Wine 0.9 progress

Dimitrie O. Paun dimi at
Mon Aug 25 16:43:25 CDT 2003

On 25 Aug 2003, Mike Hearn wrote:

> I just prodded Mark on MSN. I'm looking over the code now, and have a
> few questions about how to proceed. 


> The primary issue is that we can't have the same setting pulled both 
> from the config file and the registry, can we? 

No. winecfg should not care at all about the config file. It should
get to the values through registry calls, as we do all over Wine ATM.
This calls will be routed to the values from the config file for now,
but we'll switch them to go to the real registry when we're ready.

For writting, we should also use the registry functions. I'm not sure
what would happen now if you're trying to write config values through
the registry, they may get saved in the registry. Which is just cool,
it just means that winecfg will not be really function until the big
switch, but that should be in the near future :)

> 1) How do we stop users being confused because they updated and now
> their config file doesn't seem to work anymore?
> 2) How do we stop users being confused because they started winecfg but
> the changes they make don't always take effect?
> Possibilities include:
> * Warnings on startup if a part of the config file exists. IE if we move
> version settings into the registry, output err: lines if those keys are
> in the config file to get the user to remove them.
> * Disabling any controls that don't do anything in the winecfg program,
> so the user can't edit them.

I don't think it makes sense to plan for the long haul -- we should
get it over with this transitional period sooner rather than later.
I think it's acceptable to just leave the current warning about the
fact that winecfg is non-functional. When we switch, we'll drop the
warning and we're done.  


More information about the wine-devel mailing list