> Well, why then hasn't this patch been accepted?
> http://www.winehq.org/pipermail/wine-patches/2007-November/047212.html
Oh well, I see, corrupted...
Seems like I'll spend the day on fixing that one :D
Well, why then hasn't this patch been accepted?
http://www.winehq.org/pipermail/wine-patches/2007-November/047212.html
Am Montag, 7. Januar 2008 17:30:40 schrieb [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> Okay, I have a bit time now and tomorrow, so I'll probably have submitted a
> basic d3dx9 dll patch until Wednesday. So I'll create a new d3dx9 directory
> inside dlls, but I'm not that familiar with Wine's makefile system (not
> very
Okay, I have a bit time now and tomorrow, so I'll probably have submitted a
basic d3dx9 dll patch
until Wednesday. So I'll create a new d3dx9 directory inside dlls, but I'm not
that familiar with
Wine's makefile system (not very much with makefiles in general honestly), so
can anyone
tell me how
Am Montag, 7. Januar 2008 07:29:48 schrieb Maarten Lankhorst:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] schreef:
> >> Since everybody agrees that we need a built-in d3dx9, we could begin to
> >> implement it. In the last talk about it, no plan was found to implement
> >> it: does one create a wined3dx or implement on th
[EMAIL PROTECTED] schreef:
>> Since everybody agrees that we need a built-in d3dx9, we could begin to
>> implement it.
>> In the last talk about it, no plan was found to implement it: does one
>> create a wined3dx or implement on the top of the last d3dx9
>> dll?
>>
>> So, I think that a definiti
> Since everybody agrees that we need a built-in d3dx9, we could begin to
> implement it.
> In the last talk about it, no plan was found to implement it: does one create
> a wined3dx or implement on the top of the last d3dx9
> dll?
>
> So, I think that a definitive answer should be given very qu
Since everybody agrees that we need a built-in d3dx9, we could begin to
implement it.
In the last talk about it, no plan was found to implement it: does one create a
wined3dx or implement on the top of the last d3dx9 dll?
So, I think that a definitive answer should be given very quickly.
David
Now that i think of it, Marcus's point about redistribution is even
more relevant than the problem with licensing.
If one was was allowed (legally) to copy DLLs from Windows without a
license, i could do it. because i know how could my mother?
no way!
The only people that i have any s
Am Freitag, 4. Januar 2008 17:00:46 schrieb [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> Oh well, I didn't think about that, sorry.
> Then it of course is a good thing if we implement our own d3dx.
The directx license as far as I understand it, allows installing and using the
dx runtime, which d3dx* is a part of, on Wine
> I do not think patents which are blocking your ability to use the DLLs
> in Wine. It is your Windows license.
>
> I believe that if you have a Windows license for your machine, you are
> free to use Windows or its DLLs. This includes all the "free" downloads
> from their web-pages. I think, if y
I do not think patents which are blocking your ability to use the DLLs
in Wine. It is your Windows license.
I believe that if you have a Windows license for your machine, you are
free to use Windows or its DLLs. This includes all the "free" downloads
from their web-pages. I think, if you do not ha
On Fri, Jan 04, 2008 at 01:46:22PM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Hi,
> I enjoyed the current wine development of the D3DX libraries and also tried
> to implement an interface.
> However, while testing it I noticed that Wine seems to fully support
> everything when it has a native
> d3dx9.dll
Hi,
I enjoyed the current wine development of the D3DX libraries and also tried to
implement an interface.
However, while testing it I noticed that Wine seems to fully support everything
when it has a native
d3dx9.dll (though it even was able to run one of my games without any dll...).
So I was
14 matches
Mail list logo
