On Thu, 19 Sep 2002, Jehan wrote:
> Alexander Gottwald wrote:
> > wine is in most parts the same as replacing kernel32.dll user32.dll and
> > some other system dependent libraries. So you won't achive anything if
> > you run the windows application in a wine subsystem. The goal is not to
> > replace the windows dlls with the wine dlls but to translate the GDI
> > calls to X11. This has nothing to do with the POSIX layer.
>
> What would be the point? I mean, if you want Windows app inside XFree, I
> think you'd be better of using Wine and help them finish it than writing
> this kind of driver.
What I would like to see is a possibility to export the display of windows
hosts to remote machines. X is one of the best solutions for this. As a
side effect, you also could display these applications in the Cygwin
XServer running on windows, but also on an XServer running an hpux or
on Sparc/Solaris or MacOS X or Darwin or ...
Most of the above platforms will never allow to run native windows apps
with wine.
Writing this driver (or better adapting the wine driver) is (IMO) less
work than building replacement dlls and much faster than hooking all
graphic calls.
> The goal of Cygwin/XFree is the opposite of Wine, it's about having X
> Window inside Windows.
The goal of wine is running Windows applications on linux.
The goal of Cygwin/XFree is an usable XServer for windows.
I don't see where there is the opposite.
This "Displaying GDI Windows inside XWin" is the opposite of "Displaying
X11 Windows via GDI"
> More over, if you have GDI-fake->X->GDI-real, that would be quite ugly
> for the speed.
With a lot of speedup possible with unix-domain sockets or any other direct
connection. And with full network wide export of the windows display.
bye
ago
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.gotti.org ICQ: 126018723
