Re: [SOLVED] Re: wine-unstable 64 bit
Le 19.06.2014 16:22, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh a écrit : On Thu, 19 Jun 2014, berenger.mo...@neutralite.org wrote: This syntax $(command) is not portable. It is a POSIX shell construct. Anything that doesn't implement it should not be linked to /bin/sh in the first place. So I was wrong. Not really surprising honestly, but I think I have seen such assertion somewhere else from someone more knowledgeable than me. http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009695399/utilities/xcu_chap02.html section 2.6.3. HOWEVER, $(something) and `something` are not equivalent in POSIX, they have different behavior re. expansion of something. The code appears to be using $() correctly, though. What is the difference then? Expansion in shell is a frequent issue for me when I try to write my scripts. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/5f2009c37331affe78778ffd16b5b...@neutralite.org
Re: [SOLVED] Re: wine-unstable 64 bit
On Fri, 20 Jun 2014, berenger.mo...@neutralite.org wrote: So I was wrong. Not really surprising honestly, but I think I have seen such assertion somewhere else from someone more knowledgeable than me. Now you have the URL to the spec ;-) http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009695399/utilities/xcu_chap02.html HOWEVER, $(something) and `something` are not equivalent in POSIX, they have different behavior re. expansion of something. The code appears to be using $() correctly, though. What is the difference then? Expansion in shell is a frequent issue for me when I try to write my scripts. According to POSIX 2.6.3 (linked above): 8 Within the backquoted style of command substitution, backslash shall retain its literal meaning, except when followed by: '$', '`', or '\' (dollar sign, backquote, backslash). The search for the matching backquote shall be satisfied by the first backquote found without a preceding backslash; during this search, if a non-escaped backquote is encountered within a shell comment, a here-document, an embedded command substitution of the $( command) form, or a quoted string, undefined results occur. A single-quoted or double-quoted string that begins, but does not end, within the `...` sequence produces undefined results. With the $( command ) form, all characters following the open parenthesis to the matching closing parenthesis constitute the command. Any valid shell script can be used for command, except a script consisting solely of redirections which produces unspecified results. 8 Which is kinda hard to parse, but still... http://mywiki.wooledge.org/BashFAQ/082 http://stackoverflow.com/questions/4708549/shell-programming-whats-the-difference-between-command-and-command http://stackoverflow.com/questions/9449778/what-is-the-benefit-of-using-instead-of-backticks-in-shell-scripts http://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/5778/whats-the-difference-between-stuff-and-stuff Read them all, and you'll get the picture. Just say no to backticks :) -- One disk to rule them all, One disk to find them. One disk to bring them all and in the darkness grind them. In the Land of Redmond where the shadows lie. -- The Silicon Valley Tarot Henrique Holschuh -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20140620214817.ga15...@khazad-dum.debian.net
Re: [SOLVED] Re: wine-unstable 64 bit
Le 11.06.2014 14:42, Floris a écrit : If someone have any tips, tricks or commands on the shell script. I love to hear them. if [ $(dpkg --print-architecture) = amd64 -a $(dpkg --print-foreign-architectures) != i386 ]; then This syntax $(command) is not portable. If you want to write portable scripts, and I guess so since you used #!/bin/sh, you want the `command` syntax. Otherwise, you want to use #!/bin/bash. Other than that, but it is only a coding style potential issue, I would say that mixing test -foo ... and [ -foo ... ] is quite confusing. I do not have anything else to say, I am a newbie when things comes to shell scripting. Except than sorry to reply so late, I let my mailbox filling a lot so noticing mails on threads I have participated is not easy. Not enough time. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/c4dd40e53160604bd7f059c3f54bf...@neutralite.org
Re: [SOLVED] Re: wine-unstable 64 bit
