jlgentoo ~ # emerge -va wine These are the packages that would be merged, in order: Calculating dependencies... done! [ebuild R *] app-emulation/wine-9999 USE="X alsa cups fontconfig gecko gphoto2 gsm gstreamer jpeg lcms mono mp3 ncurses nls openal opengl osmesa oss perl png prelink samba scanner ssl threads truetype udisks v4l xcomposite xinerama xml -capi -custom-cflags -ldap -odbc -opencl (-selinux) {-test}" ABI_X86="32 64 (-x32)" 0 kB Total: 1 package (1 reinstall), Size of downloads: 0 kB Would you like to merge these packages? [Yes/No] >>> Verifying ebuild manifests >>> Emerging (1 of 1) app-emulation/wine-9999 >>> Jobs: 0 of 1 complete, 1 running Load avg: 3.17, 2.96, 1.99 (null)*(null) Unable to trace static ELF: /usr/sbin/prelink: /usr/sbin/prelink --reloc-only 0x7b800000 kernel32.dll.so >>> Jobs: 0 of 1 complete, 1 running Load avg: 3.46, 3.15, 2.33 (null)*(null) Unable to trace static ELF: /usr/sbin/prelink: /usr/sbin/prelink --reloc-only 0x7bc00000 ntdll.dll.so >>> Jobs: 0 of 1 complete, 1 running Load avg: 3.21, 3.16, 2.43 (null)*(null) Unable to trace static ELF: /usr/sbin/prelink: /usr/sbin/prelink --reloc-only 0x7ac00000 riched20.dll.so >>> Jobs: 0 of 1 complete, 1 running Load avg: 3.47, 3.31, 3.09 (null)*(null) Unable to trace static ELF: /usr/sbin/prelink: /usr/sbin/prelink --reloc-only 0x7bc00000 ntdll.dll.so (null)*(null) Unable to trace static ELF: /usr/sbin/prelink: /usr/sbin/prelink --reloc-only 0x7ac00000 riched20.dll.so >>> Installing (1 of 1) app-emulation/wine-9999 >>> Jobs: 1 of 1 complete Load avg: 2.15, 2.97, 2.99 >>> Auto-cleaning packages... >>> No outdated packages were found on your system. * GNU info directory index is up-to-date. jlgentoo ~ # ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The messages seem to come from sandbox, I found something similar in its source. I have seen them on my other system with the last releases of wine. sys-apps/sandbox-2.6-r1 was built with the following: USE="(multilib)" ABI_X86="64" No problems with the wine application so far.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 431638 ***
*** Bug 561552 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
This bug has been marked as a duplicate of an issue which is marked as resolved. Clearly, it is actually not. Is it possible to reopen it?
(In reply to Pastafarianist from comment #3) the issue is a dupe, hence re-opening this makes no sense
(In reply to SpanKY from comment #4) > (In reply to Pastafarianist from comment #3) > > the issue is a dupe, hence re-opening this makes no sense I mean re-opening the issue of which this one is a duplicate.
