After compiling Wine which files can I delete safely?

[dk]

Hi,

I've been trying to track down the version of Wine that a bug first appeared.

I've downloaded each Wine source, compiled them, and am running the application from their build directory. It's no surprise that I'm slowly running out of disk space.

I'd like to keep the build directories for further testing. What files can I remove safely? Has anyone written a script for this purpose?

Thanks!

[jjmckenzie]

On 5/28/11 7:42 PM, dk wrote:

Hi,

I've been trying to track down the version of Wine that a bug first appeared.

Why? Use Git and run a regression test. Much faster and easier than
building Wine.

I've downloaded each Wine source, compiled them, and am running the application from their build directory. It's no surprise that I'm slowly running out of disk space.

I only keep the last three development builds and the last stable.

I'd like to keep the build directories for further testing. What files can I remove safely? Has anyone written a script for this purpose?

You can safely delete all of the source and object code, that is files
ending with .c and .o. DO NOT delete files ending in .dll, .exe, dll.so
and .exe.so Those are the files built by your compiler. If you are
running on a Mac, add files ending in .dylib (dynamic library.)

James McKenzie

[DL]

With respect to tracking down a regression, you are better off doing this:

http://wiki.winehq.org/RegressionTesting

However, it will waste a lot of disk space as well. Is it a laptop? If not, I'd just get an extra HDD if you're running out of space so easily.

[jjmckenzie]

On 5/28/11 9:01 PM, DL wrote:

With respect to tracking down a regression, you are better off doing this:

http://wiki.winehq.org/RegressionTesting

However, it will waste a lot of disk space as well. Is it a laptop? If not, I'd just get an extra HDD if you're running out of space so easily.

Why are you saying 'waste space'. Git takes up less space, much so, if
you run builds based on wine versions. I deleted gigabytes of files off
of my system when I consolidated.

Regression testing is much faster than running version builds, IF you
know which version the program worked in and the one that it did not.

James McKenzie

[dk]

Thanks for the quick replies.

Yes, I'm using a notebook that has limited space and no, the problem is I don't remember what version worked - hence the compilation marathon. I do intend to run a regression test once I find it.

I though (since each compilation takes forever) I'd just archive the build directories (sans code) to a flash drive or something so that if (for whatever reason) I needed it again I'd save some time.

Thanks again!

[spoon0042]

I though (since each compilation takes forever) I'd just archive the build directories (sans code) to a flash drive or something so that if (for whatever reason) I needed it again I'd save some time.

What distro are you using? You'd probably be better off building packages for each version you're interested in and saving them if you ever want to use them later.

[spoon0042]

Sorry for the double post, but you could also check http://www.winehq.org/download to see if there's already built packages for your distro.

[Frédéric Delanoy]

On Sun, May 29, 2011 at 15:08, dk <[email protected]> wrote:

Thanks for the quick replies.

Yes,  I'm using a notebook that has limited space and no, the problem is I don't remember what version worked - hence the compilation marathon. I do intend to run a regression test once I find it.

I though (since each compilation takes forever) I'd just archive the build directories (sans code) to a flash drive or something so that if (for whatever reason) I needed it again I'd save some time.

It may be easier to keep only 1! source dir, and used release binary
builds (see on winehq's download page) to limit the scope of your
bisection.