Misha wrote:
and even my version of Windows 98 is bundled with mfc42.dll, so wine really should provide it too... [our own version, not Microsoft's.]
Well, sure. Same goes for a lot of things. But since mfc42.dll is a Visual C++ runtime file that has very liberal redistribution terms and is in fact bundled with many apps, we can get away without it for a long time. And it's not currently a showstopper as far as I can tell; I'm more interested in the bugs that keep e.g. Photoshop from running flawlessly.
So one of these days it might become a priority. Until then, it's merely important but not urgent. - Dan
On Thu, 2007-09-06 at 06:17 -0700, Dan Kegel wrote:
Misha wrote:
and even my version of Windows 98 is bundled with mfc42.dll, so wine really should provide it too... [our own version, not Microsoft's.]
Well, sure. Same goes for a lot of things. But since mfc42.dll is a Visual C++ runtime file that has very liberal redistribution terms and is in fact bundled with many apps, we can get away without it for a long time. And it's not currently a showstopper as far as I can tell; I'm more interested in the bugs that keep e.g. Photoshop from running flawlessly.
So one of these days it might become a priority. Until then, it's merely important but not urgent.
- Dan
I feel for the poor soul that will implement MFC. Using MFC is horrible enough...but actually *implementing* that?? Good luck! =)
Stephan
"Dan" == Dan Kegel dank@kegel.com writes:
Dan> Misha wrote: >> and even my version of Windows 98 is bundled with mfc42.dll, so wine >> really should provide it too... [our own version, not Microsoft's.]
Dan> Well, sure. Same goes for a lot of things. But since mfc42.dll is Dan> a Visual C++ runtime file that has very liberal redistribution Dan> terms and is in fact bundled with many apps, we can get away Dan> without it for a long time. And it's not currently a showstopper Dan> as far as I can tell; I'm more interested in the bugs that keep Dan> e.g. Photoshop from running flawlessly.
Dan> So one of these days it might become a priority. Until then, it's Dan> merely important but not urgent. - Dan
Missing MFC42 and other redistributable DLLs is a showstopper for winelib and running windows code on non i386 archtecture...
Am Freitag, 7. September 2007 10:05:25 schrieb Uwe Bonnes:
Missing MFC42 and other redistributable DLLs is a showstopper for winelib and running windows code on non i386 archtecture...
I think you can compile MFC42 for winelib and other architectures, the source code is publically accessible(shipped with visual studio). It is a bit tricky, and you have to get the license right, but there is a HOWTO somewhere on the wine website and it should work.
Uwe Bonnes wrote: [...]
Missing MFC42 and other redistributable DLLs is a showstopper for winelib and running windows code on non i386 archtecture...
Well, not quite. If you're going to use Winelib it means that you have the source of the application. And if it is using the MFC it should mean that you have a Visual Studio license, and thus the MFC sources (though maybe that's only in the 'Pro' edition or some such). So then you should be able to recompile the MFC using Winelib. That's exactly what I did five years or so ago. I had to trim quite a few things but got something that was somewhat usable. I did not pursue it further though.
Modern day MFC probably changed a bit (did it really change much?), but then Winelib should be much better too. The real issue is the license. In the Visual Studio 6 era, it seemed like it was legal to redistribute the MFC dll with your non-trivial application, with no mention of the platform. This might have changed since, and in any case that's something you'd want to check with a lawyer.
Francois Gouget wrote:
Uwe Bonnes wrote: [...]
Missing MFC42 and other redistributable DLLs is a showstopper for winelib and running windows code on non i386 archtecture...
Well, not quite. If you're going to use Winelib it means that you have the source of the application. And if it is using the MFC it should mean that you have a Visual Studio license, and thus the MFC sources (though maybe that's only in the 'Pro' edition or some such). So then you should be able to recompile the MFC using Winelib. That's exactly what I did five years or so ago. I had to trim quite a few things but got something that was somewhat usable. I did not pursue it further though.
Modern day MFC probably changed a bit (did it really change much?), but then Winelib should be much better too. The real issue is the license. In the Visual Studio 6 era, it seemed like it was legal to redistribute the MFC dll with your non-trivial application, with no mention of the platform. This might have changed since, and in any case that's something you'd want to check with a lawyer.
In Visual Studio 6 it was allowed. In Visual C++ .net, it says not only "only in object code form" and together with a product that "adds significant and primary functionality to the Redistributables", but also:
"Redistributables only operate in conjunction with Microsoft Windows platforms".
I believe this is a direct response to Wine being rather useful.
Also, end users may not distribute the Redistributable further.
(Of course, programs developed with Visual C++ .net may still be distributed, but this license covers Microsofts copyrights on their redistributables.)
regards, Jakob
-
Dan Kegel -
Francois Gouget -
Jakob Eriksson -
Stefan Dösinger -
Stephan Rose -
Uwe Bonnes