On 12/20/05, Vitaliy Margolen wine-patch@kievinfo.com wrote:
I can't say how many people have come to #winehq with different problems that were related to winetools. From what I could see, not a single person who I talked to had winetools installed and had Wine programs working properly.
I agree. Winetools goes against our goal of not using native dlls, and takes away needed testing of our builtin dlls. If people decide to use it on their own, then that's cool with me, but we shouldn't promote its use.
-- James Hawkins
James Hawkins wrote:
On 12/20/05, Vitaliy Margolen wine-patch@kievinfo.com wrote:
I can't say how many people have come to #winehq with different problems that were related to winetools. From what I could see, not a single person who I talked to had winetools installed and had Wine programs working properly.
I agree. Winetools goes against our goal of not using native dlls, and takes away needed testing of our builtin dlls. If people decide to use it on their own, then that's cool with me, but we shouldn't promote its use.
-- James Hawkins
I totally agree. Besides, isn't Winetools '~/.wine/config' based, while we're Registry based? Anyone wanna comment on that?
Hi,
On 12/20/05, James Hawkins truiken@gmail.com wrote:
I agree. Winetools goes against our goal of not using native dlls,
Ditto. Winetools had it day but now that we have a working DCOM, MSI and inital webbrowser implementation I think we should try to force builtin everything. I am not opposed to having scripts to automate install and configuration of certain things but we should only depend on Wine modules.
-- Steven Edwards - ReactOS and Wine developer
"There is one thing stronger than all the armies in the world, and that is an idea whose time has come." - Victor Hugo
-
James Hawkins -
Segin -
Steven Edwards