[Mono-winforms-list] WineLib or GTK#
Wed, 29 Jan 2003 07:59:18 -0800 (PST)
You can configure wineserver to run as a daemon and just have it start from your rc.* scripts. I
think this is what RedHat does.
--- "Tyler W. Wilson" <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> Another 2 cents from me (another one that has done no coding, btw). When
> I managed programmers, I would always reprimand them for what I am about
> to discuss.
> I had never tried running Wine before, so I gave it a shot. I run Gentoo
> Linux on a Thinkpad T23. Not a sluggish machine (unless I boot into XP).
> Anyway, I tried running a few applications on my Windows partition. The
> first thing that struck me was how long it took for the apps to start.
> Is this a concern to anybody? Do we want the Hello World GUI SWF
> application to start up the whole Wine machinery? Perhaps it goes faster
> if it has already been started (perhaps the Mozilla quick-start approach
> would work here).
> So my cote again would be to code now with WineLib to get everything up
> and running, but during implementation think, design and code the SWF
> implementation with the idea in mind that the underlying implementation
> may be swapped at in the future. So as a previous poster said, we may
> have a SWF/Qt, SWF/Wine or SWF/Gtk.
> Matt Zyzik wrote:
> >>From tallying up all of your suggestions, it appears as if most are in
> >favor of implementing SWF with WineLib.
> >I am also supporting the WineLib idea; and here are the reasons why:
> >1. Microsoft never intended Windows.Forms to be cross-platform, which is
> >why ECMA-wise, SWF is not a part of the standard.
> >2. If people are focusing on cross-platform apps, properly coding with
> >the Path class, skipping out on win32 api, not using windows registry...
> >they're probably going to use a cross-platform toolkit like GTK#
> >3. We want Mono to look like a solid framework; and supporting SWF 100%
> >is a VERY attractive feature.
> >4. GTK# already exists as a separate GUI and placing chunks of it into
> >SWF would seem awkward.
> >5. Implement WineLib would be a lot easier to reach a large percentage
> >of compatibility; a lot of code in Wine saves us the work.
> >6. Parts of SWF classes in mono cvs appear to already have some WineLib
> >code in them.
> >7. No concern should be attached to how everything would "look" when
> >implemented with WineLib because this can always be changed and I'm sure
> >the Wine people will be thinking about a native feel anyhow.
> >8. BECAUSE I SAID SO!
> >All kidding aside though, reply with some thoughts.
> >Mono-winforms-list maillist - Monoemail@example.com
> Mono-winforms-list maillist - Monofirstname.lastname@example.org
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.