Too much functionality in WINE

Open forum for end-user questions about Wine. Before asking questions, check out the Wiki as a first step.
Forum Rules
Locked
technosaurus
Newbie
Newbie
Posts: 1
Joined: Sun Jan 25, 2009 2:32 am

Too much functionality in WINE

Post by technosaurus »

Does anyone know of a way to compile a LITE wine - like a zinfandel I guess? I just want to be able to use - wine /mypathto/myprogram.exe.

such as --disable-dev --without-notepad --without-ie....

After compiling wine 1.1.13 it works quite well... at least the parts of it that I have tested. There are so many things included that I will never use that basically just take up space. For instance the compile environment, how many people that download wine actually want to compile programs for windows? Not me, yet try as I might I could find no option to leave out this and other unnecessary components at compile time. There are other things as well...I don't want/need any of the windows components either.or any of the libraries(/"dll"s) associatied with them.

Barring no feasible options at compile time, is there a list of files that are required for just the wine executable. apparently ldd wine doesn't completely work for this and readelf was not too helpful. It did great for what is required to run wine but I guess I need to know where the dlls, etc... are that myprograms call when run with wine.
Vincent Povirk

Too much functionality in WINE

Post by Vincent Povirk »

You can run make install-lib instead of make install to only include
the parts needed to run programs. The corollary is that everything
install-lib installs is a necessary component of Wine, including
notepad and internet explorer. If you remove any of those things, or
configure warns you about missing dependencies, your version of Wine
is broken and may fail to run some programs that would otherwise be
working.

(OK, maybe winemine can go, but everything else is important.)

Vincent Povirk
Vincent Povirk

Too much functionality in WINE

Post by Vincent Povirk »

One more thing. You can see what builtin libraries (.so files in
lib/wine) are being used when you run a program by running it with
WINEDEBUG=+loaddll. This isn't a reliable method to determine what
your program needs, as programs (and wine components) are known to
load additional libraries at runtime as needed for individual
features.

Vincent Povirk
austin987
Wine Developer
Wine Developer
Posts: 2383
Joined: Fri Feb 22, 2008 8:19 pm

Too much functionality in WINE

Post by austin987 »

On Sun, Jan 25, 2009 at 11:51 AM, technosaurus
<[email protected]> wrote:
Does anyone know of a way to compile a LITE wine - like a zinfandel I guess? I just want to be able to use - wine /mypathto/myprogram.exe.

such as --disable-dev --without-notepad --without-ie....

After compiling wine 1.1.13 it works quite well... at least the parts of it that I have tested. There are so many things included that I will never use that basically just take up space. For instance the compile environment, how many people that download wine actually want to compile programs for windows? Not me, yet try as I might I could find no option to leave out this and other unnecessary components at compile time. There are other things as well...I don't want/need any of the windows components either.or any of the libraries(/"dll"s) associatied with them.

Barring no feasible options at compile time, is there a list of files that are required for just the wine executable. apparently ldd wine doesn't completely work for this and readelf was not too helpful. It did great for what is required to run wine but I guess I need to know where the dlls, etc... are that myprograms call when run with wine.





Use --enable-maintainer-mode to find some things you can disable,
e.g., debugging symbols. You can also disable some dlls, that are
optional.

Such a feature would be good though...Patches welcome.
--
-Austin
vitamin
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 6605
Joined: Sat Feb 23, 2008 2:29 pm

Re: Too much functionality in WINE

Post by vitamin »

technosaurus wrote:Does anyone know of a way to compile a LITE wine - like a zinfandel I guess? I just want to be able to use - wine /mypathto/myprogram.exe.
No, it never was an objective for Wine project.

Windows comes as a whole and you can't remove even notepad - some programs will break.
austin987
Wine Developer
Wine Developer
Posts: 2383
Joined: Fri Feb 22, 2008 8:19 pm

Too much functionality in WINE

Post by austin987 »

On Sun, Jan 25, 2009 at 2:48 PM, vitamin <[email protected]> wrote:
technosaurus wrote:
Does anyone know of a way to compile a LITE wine - like a zinfandel I guess? I just want to be able to use - wine /mypathto/myprogram.exe.
No, it never was an objective for Wine project.

Windows comes as a whole and you can't remove even notepad - some programs will break.
We already do this for some features, e.g.,
printing/scanning/msxml3/etc. If the user knows they won't need
certain features, and they aren't depended on internally in wine, they
should be able to disable them.

--
-Austin
vitamin
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 6605
Joined: Sat Feb 23, 2008 2:29 pm

Re: Too much functionality in WINE

Post by vitamin »

austin987 wrote:If the user knows they won't need certain features, and they aren't depended on internally in wine, they should be able to disable them.
Unless that user developed this program himself/herself there is no way of knowing for sure what a particular program might use.
As an example more and more programs use performance counters for accurate timing.
Also lots of programs might use printer functionality to process images/text.
austin987
Wine Developer
Wine Developer
Posts: 2383
Joined: Fri Feb 22, 2008 8:19 pm

Too much functionality in WINE

Post by austin987 »

On Mon, Jan 26, 2009 at 8:57 AM, vitamin <[email protected]> wrote:
austin987 wrote:
If the user knows they won't need certain features, and they aren't depended on internally in wine, they should be able to disable them.
Unless that user developed this program himself/herself there is no way of knowing for sure what a particular program might use.
Agreed. I'm only saying we do this already, and trust users to
determine if they need it, so why shouldn't we do the same for other
features that should be considered cruft.

--
-Austin
Locked