Patrik Stridvall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> This is not what we want. Of course this is only a problem is the
> WineLib application uses gs, which is not very likely in itself.
> However it might use a Windows binary only dll that does...
True; I guess the question becomes: are there really dlls out there
that want to mess with %gs?
> Of course doing it in a thunking layer as proposed by Ulrich (and I)
> is not very cheap runtime wise, but it is obviously correct and much
> more maintainable and the thunking layer is needed for running x86
> binaries on non-x86 anyway.
Saving/restoring %gs on nearly every function call is not an option.
> In short we could do both as you and Ulrich (and I) proposed and
> have compile time options and let the user decide between speed,
> Windows API only and using things like OpenGL the needs pthreads.
Then you distribute two versions of libwine, one that is slow as hell
and one that is downright broken, but it's OK since the user has a
choice? No thanks.
--
Alexandre Julliard
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
