The MingW32 project is developing its own set of Windows headers under a
different license than Wine (which uses LGPL, right?) and I have noticed
(using both projects) that the Wine headers are more complete in a
number of areas. I was wondering if it would be acceptable to use the
Wine headers as
When attempting to install Office 2000 under the latest wine from cvs, It
stops half way through the installation with the following error.
err:cabinet:FDICopy FDIIsCabinet failed. Any ideas?
On Thursday 31 July 2003 02:57 pm, Boris wrote:
When attempting to install Office 2000 under the latest wine from cvs, It
stops half way through the installation with the following error.
err:cabinet:FDICopy FDIIsCabinet failed. Any ideas?
This rollup of the recent cabinet patches should fix
Although Wine is LGPL'ed now, older wine versions (till around march/april
2002 I think) are X11 licensed. Further there is a fork of Wine called
Rewind which is more up2date than the last X11 edition of Wine. So those
things can atleast be used by the mingw project.
Relicensing parts of the
Le jeu 31/07/2003 13:52, Roderick Colenbrander a crit :
Although Wine is LGPL'ed now, older wine versions (till around march/april
2002 I think) are X11 licensed. Further there is a fork of Wine called
Rewind which is more up2date than the last X11 edition of Wine. So those
things can
On Thu, Jul 31, 2003 at 07:52:40PM +0200, Roderick Colenbrander wrote:
Likely a vote for it would be needed since I think
all people who worked on the headers need to approve it.
Well, as you mention correctly in the second part: Everyone who submitted
patches under a LGPL license only *must*
The interfaces are public information and can be gotten from any number of means. I
dont know why
we even have license information in the headers as it has caused confusion from day 1
the LGPL
statment was added. If you are still worried about using the WINE headers to fix Mingw
(It needs
it)
