Need ideas about ntoskrnl

[Robert Shearman]

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.

-- 
Rob Shearman