Patrick R Ludvigsen said:
Could an open-source Windows application using Direct3D be recompiled for ARM, then could Wine be used to run that so as to translate the Direct3D calls to OpenGL ES?
(Wine would have to be given ES support first if I'm understanding correctly)
Wine Is Not an Emulator. It's all in the name, Wine doesn't work on non x86 architecture.
You could however port the open-source Windows application to Linux on ARM and make it use OpenGL ES instead of Direct3D, and it'd run a ton better for that matter.
EDIT: You could have found
this answer in the
FAQ.
I was asking if a Windows app which is open-source could be cross-compiled to ARM and THEN use Wine to change the Direct3D calls to OpenGL.
And I answered your question: Wine doesn't work on non x86 architecture. I don't see the problem here?
Longer answer: yes
if (the D3D->OGL parts of) Wine got ported you could
conceivably do this. This requires someone to first rip chunks of Wine out, then port them, so people don't need to change their Direct3D routines to OpenGL to port their apps. This has a very low benefit, even without considering how fallible Wine can be at this type of thing, because apps would have to have source available to be ported to ARM in the first place.
If source is available then 9 out of 10 times porting the graphics routines is going to work a few quadrillion (hyperbole for teh win) times better than using this D3D->OGLES layer that someone presumably ripped out of Wine and ported to ARM. If source is not available, the Wine port would do nothing. If you have the time yourself to create something like that, it's probably better spent porting the software properly, and I doubt anyone else is going to devote their personal time to this either. (though I could be wrong)
So in summary: yes in an ideal world where someone ported parts of Wine to the Pandora AND you ported software to ARM without changing the graphics routines AND bugs in the translation layer don't make the software a mess it could happen. But we don't live in an ideal world, so in a word the answer is simply "no".
Better?