Need ideas about ntoskrnl
rob at codeweavers.com
Tue Sep 6 09:27:04 CDT 2005
Kuba Ober wrote:
>On Tuesday 06 September 2005 07:38, Alexandre Julliard wrote:
>>Peter Beutner <p.beutner at gmx.net> writes:
>>>Any reasons given?
>>Stability is the obvious reason.
>Stability? It'd still be at most as unstable as a native windows session, so I
>don't see a big deal with that. If wineserver and/or user process crashes, so
>what? That'd very likely happen on the native platform as well, so I fail to
>see anything wrong with that approach from the stability perspective...
Except that Windows doesn't have missing functions or functions that
aren't quite completely implemented. As Alexandre says, there is a ton
of stuff that would have to be duplicated in order to be able to load
Windows drivers in the wineserver. For example, PE loader, virtual
memory, exceptions / signal handling and threading. Also note that the
wineserver is single threaded (and it would be a big task to make it
thread-safe) and that whenever you are calling driver code then all Wine
apps are blocked.
More information about the wine-devel