Support for pkgconfig

Alexandre Julliard julliard at
Tue Apr 15 12:49:09 CDT 2003

"Dimitrie O. Paun" <dimi at> writes:

> What you get:
>   -- Linux apps using their toolkit of choice. None of the silliness
>      we have now where you have to choose one or the other almost
>      like they are different platforms (there is hope with BlueCurve)
>   -- Iteroperability across the board, including _native_ Windows
>      apps!
>   -- a LOT of good apps, free and comercial. Look at SF which are
>      the most popular apps. Windows apps!
>   -- a lot less duplication of efforts, etc, etc.
> Yes, there are problems, it will not be 100% pretty, but what is? In
> fact, all things too pretty tend to fail (I think Python is a lot
> prettier than Perl, but Perl is doing so much better).

Apart from the obvious technical problems with that, and the overall
ugliness of the result, the major drawback is that you are essentially
putting Microsoft in control of the direction of the Unix desktop.

The Windows API is not something we have freedom to change, and that
is a very problematic restriction. Even if most desktop environments
today are quite similar to Windows, I hope we can move beyond that
someday, and leave Microsoft in the dust. This can't happen if we let
them define the core APIs.

Alexandre Julliard
julliard at

More information about the wine-devel mailing list