Your message dated Fri, 9 Aug 2019 20:07:26 -0400 with message-id <CANTw=MPNjfJx+KvAc2=YcsZ-xtt6h0p8DVbLRAEsbgr7cBTh-Q@mail.gmail.com> and subject line Re: [pkg-wine-party] Bug#852494: wine: Add libwine.so and libwine.so.1 alternatives has caused the Debian Bug report #852494, regarding wine: Add libwine.so and libwine.so.1 alternatives to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith. (NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact owner@bugs.debian.org immediately.) -- 852494: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=852494 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message ---
- To: submit@bugs.debian.org
- Subject: wine: Add libwine.so and libwine.so.1 alternatives
- From: Javier Serrano Polo <javier@jasp.net>
- Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2017 23:15:54 +0100
- Message-id: <1485296155.25003.104.camel@sempati.menos4>
- Reply-to: javier--7C8FrOsBhwV6hRgYM4mLHJBYcgPTm9@jasp.net
Source: wine Version: 1.8.6-3 Severity: wishlist Please add a libwine.so.1 alternative to libwine packages, and libwine.so to libwine-dev ones. These alternatives should be placed under /usr/lib/MULTIARCH so that applications depending on libwine avoid the use of RUNPATH and the binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath lintian error. The alternatives should not be slaves in the wine package. I suggest to move the slave alternatives from wine package to their respective packages (wine32-tools and such), and to depend on an update-wine-alternatives script (in libwine) that runs update-alternatives for the installed packages.Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
- To: 852494-close@bugs.debian.org
- Subject: Re: [pkg-wine-party] Bug#852494: wine: Add libwine.so and libwine.so.1 alternatives
- From: Michael Gilbert <mgilbert@debian.org>
- Date: Fri, 9 Aug 2019 20:07:26 -0400
- Message-id: <CANTw=MPNjfJx+KvAc2=YcsZ-xtt6h0p8DVbLRAEsbgr7cBTh-Q@mail.gmail.com>
- In-reply-to: <1515614859.23397.38.camel@sempati.menos4>
- References: <CANTw=MM8V-1csDfaR6RXmCfLaExn-Xy59u6y=+PqSNfqq5onbQ@mail.gmail.com> <1485296155.25003.104.camel@sempati.menos4> <ced9c631-7ca6-aa6c-5fd5-6e9a92f25af1@gmail.com> <1515614859.23397.38.camel@sempati.menos4>
On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 3:42 PM Javier Serrano Polo wrote: > > There are no reverse dependencies of libwine, so it is not clear to me > > how this would actually be helpful. > > Sorry, I missed your message. lmms-vst-server depends on wine, but I > cannot help with lmms-related packaging right now. My point of view is that lmms should rely solely on the "stable" wine API, which is the libwine package. Too much complexity will be required to support that and libwine-development via alternatives. Best wishes, Mike
--- End Message ---