Purist keyword?

[Maarten Lankhorst]

Hi Austin,

2010/10/30 Austin English <austinenglish at gmail.com>:
> On Saturday, October 30, 2010, Shachar Shemesh <shachar at shemesh.biz> wrote:
>> On 30/10/10 19:25, Austin English wrote:
>>
>> I meant bugs that only occur by manually removing native dlls. The
>> report summaries are usually clear enough, I was hoping to get an easy
>> way to search for them and separate them from 'normal' bugs.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> I suspect your use of the word "native" is different than the one defined by Wine (see, for example, http://www.winehq.org/docs/wineusr-guide/config-wine-main).
>>
>> Native DLLs, in Wine, are DLLs that come from a real Windows system. This as opposed to "built-in DLLs", that are DLLs compiled for Wine as winelib, carrying the
>> ".dll.so" extension.
>
> No, I mean native. Some applications install native redistibutables,
> e.g. msvcr80 or d3dx9_36.
>
>> To the best of my knowledge, Wine arrives with no native DLLs at all, and thus one cannot remove any. Can you point to a bug report you might tag as "purist", so we can all get on the same page?
>
> Sure. I forget not everyone follows wine-bugs, so this was unclear.
> See http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=24510. Blur runs out of the
> box, but if you remove the bundled native dll (being a purist) the
> game fails, because wine is missing a dozen or so functions. There are
> several similar bugs.
I really don't see what 'purist' adds, if a game fails because a
builtin dll is missing a function, why would it matter if the game
installs a native dll by default or not? The bug is still in the
builtin dll, whether you use the builtin dll or not. ;)

Cheers,
Maarten