September 2001 - Wine-devel

RE: CryptoAPI
by Patrik Stridvall 06 Sep '01

06 Sep '01

> > > However, OpenSSL's license is incompatible with the GPL, > hence any GPL'd > > > applications that wish to use an OpenSSL-backed CryptoAPI > implementation > > > would be unable to do so. > > > > I'm not so sure about this. Question: is it possible to > write GPL'd > > software under Windows that links into, say, USER32.DLL? > Answer: yes, > > because USER32.DLL is considered part of the operating system. > > It might be that cryptoapi's dll is also considered part of > the win32 > > operating system api, thus allowing even gpl'd apps to dynamically > > link to it without violating the gpl. > > Sure, but I think it's a fine line to walk.. The Microsoft-provided > ADVAPI32.DLL is considered part of the OS, but the API itself is not. > If you were to create a replacement ADVAPI32.DLL for use > under Windows, > I don't think it would be legal for GPL apps to link with it; but hey, > IANAL, as they say. In any case, the line is even blurrier with wine, > since wine itself isn't part of the OS -- so someone wanting to port a > GPL'd windows app [for the sake of argument let's pretend that some > exist ;-)] to Linux using winelib might have issues. This issue has been discussed before (see mailing list archive). I think that the general consensus is that the GPL certainly could be interpreted (and indeed likely to be interpreted by a court) as not covering such cases as above, especially since the GPL obviously do not cover a GPL:ed application on Windows it would be ridiculous to make it legal distribute Wine and a Windows binary but not Winelib and make it illegal to do that with a Linux binary that dynamicly links to whatever version of Winelib installed of the system. The fact that a version of Winelib might exist that links to a GPL:ed library is a ridiculous ground for an court case. You might as well argue that distribution of any Windows binary is illegal since somebody might run it on a illegal (pirated) version of Windows. Beside the GPL doesn't cover use, only distribution, so if the user would install a Winelib that uses a GPL library that would be completely legal as far as that user would be concern despite the fact that he has a non-GPL:ed application that uses Winelib. That would effectively close any "have no legal uses" argument eventhough that argument is ridiculous regardless of this since even though no non-GPL:ed Wine implementation of CryptoAPI currently exists the application might be used with limited functionality until such time or that matter use the real ADVAPI.DLL from a legally bought copy of Windows instead. Beside I don't think any copyright holder of a GPL library would dare sue the Wine project or any user of Winelib, even disregarding their non existing chances of success, because of PR reason. However Alexandre has clearly expressed that he doesn't want Wine to be a legal test bed, if not primarily for the legal issues, so because he doesn't want an unsuspecting company using Winelib be "cruficed" on Slashdot or wherever for alleged GPL violation. :-) While I, in some meaning, agree, I do not believe that we should refrain from doing so because of fear of what might never be. Obviously we should turn off the use of any GPL:ed library by default. Anyway, unless or until Alexandre changes his mind, I think that you should submit all general code that needn't use a specific library and distribute that rest as a patch. Preferable so that Winelib could dynamically load it so it could be distributed seperately in binary form as well.

2 1

Re: dsound fix in wineoss
by eric pouech 06 Sep '01

06 Sep '01

eric pouech wrote: > > for some (unexplained yet reasons), my libc implementation for memset > reads the content of the buffer it's supposed to fill > since the buffer passed in dsound init has only write access (it's > needed > for OSS in order to know it's a buffer for recording or playing), some > seg fault occurs > > I wrote it the easiest way (I don't think it's worth adding a configure > test for that) > > so I replaced the memset by a hand made equivalent > > (btw: libc 2.1.3 as shipped by Mandrake 7.2 ; bug has been submitted to > Mdk QA site, still waiting for some acknowledgement) ok.. got some feedback from the mandrake folks regarding this bug I'm looking for someone with a Mandrake 8.1 installed to test if the bug has been fixed in later release of mdk... any volunteer ? A+ -- --------------- Eric Pouech (http://perso.wanadoo.fr/eric.pouech/) "The future will be better tomorrow", Vice President Dan Quayle

1 0

Problem with specmaker
by Guy L. Albertelli 06 Sep '01

06 Sep '01

Recently had a problem with specmaker not generating prototypes. Traced it down to a problem in function_grep.pl. If the following lines are in a .h file, no prototypes after them are recognized. Removing the lines from the .h file allows the prototype to be generated: #define IShellIcon_METHODS \ ICOM_METHOD3(HRESULT, GetIconOf, \ LPCITEMIDLIST,pidl, UINT,flags, LPINT,lpIconIndex) I suspect that the preprocessor elimination did not expect multiline condition. I don't know perl so I cann't fix it. Thanks, Guy Albertelli <<galberte(a)neo.lrun.com>>

