What's the holdup with RegisterHotKey and UnregisterHotKey??

James Keane james.keane at gmail.com
Thu Jul 10 16:01:19 CDT 2008

Yes that makes complete sense, but in this case how would the
implementation be better if we moved it into the wineserver?  Isn't
the point of having seperate drivers for X11 and quartz etc, is to
take advantage of exposed interfaces ie Hotkeys?

Also, how am I as a wine outsider suppose to implement X if I don't
know what it is; this is why I asked.

Let me rephrase my original question then: why is it better to move
this in the server?


On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 4:44 PM, James Hawkins <truiken at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 2:13 PM, James Keane <james.keane at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hey everyone!
>> Just wanted to bring to your attention
>> http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1348 again, and ask what is the
>> holdup?  As far as I can see it appears a solution and working patch
>> has been posted.  I am interested in getting this into the main tree
>> and wondering what kind of modifications have to be made to the patch
>> supplied to make it happen.
>>  ------- Comment  #8 From Robert Reif  2007-02-17 15:45:56  -------
>> The reason I was given by Alexandre is that the functionality should be moved
>> into the server.
>> Why is it not possible to accept this patch and then start working on
>> moving it into the server?  With a quick look the only changes from
>> the patch and the git, is the change from dll/user to dll/user32.
> If the correct way to do it is X, and the current implementation does
> it by Y, which is not correct, then why would we accept the patch that
> implements Y?  By definition it's a hack, and if we did accept it,
> there'd be no incentive to fix the hack, because everything would
> already work (just in the wrong way).
> --
> James Hawkins

More information about the wine-devel mailing list