About that eeevil library naming decision...

Alexandre Julliard julliard at winehq.com
Mon Feb 25 13:47:31 CST 2002

Andreas Mohr <andi at rhlx01.fht-esslingen.de> writes:

> Maybe we should use libwinecore_XXX.so and libwinedll_XXX.so for the
> naming scheme. That'd be pretty reasonable and cleaner/better than
> the current approach IMHO, as it'd clearly separate core/dll functionality
> in a good way.

The separation will be done by putting dlls in a separate directory
(usually /usr/lib/wine) which is a lot cleaner than creating 150 files
in /usr/lib, no matter how they are named.

> Also, there'll always be global installs with wine library paths
> added to /etc/ld.so.conf. How would you avoid conflicts then with
> equally named libraries in other /etc/ld.so.conf paths ??

Wine dll path won't be added to /etc/ld.so.conf. But in any case the
plan is that dlls in /usr/lib/wine are named without the lib prefix to
make it clear you can't link to them.

> OK, who thinks that this is a good thing to do ?
> Who doesn't ?

I don't. If you really want to do something about it, consider working
on dll separation so that we can finally put all dlls in the right

Alexandre Julliard
julliard at winehq.com

More information about the wine-devel mailing list