Mac OS X/Darwin port of Wine
m.hearn at signal.qinetiq.com
Wed Jan 8 02:56:45 CST 2003
> You're mixing installed base numbers with new shipments ("market share").
Indeed, I've run across this distinction before.
By that logic however stuff that's given away for free has no market share,
meaning that Opera is the worlds most important browser. Hence installed
user base is a more useful metric, sorry if I mixed up the terminology.
> Yes, of course there are reasons. If I wanted to use Linux for my
> desktop I would do so. I find Mac OS X to be the best desktop OS in
> the world.
Very touching. I'm not suggesting you use it as your desktop,
I'm suggesting you use it as a place to start the port. If you decide
to make things hard for yourself due to some bizarre hatred of desktop
Linux, then you're just increasing the amount of work you'd need to do.
You don't even have to dual boot or anything, just stick it on an old PC
and ssh into it if you absolutely must have glowing buttons.
As you've seen, Darwin/x86 is basically useless, and as the opcode
translation is probably one of the hardest but also most interesting parts
(I don't think anybody has attempted Bochs integration before), it makes
sense to get it out the way. But - if you want to leave it until later,
you do it how you think is best.
> What I'ld
> really like to see is Red Hat binary compatibility
If you're going to target a distro, I'd go for Debian as it has more
binary packages available. Considering how frequently Redhat has broken
compatability even with itself (esp with C++), there aren't all that many
working Redhat (or suse, or conectiva etc) binaries out there compared to
Mike Hearn <m.hearn at signal.qinetiq.com>
QinetiQ - Malvern Technology Center
More information about the wine-devel