Jesse Allen ha scritto:
On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 8:13 AM, Massimo Del Fedele <m...@veneto.com> wrote:
2) when winedib.drv is working good enough, wanted to "detach" it from
winex11.drv, so make another "driver" comprising DDB parts of wineX11
and all optimizations needed.
This detaching thing is a little worrying. How will winex11 be called
after detaching? .....
It simply won't be called. The "replacement" winex11 would contain
the needed driver functionality.
It's exactly the same as separating DIB from DDB from inside wineX11, but
without the regression problems. The 2 winex11 drivers could remain as
a stable and a development alternative.
Once the replacement one is ready and tested, it would replace the old
one. It's almost the same that happens with wine1.0 and the devel branch
1.1, with the difference that the new driver could be operated as an
alternative to old one from the same build.
Through winedib or gdi again? The first would not
change functionality at all. The second is like the two driver
method. It sounds like we ought to stick to the two separate drivers
as a basis in development so we don't end up with something that can't
be unglued easily.
Well, now it *is* glued. That's just one way to unglue it.
Ciao
Max