2 1

Problem
by Borut Rozman 05 Sep '01

05 Sep '01

I was fooling arround with wine installation and now have a big problem, Firstly I had problems with size of my disk so I downloaded a RPM file from wine.dataparty.no glibc2-RPM (requirements): Latest stripped build: wine-cvs-stripped-090401-1.i386.rpm Latest unstripped build: wine-cvs-unstripped-090401-1.i386.rpm these two, then I could not make it running so I downloaded a gzip and make a new fresh one and it comes upto this level : Compiling regapi... gcc -c -I. -I. -I../../include -I../../include -g -O2 -Wall -mpreferred-stack-boundary=2 -fPIC -DSTRICT -D_REENTRANT -I/usr/X11R6/include -o regapi.o regapi.c ld -r regapi.o -o regapi.tmp.o strip --strip-unneeded regapi.tmp.o LD_LIBRARY_PATH="../../unicode:$LD_LIBRARY_PATH" ../../tools/winebuild/winebuild -fPIC -L../../dlls -sym regapi.tmp.o -o regapi.spec.c -spec ./regapi.spec gcc -c -I. -I. -I../../include -I../../include -g -O2 -Wall -mpreferred-stack-boundary=2 -fPIC -DSTRICT -D_REENTRANT -I/usr/X11R6/include -o regapi.spec.o regapi.spec.c gcc -shared -Wl,-Bsymbolic regapi.spec.o regapi.o -o regapi.so -L../../library -lwine -lncurses -lm -lutil -ldl rm -f regapi && ln -s ../../wine regapi Preparing to install default Wine registry entries... Installing default Wine registry entries... wine client error:0x80685e8: version mismatch 48/51. Your wineserver binary was not upgraded correctly, or you have an older one somewhere in your PATH. Or maybe the wrong wineserver is still running? Registry install failed. so u see it is some client/server error and now I cant go further plz help me out ! regards PS : Read too much of RTFM :P

3 3

this could be interesting for wine producers
by Igor 04 Sep '01

04 Sep '01

Pavel Machek suggested GPLing the netwarefs tools, or no one would be able to use the source. Jeff replied, "I will cross mount the manos server to the FTP server this evening. This server has all of the source code for the entire TRG archive. I'll put all of it up this evening. It will be mounted off of /archive in the ftp home area. It also contains all of the Microsoft source code for all of our W2K file systems work. If it's helpful to anyone, they are welcome to it." Pavel reiterated, "Putting it off /archive is not enough, it does not make it GPLed. Those tools that are usefull should be marked with GPL so it is *legal* to use them. (You might also consider creating sourceforge.net project and putting your stuff there ;-)" Jeff replied, "It's all GPL, even the MS code. Sourcefroge is a great idea. I'll look into it." found here: http://kt.zork.net/kernel-traffic/kt20010903_131.html#4

1 0

Bugs involving returning strings from API functions
by Justin Santa Barbara 04 Sep '01

04 Sep '01

There are a group of functions in the kernel that appear to be broken in that they don't follow the Windows API specification. The general convention for these functions is as follows: The function is called with a pointer to a buffer and the size of the buffer, and returns the number of characters copied to the buffer, excluding the null terminator, unless the buffer is too small when the total size in characters of the buffer needed (with a null terminator) is returned. If the buffer is too small, the string is not copied at all. Several functions that I have spotted don't implement this correctly - particularly ones in files/directory.c. eg GetSystemDirectory. They count the Null Terminator. A typical symptom of this is that an installation program attempts to call LoadLibrary on "C:\\WINDOWS\\SYSTEM", because it's appended eg "OLE32.DLL" after the null character. This is one of the problems when installing the Microsoft installer, for example. While looking for other functions that might do the same thing, I came across this: /*********************************************************************** * GetCurrentDirectoryW (KERNEL32.@) */ UINT WINAPI GetCurrentDirectoryW( UINT buflen, LPWSTR buf ) { LPSTR xpath = HeapAlloc( GetProcessHeap(), 0, buflen+1 ); UINT ret = GetCurrentDirectoryA( buflen, xpath ); if (ret < buflen) ret = MultiByteToWideChar( CP_ACP, 0, xpath, -1, buf, buflen ) - 1; HeapFree( GetProcessHeap(), 0, xpath ); return ret; } But HeapAlloc takes a number of bytes, whereas buflen is in (two-byte) characters. ie a small buffer would appear to crash this code. (right?) While I have succesfully patched these bugs on my machine, I'm not sure that going through and looking for every function that may be broken in some similar way and changing them one-by-one is a good way to proceed. These bugs all have to do with returning strings - it would probably be better to attempt to have functions that 'copy out an ANSI string' or 'copy out a UNICODE string' according to this API. Without meaning to be critical, the problem appears to be that the same functionality has been written many times throughout the code, and so multiple and different bugs have crept in. However, I'm quite new to using wine, and so would like the advice and opinions of those more experienced. My questions: 1) Is there a design reason why a single common function for string copying is not used? Maybe something to do with separate libraries, some of which may be replaced by native windows DLLs? Maybe someone more knowledgeable than myself could direct me as to the best place to put the helper function implementations. 2) Would writing these string helper functions and changing (most) string-returning functions to use them be worthwhile (or indeed even welcome)? 3) Is there a move to using UNICODE internally in the kernel that means that this would be best combined with some other effort? Certainly if this were an eventual design goal then using helper functions would make that job a little easier. Comments? Justin SB

