Wine 1.9 Release Brings WSAPoll, Better X11 D&D

[phoronix]

Phoronix: Wine 1.9 Release Brings WSAPoll, Better X11 D&D

With Wine 1.8 having been released last week, Wine 1.9.0 was released today as the first development snapshot leading to the Wine 1.10 release in 2016...

http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=Wine-1.9.0-Released

[nanonyme]

Brief googling says WSAPoll is notoriously buggy on Windows so people avoid it

[sonnet]

Brief googling says WSAPoll is notoriously buggy on Windows so people avoid it

If that's so, why wasting time to implement it (since it's not used by applications ) ?

[nanonyme]

If that's so, why wasting time to implement it (since it's not used by applications ) ?

Indeed an interesting question

[Ericg]

If that's so, why wasting time to implement it (since it's not used by applications ) ?

Avoided doesn't meant not used. If this had absolutely zero application users, then yeah, it could be skipped over. But obviously someone cared enough to put the time and effort into making it work, therefore implying that the users of that API are not zero.

[nanonyme]

Avoided doesn't meant not used. If this had absolutely zero application users, then yeah, it could be skipped over. But obviously someone cared enough to put the time and effort into making it work, therefore implying that the users of that API are not zero.

Actually makes me wonder whether Wine is allowed to diverge from Windows implementation of WinAPI and fix bugs where it doesn't break apps

[F1esDgSdUTYpm0iy]

Actually makes me wonder whether Wine is allowed to diverge from Windows implementation of WinAPI and fix bugs where it doesn't break apps

Given its name -- WINE (Wine Is Not An Emulator), I'd say it's not outside the realm of open to the developers. As in, if the function of the WinAPI call in question remains the same, why not fix it? Since WINE isn't emulating Windows 1:1, there is very little reason not to.

[DMJC]

Wine does implement fixes for the win32 API including broken code on Windows. They always aim for 1:1 behaviour/features but where there's a feature which is broken on Windows which can be fixed without affecting compatibility. Wine fixes it. This is partly why backwards compatibility within wine is better than within windows in some cases.

[eydee]

If that's so, why wasting time to implement it (since it's not used by applications ) ?

Probably it IS used by something. Most bug reports seem to come in from people trying to use certain programs and reporting problems with it.

[pinguinpc]

In this wine version appears more work related with msvcp110 - msvcp120 and ws2_32

Apparently them have plans to name next wine as wine 2.0

Rosanne DiMesio <dimesio at earthlink.net> writes: On Mon, 21 Dec 2015 10:24:12 -0600

Andrew Eikum <aeikum at codeweavers.com> wrote: On Mon, Dec 21, 2015 at 09:23:18AM +0100,

Alexandre Julliard wrote: I will try to make a 1.9.0 release this Friday.

As we are approaching the dreaded "1.10", this or the next release seem like good opportunities to drop the meaningless "1." from our version numbers.

IIRC, back at FOSDEM 2014 Alexandre said that 1.8/1.9 would be the last 1.x releases because people are confused by two digit numbers.

Yes, the plan is for the next stable version to be called 2.0.

There are no plans yet for what happens after that, this would be a good Wineconf topic...

-- Alexandre Julliard julliard at winehq.org

Link to original message

https://www.winehq.org/pipermail/win...er/110838.html