mike at navi.cx
Fri Nov 19 12:01:55 CST 2004
On Fri, 2004-11-19 at 16:07, Vincent Béron wrote:
> If you're talking about this thread
> (http://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/showthread.php?s=&threadid=252670), then I didn't reproduce it on my RH9 setup when I released 20041019 (I have a video card fan problem right now, so the video card in that computer is now in my main computer, so I can't test it just right now). I guess the user have a different kernel/glibc than I do (I'm using RH9+updates from RH for RH9+updates from FedoraLegacy for RH9 as of the releases of Wine). The epoll detection/support is not very robust yet it seems.
Hmm, OK. Actually there are several threads, just search for
epoll_create on the forums. As long as you're aware of the issue I'm
We should really be dynamically detecting this at runtime not compile
> (Slightly OT: would autopackage help here?)
Well, maybe. The ethos of autopackage is "build once, install anywhere"
so before packaging Wine as an autopackage I'd have done the work to
make this dynamically loaded. Features enabled at compile time not
runtime are e.v.i.l and should generally by regarded as bugs IMHO. The
RPM ethos is the exact opposite: "build many, install once".
But the issue here is with Wine rather than the actual packaging
technology in use.
> Also, PICOspark mentions he gets the same error in WineX, which I
> personnally find a bit strange.
That is a bit bizarre, I just checked and TG CVS appears to use standard
poll not epoll. But who knows what their binaries use.
More information about the wine-devel