RFC: Adding Mac support to secur32/schannel.c
hverbeet at gmail.com
Thu Feb 3 12:46:33 CST 2011
On 3 February 2011 18:58, Alexandre Julliard <julliard at winehq.org> wrote:
> Henri Verbeet <hverbeet at gmail.com> writes:
>> On 3 February 2011 18:01, Charles Davis <cdavis at mymail.mines.edu> wrote:
>>> I'm for that. In fact, my humble opinion is that Wine on Mac should only
>>> use libraries that are part of the OS (i.e. only dylibs in /usr/lib and
>> I think Wine should have as few OS X (or Ubuntu for that matter)
>> specific hacks as possible.
> It shouldn't have hacks, but I don't think it's unreasonable to use
> platform-specific services for things that don't have widely accepted
That was mostly in reply to the general idea of only using Apple
provided libraries for no good reason. In fact, if you bring that to
its logical conclusion OS X users shouldn't use Wine at all, since
those are non-Apple libraries as well.
I'm not opposed to using platform specific libraries where
appropriate. However, there's certainly a maintenance and support cost
there. From what I've seen in the patch Ken posted it should be
possible to do right on the technical side, although this version of
that patch isn't quite it. It does mean you know have two
implementations to support on Bugzilla etc. though.
The part I'm personally not so convinced of is that this is going to
benefit Wine in any way. I'm not buying the argument that it's going
to simplify things much for Wine users on OS X. If someone is capable
of getting Wine to build and run successfully on OS X, I don't think
GnuTLS is going to be much of a problem either. I don't have the
impression most OS X users compile Wine themselves anyway though.
More information about the wine-devel