No subject

2009/2/15 Martin Hinner <martin at hinner.info>:
> I understand this and in my opinion (if there will be any "official"
> WINEGATE.DLL)

I can't speak for the people who make these decisions in the Wine
project, but I don't believe winegate is or will ever be a candidate
for inclusion in Wine. If there's a good reason, it's thos:

> Yes, the WINEGATE.DLL is not solving any problem on its own, it just
> simplifies "porting" process.

If it doesn't solve a problem, it doesn't make it much easier.

In any case, that's what winelib does too, you know, make porting
easier. And from what I understand, you can just as easily use a
winelib wrapper around a win32 application.

> I don't want to be rude, but I have better things to do than
> propagandize my solution. We can live without such library in Wine, it
> would just require us to maintain separate libraries for different
> libc or wine versions.

If you foresee that you will have to maintain different versions of
your library for different libc or Wine versions, you have big design
flaws. It should "just work" without requiring maintenance. The Linux
component may require a recompile on occasion to keep up with a change
in libc (more likely frequent recompiling/code maintenance due to
changes in the kernel every time you upgrade).