http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9685
--- Comment #90 from EA Durbin ead1234@hotmail.com 2007-10-31 18:24:29 --- (In reply to comment #89)
Hello,
In my opinion this stuff is just a big waste of time because even if I gather a more or less complete list of checked entries, the patches probably won't make it into official wine tree ... and EB could add expand that list every time to disrupt this effort.
This and copy protection are the two biggest obstacles to adopting gaming in linux, and hence linux adoption in general. If it is absolutely impossible to come up with a wine acceptable solution for this, just maintaining a pb patch or unofficial third-party wine tree may be the only solution. Cedega currently doesn't support pb either, it's a huge need that's just waiting to be filled.
Just bugger EB to drop/loosen 131xxx signature checks. All other stuff just works fine - as long as EB doesn't add other braindamaged methods, requiring windows interna mimicked. Hell, they could easily implement non OS/patchlevel specific analyzer to verify if an API entry has been hooked (using some heuristics) - so even wine could be officially supported.
EB absolutely refuses to bend their code to conform with wine or cedega, nor will they support users of these api compatibility layers as Stuart Dunsmore has been quoted as stating before.
so bugger EB = render the checks useless and persuade them to drop them