On Thu, Jan 22, 2009 at 10:56:50PM +1100, Ben Klein wrote: > 2009/1/22 Francois Gouget <fgou...@free.fr>: >> On Thu, 22 Jan 2009, Ben Klein wrote: >> [...] >>> Perhaps the question remains, is a VC7 runtime library intended to be >>> developed and shipped with Wine? I don't think this is the case.
>> We have msvcirt, msvcrt, msvcrt20, msvcrt40, msvcr71 so I would not be >> so sure. Which dlls are we talking about anyway? > I'm always happy to be corrected :) I guess that's the crux of the question. To my mind, msvc runtimes are normally distributed with the using application (except some early ones which I think comes with all the versions of 32-bit Windows) and operate without hardware/HAL dependencies so they're not something that Wine needs to implement to be a complete implementation of Win32. They would be nice to have, sure. And then the upstream redistributable package will see that they are already installed and not install them. I presume this is the eventual goal for DirectX 9's D3DX support. Is bug-for-bug compatibility enough for platinum? Or do we need to be not just bug-for-bug compatible, but catching and fixing application bugs or installer bugs which trigger more frequently under Wine than Windows? The .NET 2.0 installer comes to mind here as a counterexample. It fails under Wine's WinXP mode because it uses a capability test which infers the right conclusion under Windows, but the wrong conclusion under Wine, despite there being a different test which actually answers the question being inferred. I guess under the above reasoning, that would not prevent it from being platinum, despite it being non-functional under the default configuration. .NET 2.0 is actually another example of a runtime which is often left out of installers, with a note at the website (or not at all) saying "You need .NET 2.0 installed". (I guess the eventual plan is to integrate an mscoree.dll that points to Mono? I think I saw that on the Wiki, anyway) Should Wine act like a stock Windows (or stock + service packs) or should it also be expected to provide whatever other random extension libraries Microsoft publishes? (eg. Speech SDK...) I hadn't realised Wine provided a msvcr71 implementation for that matter. >> msvcp80 and msvcr80? Or is it mfc80 that's needed? >> Btw, the AppDB mentions Visual C++ 2005 which means we're talking about >> VC8, not VC7. Or is the AppDB wrong? Or maybe I'm looking at the wrong >> AppDB entry: there's Reign of Chaos (rated platinum), and the Frozen >> Throne (rated gold). > Someone mentioned Warcraft 3, someone else mentioned WoW, I'm not sure > any more. It's all too confusing when you're low on coffee :P The DLL confusion is my fault, I misaligned Visual C and Visual Studio versions in my head. In this case, it's Visual Studio 2005, msvc?80.dll. Which coincidentally is the first one to implement SxS, which means it behaves differently under <= Win2k and >= WinXP. I dunno where WoW came into it, I was talking about Warcraft 3. Mind you, occasionally AppDB users (and bug reporters) confused the two as well. It doesn't help that WoW hit version 3 late last year. -- ----------------------------------------------------------- Paul "TBBle" Hampson, B.Sc, LPI, MCSE Very-later-year Asian Studies student, ANU The Boss, Bubblesworth Pty Ltd (ABN: 51 095 284 361) paul.hamp...@pobox.com Of course Pacman didn't influence us as kids. If it did, we'd be running around in darkened rooms, popping pills and listening to repetitive music. -- Kristian Wilson, Nintendo, Inc, 1989 License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.5/au/ -----------------------------------------------------------
pgpbzB9ULYjgC.pgp
Description: PGP signature
