Re: How to handle Wrapper(?) Dlls

[Henri Verbeet]

On 26 July 2010 15:58, Uwe Bonnes
<bon(a)elektron.ikp.physik.tu-darmstadt.de> wrote:
> Wrapper DLLs, where possible, are much more favorable. They don't require
> server calls for each function call.
> I'd imagine proper USB support wouldn't either. That said, I don't
> know for sure if that's the real reason either, it could also be a
> specific issue with that patch, or a more general consideration like
> "Let's not add wrappers for every possible Linux library".