Compile documentation problem

gslink gslink at
Fri Oct 21 09:32:45 CDT 2005

Vincent Béron wrote:
> Le jeu 20/10/2005 à 20:34, gslink a écrit :
> [snip]
>>Let me explain the problem.  I took your source from May and it compiled 
>>correctly.  When I looked at your source I found that you had supplied 
>>some additional code in the form of three patches.  Among the other 
>>things supplied were ttf fonts.  As a result your source does not need 
>>fontforge or fontforge required libraries.
> Right, because seeing the number of downloads of fontforge on
> sourceforge, not much people have it installed, and I prefer ease the
> step in this specific case.
>> This is not true of the 
>>stock version of Wine.  It supplies all fonts in fontforge form.  As a 
>>result if is missing then the make file in 
>>directory fonts will fail and compilation will stop.
> That's the point where I don't quite understand. You installed
> fontforge, but some of its dependencies is not installed so it fails to
> run? How did you install it? Fedora Extras? The fonts in the .tar.gz
> you're talking about are generated with fontforge (obviously :)), but
> always the binary package available from, not
> the one from Fedora Extras, as that one is older and I know there had
> been some changes in the way Wine builds the fonts because of bugs in
> fontforge (fixed since then, but it was after this July).
>> With your patches 
>>this didn't happen.  Try running wineinstall with the stock Wine source 
>>and NO additional rpms in your system.  It should fail in fonts.  If you 
>>install fontforge and the fontforge required library 
>> then Wine compiles and installs perfectly.
> Again, I don't quite understand. Fontforge is not normally installed on
> my system, and I never get problems in fonts/ (the files are not built,
> but it's not a compilation failure, no attempt to build them is done).
> Reading from, if fontforge and freetype are not both
> available, the fonts/ dir won't be entered in by make. So if you get any
> failure in fonts/, fontforge is installed (or you removed it and didn't
> ran configure after).
> Now, if you're getting unresolved dependencies (I just checked and the
> fontforge package in Fedora Extras lists as one),
> then it's a matter of your package manager to install it, or not let you
> install fontforge if it can't resolve it itself. If you --force the
> installation of fontforge while some dependencies are not satisfied, all
> hell breaks loose.
> I'm curious how you get to install a fontforge requiring libuninameslist
> without installing the latter. Or please point me to what I understood
> wrong.
>>I think the best thing might be for you to document those May patches as 
>>I think I prefer your way over the stock way.  Please understand: there 
>>is nothing wrong with Wine.
> Actually, I think some parts of Wine should be distributed as standalone
> packages, as they don't need to be in the same source .tar.gz as the
> rest of Wine, and the tools to build them are not as ubiquitous as a C
> compiler.
> The SGML documentation was a start, I see the fonts as another one.
> Vincent
I think you have it right.  What happened was that I got an old 
fontforge which, for some reason didn't squalk when libuninameslist 
wasn't there.  The actual source from fontforge lists that as an 
optional library.  I have not tried to install fontforge without it but 
if the documentation is correct then it should install with no 
additional libraries.  When I tried to install the fontforge in RH 
extras that version does require libuninameslist.  I think doing all the 
RH binaries is really too much for one person and understand that you 
might not have the time but could you please explain your May patches. 
It would make life much easier for those of us converting to a compiled 

More information about the wine-devel mailing list