Hans Leidekker wrote:
On Saturday 18 September 2004 19:47, Robert Shearman wrote:
Will we get into the same state as SHDOCVW where the DLL is essentially useless?
SHDOCVW needs the Mozilla based ActiveX control right? If I understand your question you're worried that because people don't have liblcms installed MSCMS will be useless.
No. I am asking whether it will end up sitting there remaining 5% implemented (I think the 25% on the DLLs status page is a little generous) because no-one will have the time and expertise to implement the rest. Admittedly, this is different from SHDOCVW where it consists of many undocumented functions and interfaces.
Well, I know liblcms is part of SUSE, Mandrake and Debian. It's not in Fedora Core but it is in Fedora Extras.
liblcms (LittleCMS) is only 384Kb so we could also consider statically linking it, an option pretty much out of the question for the Mozilla based control. A third option would be to build LittleCMS as another dll (it support this), implement MSCMS on top of it, and simply ship that as another Wine specific dll.
It is not a problem if liblcms isn't installed as we could print a FIXME and return FALSE from PROCESS_ATTACH to get the same behaviour as before.
Rob