dlls/mscms/profile.c breakage

Hans Leidekker hans at it.vu.nl
Thu Nov 25 03:44:40 CST 2004

On Thursday 25 November 2004 02:08, Vincent Béron wrote:

> A packager has to target something (a distro, etc.). If your target has

A packager could target a single distro and version, like you seem
to do. A packager could also target multiple versions of the same
distro (like Ivan does) and a packager could target multiple versions
of multiple distro's and OS'es, like CodeWeavers seems to do.

> lcms 1.09 as standard, you can't require to update it for all users if
> the replacement version (1.13 or so) is not the standard one for that
> distro.

No, I'm not requiring or forcing users to upgrade. I'm asking packagers
(specifically those that target multiple distro's/OS'es or versions with
a single package) to build with the most recent headers. Because that
will result in the most functional Wine if recent lcms is available on
a users' system.

If lcms is not available Wine will degrade gracefully. If such a package
was built with old headers users that actually have a recent lcms would
not profit from it. See my point?

> I thought almost every lib used by Wine would be in ports then. I guess
> ports can be considered as part of FreeBSD from a dependancies point of
> view, it's the first place where FreeBSD users go fetch programs they
> don't currently have.

Don't they automatically fetch the latest version in that case? Or is
the ports collection versioned and tied to the FreeBSD main version?


More information about the wine-devel mailing list