hmmm... i'd certainly avoid porting XFree86 to use win32 instead of cygwin... i have a feeling it'd be a *lot* of effort...
i'm thinking.. if it might work if all the .dll files and XWin.exe required were compiled to .o or .a files.. then using a COM object, statically link in all those .o or .a files... (it would be a pretty huge COM obj though, but it's a start at least?)... At 2003/04/01 07:58, you wrote: >Harold, > >At 15:50 2003-03-31, you wrote: >>KH, >> >>The scope is probably beyond the scope of this mailing list. >> >>I think you would be better off working first on a version of Cygwin/XFree86 that >>compiled without Cygwin... then, and only then, could you even begin to worry about >>wrapping XFree86 with a COM interface. > >Cygwin /XFree86 without Cygwin is Win32/XFree86, or some such, is it not? > >It always seemed to me that the target specifier ought to come after the main program >name: XFree86/Cygwin, XFree86/Win32, etc. > > >>Harold > >Randall Schulz