2 3

CryptoAPI
by Travis Michielsen 03 Sep '01

03 Sep '01

Hi, I was going to start implementing the Cypto API (in advapi32.dll) over the next few weeks. As of yet these functions are no more than stubs. However, I am finding increased use of this API as more applications becomed networkable and relying more heavily on internet connections. I was hoping to implement these functions by using the OpenSSL library (if/when available). This library seems to have similar capabilities. One of my concerns is about legal issues. What special concerns should I note about cryptographic software? Are there any special copyright issues I should be aware of? Another question is about design. M$ seems to split the cryptographic software into different dlls (rsabase.dll, rsasig.dll, dssbase.dll, etc.). Should I do this as well so that, applications can use the native dlls if necessary or should I simply implement it entirely though advapi32.dll which and avoid the need to create several new (and very small) dlls under wine? Because most of the code is already in another library (OpenSSL) creating extra dlls seems abit unnecessary. - Travis _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com

3 4

Two threads waiting for a critical section
by Uwe Bonnes 03 Sep '01

03 Sep '01

Hallo, appended log seems fishy to me: trace:win32:_LeaveSysLevel (0x4010f7d4, level 1): thread 0x96d41a0 (fs 02d7, pid 15615) count after 2 (0) trace:win32:_EnterSysLevel (0x4010f7d4, level 1): thread 0x96d34a0 (fs 01cf, pid 15616) count before 0 (1) ^^^^ ^^^^^^^^ trace:win32:_EnterSysLevel (0x4010f7d4, level 1): thread 0x96d41a0 (fs 02d7, pid 15615) count before 2 trace:win32:_EnterSysLevel (0x4010f7d4, level 1): thread 0x96d41a0 (fs 02d7, pid 15615) count after 3 trace:win32:_LeaveSysLevel (0x4010f7d4, level 1): thread 0x96d41a0 (fs 02d7, pid 15615) count before 3 trace:win32:_LeaveSysLevel (0x4010f7d4, level 1): thread 0x96d41a0 (fs 02d7, pid 15615) count after 2 trace:win32:_EnterSysLevel (0x4010f7d4, level 1): thread 0x96d5280 (fs 07bf, pid 15623) count before 0 (2) ^^^^ ^^^^^^^^ trace:win32:_EnterSysLevel (0x4010f7d4, level 1): thread 0x96d41a0 (fs 02d7, pid 15615) count before 2 trace:win32:_EnterSysLevel (0x4010f7d4, level 1): thread 0x96d41a0 (fs 02d7, pid 15615) count after 3 trace:win32:_LeaveSysLevel (0x4010f7d4, level 1): thread 0x96d41a0 (fs 02d7, pid 15615) count before 3 trace:win32:_LeaveSysLevel (0x4010f7d4, level 1): thread 0x96d41a0 (fs 02d7, pid 15615) count after 2 trace:win32:_EnterSysLevel (0x4010f7d4, level 1): thread 0x96d41a0 (fs 02d7, pid 15615) count before 2 trace:win32:_EnterSysLevel (0x4010f7d4, level 1): thread 0x96d41a0 (fs 02d7, pid 15615) count after 3 trace:win32:_LeaveSysLevel (0x4010f7d4, level 1): thread 0x96d41a0 (fs 02d7, pid 15615) count before 3 trace:win32:_LeaveSysLevel (0x4010f7d4, level 1): thread 0x96d41a0 (fs 02d7, pid 15615) count after 2 trace:win32:_EnterSysLevel (0x4010f7d4, level 1): thread 0x96d41a0 (fs 02d7, pid 15615) count before 2 trace:win32:_EnterSysLevel (0x4010f7d4, level 1): thread 0x96d41a0 (fs 02d7, pid 15615) count after 3 trace:win32:_LeaveSysLevel (0x4010f7d4, level 1): thread 0x96d41a0 (fs 02d7, pid 15615) count before 3 trace:win32:_LeaveSysLevel (0x4010f7d4, level 1): thread 0x96d41a0 (fs 02d7, pid 15615) count after 2 trace:win32:_LeaveSysLevel (0x4010f7d4, level 1): thread 0x96d41a0 (fs 02d7, pid 15615) count before 2 trace:win32:_LeaveSysLevel (0x4010f7d4, level 1): thread 0x96d41a0 (fs 02d7, pid 15615) count after 1 trace:win32:_LeaveSysLevel (0x4010f7d4, level 1): thread 0x96d41a0 (fs 02d7, pid 15615) count before 1 trace:win32:_LeaveSysLevel (0x4010f7d4, level 1): thread 0x96d41a0 (fs 02d7, pid 15615) count after 0 (3) err:ntdll:RtlpWaitForCriticalSection section 0x4010f7d4 "syslevel.c: Win16Mutex" wait timed out, retrying (60 sec) fs=07bf err:ntdll:RtlpWaitForCriticalSection section 0x4010f7d4 "syslevel.c: Win16Mutex" wait timed out, retrying (5 min) fs=07bf At (0) 0x96d41a0 holds the Mutex. At (1) 0x96d34a0 tries to get it, but as 0x96d41a0 has the Mutex, it waits. At (2) 0x96d5280 also tries to get the lock and must also wait. At (3) 0x96d41a0 releases the lock, but neither 0x96d34a0 nor 0x96d5280 start to aquire the lock. Why doesn't one of them continue? This happens with the installer from the recent RS Components CD-ROM running SETUP.EXE with --winver nt40. Bye -- Uwe Bonnes bon(a)elektron.ikp.physik.tu-darmstadt.de Institut fuer Kernphysik Schlossgartenstrasse 9 64289 Darmstadt --------- Tel. 06151 162516 -------- Fax. 06151 164321 ----------

