Hi!
On Tue, 2019-08-06 at 16:45:09 +0200, Jens Reyer wrote:
> Both build and install a "wineserver" binary, which we install as
> /usr/lib/wine/wineserver32 or wineserver64. We call that binary from a
> script [2] /usr/lib/wine/wineserver which currently is in pkg:wine
> (arch:all), which is only "recommended" [3] by pkg:wine32 or pkg:wine64.
>
> Since the wineserver{32|64} file is not found by the Wine code, these
> filenames are broken without our wineserver script. So I'd like to move
> that script to pkg:wine32 and pkg:wine64.
> [2] There are also unrelated reasons for having this script. Otherwise
> I'd dpkg-divert the 32-bit wineserver in favor of the 64-bit one, which
> would perfectly match the way Wine works (Wine uses the 32-bit
> wineserver only for pure 32-bit installations, but the 64-bit server for
> mixed and 64-bit installations).
> I could dpkg-divert the script, but that looks like a workaround, not a
> solution, to me.
I've checked the script, and the only reason I see for it being a
wrapper is perhaps the -p0 option? Couldn't that be passed by whoever
is running that program?
If so a probably nicer option would be to turn the wineserver pathname
into an alternative, then you can assign the 32-bit variant a lower
priority than the 64-bit one, and things will just work automatically.
Thanks,
Guillem
