Vitaliy Margolen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I disagree. It have to be scary! It have to tell user that they do not
> have direct access to the device. And that enything that will try doing
> that will fail!
CD checks is a specific case, there are many other perfectly valid
uses for loop mounts
Alexandre Julliard wrote:
> Vitaliy Margolen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> Any reasons why this patch is not applied?
>> http://www.winehq.org/pipermail/wine-patches/2007-January/035264.html
>>
>> This is one of the major headaches for users trying to get programs
>> requiring direct CD-ROM dri
Vitaliy Margolen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Any reasons why this patch is not applied?
> http://www.winehq.org/pipermail/wine-patches/2007-January/035264.html
>
> This is one of the major headaches for users trying to get programs
> requiring direct CD-ROM drive access to work. And it's nearly
Any reasons why this patch is not applied?
http://www.winehq.org/pipermail/wine-patches/2007-January/035264.html
This is one of the major headaches for users trying to get programs
requiring direct CD-ROM drive access to work. And it's nearly impossible
to get required information from users to fi
