On Tue, Feb 26, 2002 at 12:14:15PM +0100, Gerhard W. Gruber wrote:
David Elliott wrote:
Anyway, on a personal note, don't get disheartened that the wine
developers don't like you. Believe me, EVERYBODY who has contributed code
to Wine has had some code or some ideas frowned upon. Just
Andreas Mohr wrote:
Hmm, well, winebootup is supposed to execute everything *at once*
on Wine startup (i.e. check in the wine wrapper script whether this is
the first wine instance to get started, then run winebootup)
If you don't think this is a good design, then go ahead and change it !
Could we have the first snapshots ?
winebootup is not in CVS for the moment...
Is winebootup going to replace wine then, once it is
finished? Otherwise
there would be two boot programs doing almost
similar things and that's
what I consider a bad design. :)
On 2002.02.23 23:49 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, 23 Feb 2002, David Elliott wrote:
application. Save yourself a lot of trouble trying to figure out where
to
place a hook in wine and simply write it into a completely seperate
program. You can then have wine actually run that
On Sat, Feb 23, 2002 at 11:49:43PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, 23 Feb 2002, David Elliott wrote:
application. Save yourself a lot of trouble trying to figure out where to
place a hook in wine and simply write it into a completely seperate
program. You can then have wine
David Elliott wrote:
To really follow the UNIX philosophy you want to put it in a seperate
application. Save yourself a lot of trouble trying to figure out where to
place a hook in wine and simply write it into a completely seperate
program. You can then have wine actually run that program
Andreas Mohr wrote:
wine/programs/
is a good neighborhood.
Sure, and that's why I chose programs/winebootup/.
Well, it's not submitted in its complete form yet, but I'm going
to continue working on it.
But your wine bootup does much more then just handling the
renaming/deletion of
Alexandre Julliard wrote:
moving it to higher layers, like in a separate app, you have access to
more functionality; for instance you can popup a confirmation dialog
or things like that.
That's ok but this can also be done in a seperate module. I don't like
to have multiple programs if it is
Maybe it went a bit unnoticed because of the many mails the licence
issue generated, or then again, maybe the bootprocedure is not that
important to most. :) The only response I got was that performance could
be a consideration, which I think wouldn't be a problem and another one
was that wine
Gerhard W. Gruber [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Maybe it went a bit unnoticed because of the many mails the licence
issue generated, or then again, maybe the bootprocedure is not that
important to most. :) The only response I got was that performance could
be a consideration, which I think
Alexandre Julliard wrote:
Well, if you discard all objections as not real then of course there
isn't a real objection. But the two mentioned seem very real to
Sorry, I didn't mean them to be not real. It's only that I doubt that
the check for the existence of a registry key and alternatively
Gerhard W. Gruber [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
So why is it neccessary for this to be in a seperate app and are there
already any plans on how this should have been integrated? Which layer
would that be that decides this? If the decision is done in a higher
app, why not just implement it in a
12 matches
Mail list logo
