed when the wine binary is installed, which in a wow64 setup means on the 32-bit side (arguably we should also have a wine64 manpage installed on the 64-bit side).
When both builds end in the same package (like on Archlinux) this doesn't matter, however there are plenty of distributions which ship the 32-bit and 64-bit parts in different packages. Having a few manpages in one and the rest in the other is at least a bit unusual, but could also lead to package conflicts.
I'm not sure I understand why it would be a problem to have the 32-bit package install manpages. What issues do you see?
On 02.11.2015 02:33, Alexandre Julliard wrote:
Sebastian Lackner sebastian@fds-team.de writes:
Hiho,
I've noticed another side effect introduced by http://source.winehq.org/git/wine.git/commit/da340169d6518cf42f1cbe169fbf120..., and I'm not sure if its intentional, or if its a bug.
It's intentional, in the sense that the manpages should go along with the corresponding binary. So the wine manpage is installed when the wine binary is installed, which in a wow64 setup means on the 32-bit side (arguably we should also have a wine64 manpage installed on the 64-bit side).
I agree, it probably makes more sense than the previous solution. Thanks for the clarification.
When both builds end in the same package (like on Archlinux) this doesn't matter, however there are plenty of distributions which ship the 32-bit and 64-bit parts in different packages. Having a few manpages in one and the rest in the other is at least a bit unusual, but could also lead to package conflicts.
I'm not sure I understand why it would be a problem to have the 32-bit package install manpages. What issues do you see?
Its not really a problem, but it requires changes in most distro packaging scripts.
Best regards, Sebastian
On Mon, Nov 02, 2015 at 10:33:30AM +0900, Alexandre Julliard wrote:
Sebastian Lackner sebastian@fds-team.de writes:
Hiho,
I've noticed another side effect introduced by http://source.winehq.org/git/wine.git/commit/da340169d6518cf42f1cbe169fbf120..., and I'm not sure if its intentional, or if its a bug.
It's intentional, in the sense that the manpages should go along with the corresponding binary. So the wine manpage is installed when the wine binary is installed, which in a wow64 setup means on the 32-bit side (arguably we should also have a wine64 manpage installed on the 64-bit side).
When both builds end in the same package (like on Archlinux) this doesn't matter, however there are plenty of distributions which ship the 32-bit and 64-bit parts in different packages. Having a few manpages in one and the rest in the other is at least a bit unusual, but could also lead to package conflicts.
I'm not sure I understand why it would be a problem to have the 32-bit package install manpages. What issues do you see?
Main issue is that the x86_64 package does not install the "wine" manpages, as the binary is called wine64.
Not a big issues, it can be worked around.
Ciao, Marcus