hello world

[Dimi Paun]

From: "cdr" <cedar at 3web.net>
>  > That's fine it's supposed to do so. But it's also supposed to
>  > create a 'type' executable too (a batch file really).
> 
> This is where I was (obviously) confused, all I can say
> in my defence is that Winelib User's Guide in "Getting started"
> implies that:
> 
> (...
>   You are done! Now you can start the application as ./notepad2
> ...)
> 
> And there is no mention of script that runs ...so - so I was
> expecting self-contained Linux binary.

Well, the statement above is still correct. And yeah, you don't
have to worry about any script  -- you just do ./notepad2 :)
Why do you care it's a script?

>  > That's all fine. You should get type.exe.so (correct, we need that)
>  > and a type executable that basically does
>  >
>  > wine type.exe.so
>  >
> 
> I take it that means all winelib-ported apps are NOT true linux
> binaries - but some half-breed between win32 binaries and Linux
> binaries? What is then the advantage of porting (using winelib)
> as opposed to running win32 binaries under wine?

They are true Linux binaries (ELF format) but they need a bit of
setup (for Windows compat) _before_ they start.

But yeah, running the Win32 (PE) executables instead is a true
possibility, same speed, etc. But having a Winelib port allows
you to better integrate with the Unix env, which may be what 
you want for a 'true' Linux app.

-- 
Dimi Paun <dimi at lattica.com>
Lattica, Inc.