Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2006 14:30:34 +1000 From: Andrew Reilly <andrew-freebsd@areilly.bpc-users.org> To: Pete French <petefrench@ticketswitch.com> Cc: amd64@freebsd.org Subject: Re: amd64/104311: ports/wine should be installable on amd64 Message-ID: <20061013043034.GA71990@duncan.reilly.home> In-Reply-To: <E1GY1Zt-000Gi6-Lr@dilbert.firstcallgroup.co.uk> References: <E1GY1Zt-000Gi6-Lr@dilbert.firstcallgroup.co.uk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, Oct 12, 2006 at 03:30:29PM +0100, Pete French wrote: > > If wine is important to you, then you have 3 choices: > > > > 1. submit patches to create the lib32-* library ports and the > > necessary patches to Mk/bsd.ports.mk and emulators/wine to allow it to > > build on the amd64 architecture. > > Hmmm, now what I am about to suggest is probably going to sound stupid, > but when I need to run a 32 bit executable under 64 bit I dont bother with > all that library junk, I simply static link it. So would it not be possible > just to produce a staticly linked wine executable and install that ? No > need for library ports and fixing dynamic linking or any of that stuff. > It's always worked fine for me with my own code, I dont see why it couldnt > be applied to ports too. > > How hard is it to tell wine (or any other port) to build staticly when it is > being compiled on an i386 box ? That won't work with wine, I'm fairly certain. In order to look sufficiently similar to a Windows environment, you have to have something that looks like DLLs. Wine, just like Windows, has a gazillion dynamically loadable libraries, for that reason. Run-time linking is very much part of the windows experience... Cheers, -- Andrew
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20061013043034.GA71990>