RFC: Detecting the wine prefix
mstefani at redhat.com
Fri Jul 16 10:15:52 CDT 2010
On 07/16/2010 04:58 PM, André Hentschel wrote:
> Am 16.07.2010 11:32, schrieb Michael Stefaniuc:
>> Hello Paul,
>> Paul Chitescu wrote:
>>> I would want to implement a change in where the wine prefix is assumed by
>>> The current behavior of only considering WINEPREFIX is cumbersome and risky.
>>> Slip a finger, forget a letter and you end running a potential disastrous
>>> command in the wrong prefix. I ruined my main prefix by accidenatlly running
>>> "winetricks ie6" in it...
>>> To fix that I use a wrapper script (unimaginatively named "win") that detects
>>> the proper prefix from the current directory and calls wine or other programs
>>> (winecfg, wineserver, winetricks, etc.) after setting WINEPREFIX. I am
>>> satisfied by this wrapper but has several disadvantages:
>>> - You need to remember to run it instead of wine.
>>> - You may paste a command from somewhere and forget to add "win" in front.
>>> - Needs to be distributed.
>>> The proposed solution is to incorporate the prefix detection logic in wine
>>> itself so no wrapper is needed.
>>> The modified behavior would be like this:
>>> - If WINEPREFIX is set obey that, user knows better. This is also required to
>>> create a new prefix.
>>> - Starting from current working directory descend towards root looking for a
>>> directory that:
>>> 1. Has a dosdevices/ subdirectory and a system.reg file
>>> 2. Has a .wine symlink pointing to a directory matching condition 1.
>>> 3. Holds a .wine regular file whose content is the name of a directory
>>> matching condition 1.
>>> - If a valid prefix (matches condition 1. above) is found use it for wine
>>> - Else use the default ~/.wine
>>> The extra checks 2. and 3. are to be able to handle the case when the current
>>> directory is on a path that is symlinked from inside the prefix. In particular
>>> test 3. is used when the files are on a FAT (or other symlink incapable)
>>> partition. I have several wine prefixes whose "Program Files" is located on a
>>> much larger FAT32 partition shared with you know what.
>>> What do you think about this? Should I go on coding it?
>> I like the idea as it follows the DWIM (Do What I Mean) principle.
>> But the working directory shouldn't be the primary means to detect what
>> WINEPREFIX to use. That should be inherited first from the location of
>> the Win32 binary that is run. E.g. working on multiple regression bugs I
>> have used a separate git tree as well as a separate WINEPREFIX per bug.
>> My CWD was always the SRCDIR/BUILDIR thus useless to find the WINEPREFIX
>> but the path to the binary always had the WINEPREFIX informations in it:
>> ./wine ~/wine/prefixes/21409/drive_c/Program\ Files/foo/foo.exe
>> The "descend towards root" is used extensively by git so that one can
>> provide a good inspiration on how to do it, especially the corner cases.
> Both cases should be taken into account:
That's what I said.
> user:~/.wineprefix/drive_c$ wine myapp.exe
> user:~/$ wine .wineprefix/drive_c/myapp.exe
> Both should work and use .wineprefix
> Also dont forget about worst case situations like:
> user:~/.wineA/drive_c$ WINEPREFIX=~/.wineB wine ../../.wineC/drive_c/myapp.exe
> This makes clear IMHO that the env var WINEPREFIX should have the highest priority, as i think this should be started using .wineB
> So i think if no WINEPREFIX is specified then the cwd should be used and if that is not in some wineprefix the apppatch should be used.
The second part is wrong.
If the user *explicitly* requests something we have to honor it. So
- Highest priority: WINEPREFIX aka "I know what I'm doing, stop ASSuming
and do what I tell you to do!"
- Second highest priority: application path. The user explicitly passes
that to Wine; we have to honor that.
- Last priority: current working directory. This actually is needed
*only* for stuff like "wineconsole cmd" or "winetricks bla" as "wine
foo.exe" already specifies the path to the app and is handled by the
More information about the wine-devel