On 01/23/2012 11:01 AM, Juan Lang wrote: > Hi Daniel, > > On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 3:15 AM, Alexandre Julliard <[email protected]> > wrote: >> Daniel Santos <[email protected]> writes: >> >>> I've updated my in-process wineserver hack, cleaned it up a bit more and >>> fixed a few problems. So, at least in Star Wars Battlefront II, the >>> sound and HID problems are fixed (the "select" server call must be made >>> via the pipe). I presume there are other server calls with similar >>> properties. Also, the wineserver now exits properly and cleans up it's >>> instance when the main process terminates. Changed the enabling >>> enviroment variable to "WINESPEEDHACK". >>> >>> So what would it take for this to be integrated into wine as an optional >>> feature? >> You'll probably have to kill me first ;-) Do you have a taster? :D (jk) > a more serious reply: you may not be aware the Transgaming did just > such a thing years ago, and lobbied pretty heavily for it to be > included. AJ declined at the time. The reasons for not including it > remain the same: because of the possibility of a buggy app taking > down the wineserver, we couldn't ever attempt to support such a beast. > Any bug reported against it would be suspect. Worse, people might > report bugs neglecting to mention that they'd enabled it. > > So no, we really won't ever include such a feature as part of an > official release around here. We already have enough trouble with > people reporting bugs in unsupported configurations. > > You're welcome to maintain your own fork, or maintain your patch for > people to try in their own Wine builds if they like. > --Juan Thanks for the history and clarification. Indeed, it's an ugly little beast. I've tested it on a number of apps and uncovered some other other flaws in the patch (no surprise there). However, I've so far found it handy for testing some things, so I think that it's useful. For example, there a few performance bottlenecks I want to create specific (conventional) patches for and I already know it will help because I can toggle how the call is made (well yes, I know, I can also toggle logging, and I did that before, but this just confirms it).
So I can understand your reluctance, but I still think it might be worth consideration at some point (or in some other incarnation). Daniel
