Support for pkgconfig

Alexandre Julliard julliard at
Mon Apr 14 16:27:38 CDT 2003

"Dimitrie O. Paun" <dimi at> writes:

> But you see, the interface to the DLL may be small enough that
> LoadLibrary would do just fine, but most of the time the DLL
> itself will need registry support, and so on, and so forth.

Of course that depends on what the dll does. But for the common case
of things like codecs, you don't want to drag Wine into it. Even if
the dll is calling a bunch of API functions, you want to stub these to
do whatever makes sense for your app; you don't want to have to
provide a config file, DOS drives, registry files, the wineserver, the
X11 driver, etc. etc.

If the dll does require a lot of Windows features then yes you should
use Wine, but then I think it's reasonable to build a Winelib
app. Even if we somehow change the linking process so that you can
simply add -lwine, you will still end up with a Winelib app, and have
to deal with everything this implies. And frankly at that point the
exact command line you have to use to link is a minor detail.

The problem with saying that one should be able to use Wine simply by
adding -lwine is that "use Wine" means something different for each
case. And what people really want is that -lwine should allow them to
use the APIs their specific case needs, and not bother them with any
other part of Wine; so there's simply no way to offer a general
solution for that.

Alexandre Julliard
julliard at

More information about the wine-devel mailing list