WINEDLLPATH and /usr/lib/wine
hintak_leung at yahoo.co.uk
Tue Jan 26 12:35:03 CST 2010
--- On Tue, 26/1/10, Alexandre Julliard <julliard at winehq.org> wrote:
> Michael Ost <most at museresearch.com>
> > I agree. And that's what your patch does, right? Would
> you like to
> > submit it to the wine-patches list? I think the case
> for it is strong,
> > especially since (1) you found that it fixes a
> behavior change in
> > WINEDLLPATH from November 2006 --- arguably a
> regression; and (2) it
> > works in the same way that LD_LIBRARY_PATH works,
> which is what Linux
> > programmers would expect.
> Actually the current way is precisely what LD_LIBRARY_PATH
> does for
> relocatable installs. The loader first looks in the rpath
> $ORIGIN path,
> then in LD_LIBRARY_PATH, then in system directories. Wine
> does exactly
> the same thing.
I suppose that's the intention of specifying rpath (and that change back in feb 2006?) - some are security-conscious and wish built-in bits not to be overridable. I agree most uses of LD_LIBRARY_PATH are fairly ugly hacks, and if it is needed somebody is probably doing something wrong.
(on the issue with ddiwrapper - supposedly its use of WINEDLLPATH shouldn't be needed if wine's gdi32 and friends have a more complete implementations of DIB, the *Eng* routines, I think... so it is band-aiding over an issue, but it is a band-aid useful to some people, alright).
More information about the wine-devel