Is it time to delete wineinstall?
dank at kegel.com
Sun Nov 14 17:34:33 CST 2004
James Hawkins wrote:
>>>>Is wineinstall needed anymore?
>>>>README seems to indicate you can install Wine just fine
>>>You can but Alexandre wants to keep it to make it easier for new Linux
>>>users to build and install Wine.
>>OK, but wineinstall seems to do more than wineprefixcreate;
>>shouldn't they do exactly the same thing when setting up
>>the registry and drives?
> For many, wine is a stepping stone from windows to linux. It eases
> the relocation process. For those people, ./configure, make, and make
> install isn't so trivial or automatic. What they are used to is a
> single setup.exe like in windows
Most people install RPMs, they don't build from source.
That's fine. I'm not arguing against having such a script
that does the configure / make / make install .
What I object to is that there is *duplicated code* between
wineprefixcreate and wineinstall, and it's already diverging.
e.g. wineinstall contains
if [ ! -d ~/.wine/dosdevices ]
[ -d ~/.wine ] || mkdir ~/.wine
ln -s /mnt/fd0 ~/.wine/dosdevices/a:
ln -s $CROOT ~/.wine/dosdevices/c:
ln -s /cdrom ~/.wine/dosdevices/d:
ln -s /tmp ~/.wine/dosdevices/e:
ln -s ~ ~/.wine/dosdevices/f:
ln -s / ~/.wine/dosdevices/z:
if [ "$WINEINSTALLED" = 'no' ]
tools/wineprefixcreate --update --use-wine-tree .
and wineprefixcreate contains
if [ ! -d "$WINEPREFIX/dosdevices" ]
[ -d "$WINEPREFIX/drive_c" ] || mkdir "$WINEPREFIX/drive_c"
ln -s "../drive_c" "$WINEPREFIX/dosdevices/c:"
ln -s "/" "$WINEPREFIX/dosdevices/z:"
Now, why the different list of drives in the two scripts?
And why does wineinstall have *any* of what's in wineprefixcreate,
since it then immediately calls wineprefixcreate?
Code forking is evil, and makes bugs harder to reproduce.
How 'bout we at least nuke the part of wineintall that
duplicates what's in wineprefixcreate?
Trying to get a job as a c++ developer? See http://kegel.com/academy/getting-hired.html
More information about the wine-devel