Another factor to consider is that individual distributions may work while others do not. Vanilla gcc may work, but after Ubuntu/Suse/etc apply their patches, this may not be the case.
-Austin On Dec 20, 2007 8:11 PM, Peter Beutner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Rolf Kalbermatter schrieb: > > Peter Beutner wrote: > > > >> just tested again with current git and it worked with every gcc version > >> I had at hand here: 4.2.2, 4.1.2, 4.0.4 and 3.4.6. > > > > And what did you test there? > > That safedisc 2.x works. Wine successfully passes the statistical code > analysis. > And that also with gcc versions that reportedly caused problems on earlier > wine > versions. So other people might want to recheck as well with whatever compiler > they are using. > > > As far as I understood the issue, it's not that > > Wine won't work at all (at least for most of those gcc versions). Those gcc > > version will only emit much more code that modern copy protection schemes > > (Safe Disc, Secu Rom) with statistical code analysis will see as possible > > attempts to counterfeit them and consequently prevent starting applications > > protected by them. > > yes, but also changes at the source code level can change the results of that > analysis. There were some specific changes for that between .48 and .49 that > drastically improved the situation. Unless you were using certain "broken" > gcc versions (broken is a bit too harsh, the main problem is after all only > that the function prolog sequence is ordered a bit differently). > > Now some changes seems to have improved the situation even further, so that > even with those little differences between different gcc versions it > stays below the threshold where the safedisc analyzer would start complaining. > > > As long as you do not want to run copy protected applications under Wine > > most of those gcc versions should just work fine. > > sry, for not being more specific. I thought the context was clear as this > whole > discussion was only about copy protection vs. different gcc versions. > > btw., because you said "most of those gcc versions", is there a gcc version > that > is known to not work with wine (beside these copy protection issues)? > > >
