Why isn't everyone compiling wine
James E. LaBarre
jamesl at bestweb.net
Tue May 25 12:42:48 CDT 2004
>On Mon, 2004-05-24 at 16:21, James E. LaBarre wrote:
>> eternal wrote:
>> > you remove something you have had to compile with `make deinstall' from
>> > the directory that the Makefile is in.
>> This implies you still have/kept the source tree you installed from.
>> Unless you are specifically doing debugging/testing, it seems a waste of
>> Personally, if I were building such apps from source, I'd take the extra
>> step and make an RPM fist *then* install from the RPM. Then it becomes
>> a simple matter of running "rpm -e winebuild" to remove the old version.
>i'll have to look into rpm on freebsd(i have it installed with
>linux_base, i know this much, but i dont use it), i guess... good point
>tho, and thank you. fyi, space isn't a concern on my box; 120GB and
>its all *MINE* -=oD
>ps: i was really posting that as a bit of know-how that i have... i
>regularly use (and highly recommend - just be very, very sure to read
>the man page for it first) portupgrade to handle all of my
>installing/upgrading (ie: after a cvsup), and if i should have to
>uninstall something manually, use `pkg_deinstall packagename-version'
Did I send that directly to you and not the list??? Stupid bad-forwarding-headers
in the list manager again (I've heard the arguments both ways, and I think the
"reply-to" header is still the correct way to go).
When I suggested creating an RPM and then installing from that, I really meant
RPM as what *I* would be using on my system, while RPM would be replaced with
the appropriate packaging system for your own distribution &/or OS. Would that
mean one would use the NSIS installer for creating a Wine install for Windows?
More information about the wine-users