2010/4/9 Nicolas Le Cam <[email protected]>: > Le 9 avril 2010 13:30, Frédéric Delanoy <[email protected]> a écrit : >> 2010/4/9 Nicolas Le Cam <[email protected]>: >>> Hi Frédéric, >>> >>>>+processus clients se sont terminés. Ceci évite le coût inhérent à l'arrêt >>> sont -> soient >>> >>>>+\fIwineserver\fR dans le chemin système ou quelques autres emplacements >>>>vraisemblables. >>> "potentiels" or "possibles" suit better. >>> >> >> My understanding was that it looked first in the system path, then >> tried in, e.g., the home dir or other >> directories. >> I guess it looks in a hardcoded list of dirs, or sthg like that. In >> that sense, "possibles" does not fit IMO. >> "potentiels" or "vraisemblables" could both fit, but I wanted to >> insist on the probability for the command >> to be there (sthg like P[potentiels] < P[vraisemblables]). >> >> Frédéric >> > It tries PATH and BINDIR (and server/wineserver if in a build > directory). See > http://source.winehq.org/git/wine.git/?a=blob;f=libs/wine/config.c#l480 > So 'potentiels' or 'possibles' fit better IMHO.
"Probables" may possibly fit even better (altough "potentiels" should be OK)? Frédéric
