WINEDLLPATH and /usr/lib/wine

[Michael Ost]

Alexandre Julliard wrote:
> Michael Ost <most at museresearch.com> writes:
> 
>> I think it makes more sense to require, as Hin-Tak Leung's patch does,
>> that a user put /usr/lib/wine in WINEDLLPATH if they use
>> WINEDLLPATH. This is how LD_LIBRARY_PATH works for ld and PATH works
>> in bash --- so it's expected behavior.
>>
>> Also, from my reading of the code, you jump through some special hoops
>> to deal with running from the build directory which could be more
>> easily solved by putting WINEDLLPATH first.
>>
>> Anyway, I'm guessing that I'm whistling in the wind here since so much
>> is built on how WINEDLLPATH currently works...?
> 
> Not necessarily, the behavior could probably be tweaked, feel free to
> suggest changes. You can't require users to set WINEDLLPATH for normal
> usage though, including running from the build tree or from a relocated
> install.

Two easy options would be:
1. put /usr/lib/wine at the end of the list automatically. This is 
Hin-Tak Leung's approach.
2. require users to add /usr/lib/wine themselves. I could make a patch 
for that.

#1 is easier for me :) but #2 is a little more "standard", acting like 
LD_LIBRARY_PATH or PATH do.

Which would you prefer? ... mo