On 19/06/14 14:18, berenger.mo...@neutralite.org wrote: This syntax $(command) is not portable. The $() syntax for command substitution is *not* a bashism. It's been a POSIX Shell Command Language construct for at least a decade. http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009695399/utilities/xcu_chap02.html#tag_02_06_03 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/53a2ed71.8010...@zen.co.uk
Re: [SOLVED] Re: wine-unstable 64 bit
On Thu, 19 Jun 2014, berenger.mo...@neutralite.org wrote: This syntax $(command) is not portable. It is a POSIX shell construct. Anything that doesn't implement it should not be linked to /bin/sh in the first place. http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009695399/utilities/xcu_chap02.html section 2.6.3. HOWEVER, $(something) and `something` are not equivalent in POSIX, they have different behavior re. expansion of something. The code appears to be using $() correctly, though. -- One disk to rule them all, One disk to find them. One disk to bring them all and in the darkness grind them. In the Land of Redmond where the shadows lie. -- The Silicon Valley Tarot Henrique Holschuh -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20140619142259.gc31...@khazad-dum.debian.net
Re: [SOLVED] Re: wine-unstable 64 bit
Op Thu, 19 Jun 2014 15:18:34 +0200 schreef berenger.mo...@neutralite.org: Le 11.06.2014 14:42, Floris a écrit : If someone have any tips, tricks or commands on the shell script. I love to hear them. if [ $(dpkg --print-architecture) = amd64 -a $(dpkg --print-foreign-architectures) != i386 ]; then This syntax $(command) is not portable. If you want to write portable scripts, and I guess so since you used #!/bin/sh, you want the `command` syntax. Otherwise, you want to use #!/bin/bash. Other than that, but it is only a coding style potential issue, I would say that mixing test -foo ... and [ -foo ... ] is quite confusing. Funny, this part of the script is just a copy-paste from the original one. But I admit that mixing test -foo ... and [ -foo ... ] is not neatly Thanks, floris -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/op.xhpsma0a5k9...@alice.jkfloris.demon.nl
[SOLVED] Re: wine-unstable 64 bit
Op Mon, 09 Jun 2014 13:44:04 +0200 schreef Ralf Mardorf ralf.mard...@alice-dsl.net: On Mon, 2014-06-09 at 11:45 +0200, berenger.mo...@neutralite.org wrote: Thank you both for your little compile-it-yourself-how-to. I have add a patch [1] to the wine source package and successfully rebuild it. Also I have modified the /usr/bin/wine-unstable script to: #!/bin/sh set -e bindir=/usr/lib/$(basename $0) wine32=$bindir/wine wine64=$bindir/wine64 if test ! -x $wine32 -a ! -x $wine64; then echo error: unable to find wine executable. this shouldn't happen. exit 1 fi if test -x $wine32; then wine=$wine32 echo 32-bit Wine is possible fi if test -x $wine64; then wine=$wine64 echo 64-bit Wine is possible if [ $(dpkg --print-architecture) = amd64 -a $(dpkg --print-foreign-architectures) != i386 ]; then echo it looks like multiarch needs to be enabled. as root, please echo execute \dpkg --add-architecture i386 apt-get install wine32\ fi fi if test -x $wine32 -a -x $wine64; then if test $WINEARCH = win64; then echo Running a 64-bit Wine wine=$wine64 else echo Running a 32-bit Wine echo Use WINEARCH=win64 $(basename $0) for a 64-bit wineserver wine=$wine32 fi fi if test -z $WINELOADER; then wineloader=$wine else wineloader=$WINELOADER fi if test -z $WINEDEBUG; then winedebug=-all else winedebug=$WINEDEBUG fi WINELOADER=$wineloader WINEDEBUG=$winedebug $wine $@ If someone have any tips, tricks or commands on the shell script. I love to hear them. Thanks, floris [1] http://bugs.winehq.org/attachment.cgi?id=48593 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/op.xhaiw5ab5k9...@alice.jkfloris.demon.nl
wine-unstable 64 bit
With the current version of wine64-unstable (1.7.19-1) there is no possibility to run a 64-bit wineserver floris@Alice:~$ rm -R win64 floris@Alice:~$ WINEPREFIX=/home/floris/win64 WINEARCH=win64 wine-unstable wincfg wine: created the configuration directory '/home/floris/win64' wine: WINEARCH set to win64 but '/home/floris/win64' is a 32-bit installation. Bug #742561 https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=742561 is know by the Debian Wine maintainers Does someone know a workaround, or can point me to a site to compile and make it myself the Debian way? thanks, floris -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/op.xg6j6uqu5k9...@alice.jkfloris.demon.nl
