Request for comments on patch

Erich Hoover ehoover at mines.edu
Sun Jun 14 16:44:01 CDT 2009


On Sun, Jun 14, 2009 at 3:33 PM, Mike
Kaplinskiy<mike.kaplinskiy at gmail.com> wrote:
> ...
>
> I didn't mean symlinking to the /lib/wine directory, but rather,
> symlinking to prefix/windows/system32/ from /lib/wine/ . But since
> that isn't done either, just copying to a new filename also seems
> reasonable. Sadly if we do have a registry-based mechanism for
> selection, this might not be possible to do on wineboot (unless there
> is a way to check on every startup?)
>

A copy would probably be fine, I'm not familiar with how this is
handled though so I'd have to look into it.

> Stubbing dlls for every possible driver (even if there are only 2-3)
> seems too much, so a general driver should be available. I'm just not
> too sure on how to convert between that driver's filename and the
> specific filename that our table gives.
>

I'm not sure exactly what you're referring to here.

>>
>> "struct driver_version_information" contains the vendor as an integer
>> already, a separate structure could easily contain columns for
>> matching the Vendor and OS in order to return a driver filename.  That
>> way you wouldn't end up with a giant "struct
>> driver_version_information".
>
> Yes that is what I meant to say, sorry if I didn't make my intentions
> clear. I was just thinking about the size of the driver_version_table
> array - 5-10 os's, 30-40 drivers already there...that's 150-400
> entries, and adding something like WINVER_ANY (as a last resort when
> matching) would make it a smaller.
>

There are only a couple different manufacturers, you don't need an
entry for each specific driver.  There would only be
OSVersion*Manufacturer combinations.

Erich Hoover
ehoover at mines.edu



More information about the wine-devel mailing list