1 0

' ' & '"' handling in the command line
by Francois Gouget 02 Sep '01

02 Sep '01

Hi, Some time ago I realized that the command line handling in Wine did not work properly when arguments with spaces or double-quotes are involved. For instance I would start a Wine application like this: main "a b" c and it would tell me something like this: GetCommandLine=[./main a b c] Or I would call CreateProcess(... "main \"a b\" c" ...) and main would get: main -> argc=4 0 [./main] 1 [a] 2 [b] 3 [c] So I investigated this and found that * double-quotes, '"', have the same meaning in win32 as in unix (tested on Win95 & Win2000) * backslash, '\', work as on unix, especially wrt double-quotes * single-quotes, ''', have no special meaning So CreateProcess(... "main \"a b\" c" ...) should give me: GetCommandLine=[./main "a b" c] main -> argc=3 0 [./main] 1 [a b] 2 [c] I searched for places where we convert command lines to argv lists and reciprocally and modified them to work as on windows. With this patch things should be correct, whether you call a Wine application from Unix, from another Wine application via CreateProcess, or if you call a Unix application from Wine. There's just one little bit in the msvcrt code which I treated in a separate patch (p20010902-cmdline2.diff). In the process I wrote a few test applications: * hello regular hello world unix app * main A Wine console application which dumps its argc/argv and then calls GetCommandLine, ... You can also call it with a '-i' parameter to test CommandLineToArgvW, except that _getws is not implemented in Wine so you can only do that on windows * winmain A Wine Gui application which dumps lpCmdLine and then calls __getmainargs, CommandLineToArgvW(GetCommandLineW), ... * createp Which reads a command line from stdin and calls CreateProcess with it * spawnv Reads a list of arguments from stdin and calls spawnv with it (spawn* don't handle ' ' and '"', see p20010902-cmdline3.diff) * spawn Same but the command is fixed I know that there has been discussions about the command line handling before and that some applications do very weird things. Please test this patch and let me know how it goes. -- Francois Gouget fgouget(a)free.fr http://fgouget.free.fr/ If it stinks, it's chemistry. If it moves, it's biology. If it does not work, It's computer science.

1 0

Re: pe format
by Dan Kegel 02 Sep '01

02 Sep '01

tiago r wrote: > From: Dan Kegel <dank(a)kegel.com> > > > tiago r wrote: > > > i know this doesn't got direct link with wine development, but i was wondering if someone has a complete reference of the portable executable format including BOUND_IMPORT_DIRECTORY description. > > > > google finds > > http://www.microsoft.com/hwdev/hardware/PECOFF.htm > > http://www.windowsitlibrary.com/Content/356/11/1.html > > http://www.csn.ul.ie/~caolan/publink/winresdump/winresdump/doc/pefile.html > > http://www.csn.ul.ie/~caolan/publink/winresdump/winresdump/doc/pefile2.html > > In fact all of this (and other) documents describe the pe format but none of them describe the BOUND_IMPORT_DIR. Hmm. Searching for BOUND_IMPORT with google yields two links: http://www.radsoft.net/gallery/bv/ http://members.internettrash.com/astalalista/ac/pe_tut2.html plus one hit on groups.google.com (a guy doing a minimal hello_world.exe mentioned it). Maybe try asking on comp.lang.asm.x86, or some microsoft group... - Dan -- "I have seen the future, and it licks itself clean." -- Bucky Katt

1 0