Re: wine-unstable 64 bit
Hello. Le 09.06.2014 11:19, Floris a écrit : With the current version of wine64-unstable (1.7.19-1) there is no possibility to run a 64-bit wineserver floris@Alice:~$ rm -R win64 floris@Alice:~$ WINEPREFIX=/home/floris/win64 WINEARCH=win64 wine-unstable wincfg wine: created the configuration directory '/home/floris/win64' wine: WINEARCH set to win64 but '/home/floris/win64' is a 32-bit installation. Bug #742561 https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=742561 is know by the Debian Wine maintainers Does someone know a workaround, or can point me to a site to compile and make it myself the Debian way? Never tried to do that myself, but it should work: _ install build-dependencies of the package you want ( #aptitude build-dep package ) _ download the source package ( $apt-get source package ) _ replace the source code with official one ( unarchive the file apt-get gave you, download upstream's source-code, unarchive it needed -- not if you use git for example --, search for source code in apt's stuff, replace it with upstream's ) _ pray the gnu to not give you build errors ( it should not, but... should and will are different words, right? anyway we might be able to help you here if there are some ) _ compile and make the package(s) _ install the packages _ try to use the package thanks, floris -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/c548e34047e4b7238c34eecc7c0dd...@neutralite.org
Re: wine-unstable 64 bit
Op Mon, 09 Jun 2014 11:19:32 +0200 schreef Floris jkflo...@dds.nl: With the current version of wine64-unstable (1.7.19-1) there is no possibility to run a 64-bit wineserver floris@Alice:~$ rm -R win64 floris@Alice:~$ WINEPREFIX=/home/floris/win64 WINEARCH=win64 wine-unstable wincfg wine: created the configuration directory '/home/floris/win64' wine: WINEARCH set to win64 but '/home/floris/win64' is a 32-bit installation. Bug #742561 https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=742561 is know by the Debian Wine maintainers Does someone know a workaround, or can point me to a site to compile and make it myself the Debian way? thanks, floris Maybe there will be another way to fix this. After removing the wine32-unstable package, the wine64-unstable installation is able to create a 64-bit wine prefix. Nevertheless, after reinstalling the wine32-unstable package only a 32-bit prefix is possible. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/op.xg6nijws5k9...@alice.jkfloris.demon.nl
Re: wine-unstable 64 bit
On Mon, 2014-06-09 at 11:45 +0200, berenger.mo...@neutralite.org wrote: Never tried to do that myself, but it should work: _ install build-dependencies of the package you want ( #aptitude build-dep package ) _ download the source package ( $apt-get source package ) _ replace the source code with official one ( unarchive the file apt-get gave you, download upstream's source-code, unarchive it needed -- not if you use git for example --, search for source code in apt's stuff, replace it with upstream's ) _ pray the gnu to not give you build errors ( it should not, but... should and will are different words, right? anyway we might be able to help you here if there are some ) _ compile and make the package(s) _ install the packages _ try to use the package The following example shows how to use a source from the Debian repos, replace the source code with source code from upstream and to build a new Debian package. This does work often, but also fails often, so good luck! Here's a pragmatic way to make a .deb of libasound2 - alsa-lib-1.0.24.1 cd /tmp/ apt-get source libasound2 sudo apt-get build-dep libasound2 mv -vi alsa-lib-1.0.23/ alsa-lib-1.0.24.1 curl ftp://ftp.alsa-project.org/pub/lib/alsa-lib-1.0.24.1.tar.bz2 \ | tar xvj cd alsa-lib-1.0.24.1 # edit debian/changelog - alsa-lib (1.0.24.1-1) unstable; urgency=low # edit debian/rules - remove line 15-18 (biarch builds) libtoolize --force --copy --automake aclocal autoreconf debuild -b -us -uc sudo dpkg -i ../*asound2*.deb - http://lists.linuxaudio.org/pipermail/linux-audio-user/2011-June/078885.html -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/1402314244.813.52.camel@archlinux
