Alexandre Julliard wrote:
> David Elliott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Well, the real question is: Is it fixable? That is, it's fine to break native
> > USER support, but can it be fixed again after the seperation? Or is the design
> > of Wine becoming too different to ever be able to support that.
>
> I doubt it can be fixed. The problem is that the native USER/GDI we
> could run are the Win95 ones; but it doesn't make much sense to
> support 100% compatibility with the Win95 kernel, which is an
> monstruosity full of 16-bit and DOS code. It is preferable to do
> things the NT way, as it is much cleaner and maps better to the Unix
> API. But of course this means we can no longer run Win95 GDI/USER,
> just like they cannot run under NT either.
Agreed, I think we should go towards NT architecture not only because it is closer
to UNIX, but also because MS is doing the same thing. Hmmm.. does that mean MS is
trying to act more like UNIX... geee.. wonder why?
I haven't had a lot of time to look through the internals of a Win9x GDI/USER, but
I am going to assume you are correct and that they make assumptions about the
architecture which simply won't be true.
Of course now the question is, what about running NT's GDI/USER. Answer to that
from what I gather is that it's not worth it since NT's USER basically just sends
everything down to NT anyway and doesn't do anything. Of course if we really did
want to have an NT architecture, maybe we should support that simply as a proof that
we have an NT architecture.
-Dave
