Luke Benstead <[email protected]> writes: > That sounds like a far better way of doing it. Perhaps though, if that > method was implemented, passing a program path directly into wine > (wine ~/foo.exe) would be a special case (without a \\?\ prefix). From > a users point of view that's what I'd expect, as you haven't yet > started the application (and entered windows land :) ).
Yes, that's my point, the functionality has to be preserved as far as possible (and not just for the program name). So the heuristic essentially needs to be moved to higher-level functions, which would then in turn call the lower-level code with an explicit \\?\unix prefix. -- Alexandre Julliard [email protected]
