[Fwd: x11drv WND separation]

[David Fraser]

Hi

Have had trouble getting through to [e-mail], so reposting 
this to see...
Funny, nothing's bounced...

David

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: x11drv WND separation
Date: Mon, 04 Nov 2002 15:27:27 +0200
From: David Fraser 
To: [e-mail], [e-mail]
CC: [e-mail]
References:  

Dimitrie O. Paun wrote:
> On October 31, 2002 06:02 pm, Alexandre Julliard wrote:
> > "Dimitrie O. Paun"  writes:
> > > What is NOT in 0.8:
> > >  -- stable server protocol: no binary compatibility
> > >  -- DLL separation: ditto
> >
> > IMO the goals for 0.9 will be reached before the ones for 0.8 so you
> > might as well put everything together...
>
> Maybe so, you know this better. But 0.9 needs what's listed
> here anyhow, if we hit the 0.9 targets before, no harm's done.
> I am not that optimistic about the DLL separation. The x11drv
> is a bit of a mess, as we have a WND structure maintained by
> USER, which x11drv needs access to. It needs work. And in 
> general, the separation work that's left is not trivial,
> and you seem to be the only one qualified to do it. And you
> are one busy guy...

Does anyone have any info on what needs to be done to separate out the
WND structure from USER? Is there any other stuff that should be separated
out into x11drv? Presumably even if the separation isn't trivial some 
pointers
could enable others to give it a try...

David

[Dimitrie O. Paun]

On November 5, 2002 08:59 am, David Fraser wrote:
> Does anyone have any info on what needs to be done to separate out the
> WND structure from USER? Is there any other stuff that should be separated
> out into x11drv? Presumably even if the separation isn't trivial some
> pointers could enable others to give it a try...

Well, take what I said with a grain of salt. I looked a _bit_ around there,
and it seems that is a big reason why it's going to be hard to separate the
two. I just got the gut feeling that it will require some thought. I might
be completely wrong, Alexandre should comment on this one.

[Alexandre Julliard]

"Dimitrie O. Paun"  writes:
> Well, take what I said with a grain of salt. I looked a _bit_ around there,
> and it seems that is a big reason why it's going to be hard to separate the
> two. I just got the gut feeling that it will require some thought. I might
> be completely wrong, Alexandre should comment on this one.

Well, if it was easy it would be done already...