[Wine]warn:dosfs:DOSFS_FindUnixName (Xilinx)

[michael at cherryblossom.homelinux.com]

On Sat, Aug 28, 2004 at 03:32:25PM +0000, Craig Dunn wrote:
> Thanks for all the replies.
 
Okay, first and foremost, avoid (as much as possible) using prepackaged
debian packages for anything under heavy development (such as wine or
amsn) -- I don't, since they take months or years to filter down to you,
and usually are broken anyways.  (You can use unstable, which might help
a little, but not much.)

Oh, and by the way, my pc is reporting that Woody Stable's Wine version
is 20020411, at least 1 year newer than your reported version.

> I've download the source files from winehq and compiled them.  As a result, 

Wine is under constant development.  Using newer files makes sure that
you're not reporting a problem that has already been found, debugged,
and solved -- redundant work is very annoying to users and developers. 
That is probably why a) using the new version helped you and b) one of
the mailing list members was so pushy about using the latest
release/CVS.

Even between one month releases, there are TONS of changes, and many
programs/interfaces/setup can be or have been dramatically improved or
changed, usually for the better.   (Except in regressions.)

> the problem has now gone away and the software works (I don't get any 
> warnings now).  People on the Internet claim to be using the Xilinx 
> software with older versions of Wine, so I didn't think it was a Wine 

Yes, but 3 years old? Honestly...

If they're reporting older versions, make sure that those "older
evresions" match or are older (i.e. your's is newer) than yours.   Also
note above statement about how fast development occurs.

> version problem.  I can only guess the problem was to do with using a 
> pre-packaged version of Wine (Debian Package).  I had also tried other 

I'd go as far as saying that almost 60+% of linux code only runs
properly if built from source, and that 35% of the remaining 40% run
better from optimized binaries built from source as opposed to generic
binaries.  Of cuorse, standard i386 binarys are easier for an end-user
to set up, making it more like, say, Windows in terms of setup.

> pre-packaged versions, all to no avail.

You aren't talking about other OSes' packages, are you?  I hope not,
because that usually causes issues, since almost each OS distro uses a
completedyl different configuration layout.  Like debian and it's
friendly-browser and such.

> If everything had of worked as it should I wouldn't have been that bothered 
> with the warnings.  But as it failed, the warnings were the only clue I had 
> to the problem.

Very logical.  You're smarter than most; some just complain about GUI
messages they get from their app and don't even tell us anything about
what distro they're using, what kernel they use, what wine they use,
and/or it's setup!

> Thanks again for the help.
> 
> _________________________________________________________________
> Stay in touch with absent friends - get MSN Messenger 
> http://www.msn.co.uk/messenger
> 
> _______________________________________________
> wine-users mailing list
> wine-users at winehq.org
> http://www.winehq.org/mailman/listinfo/wine-users

I cannot guarantee the accuracy, logicalness, correctness or fairness of
the above statements.  I'm just trying my best.

--Michael Chang