June 2009 - Wine-devel - list.winehq.org

Alpha Roadblocks
by Joel Holdsworth 26 Jun '09

26 Jun '09

Hi All, Some of you may have read some of my recent mails about my work to refresh the wine icons with Tango versions, as demonstrated in this screenshot: http://www.airwebreathe.org.uk/alpha-tango-icons.png Achieving this task isn't a simple icon replacement job, because of the inability of wine to handle the alpha channel correctly in two key areas: HICONS, and IImageLists. I've patched some of the problems, but others are roadblocked by shortcomings in x11.drv's BitBlt/StretchBlt which (usually) strip the alpha channel. This leaves me a bit stuck: AJ rightly won't accept any hacks or workabouts, which leaves me with the choice to give up (for the time being), or try and fix x11.drv myself. I'm pretty sure that fixing the blts would be a major job, but I thought I'd write and ask for some comments. Is it so hard as I think? Does anyone have any ideas what would be required? Thanks Joel

3 2

Re: [5/10] d3dx9: Implement D3DXLoadSurfaceFromSurface
by Tony Wasserka 26 Jun '09

26 Jun '09

> Watch out, some surfaces aren't lockable. I don't know the d3dx9 api too well, > but are you sure that you have a lockable surface here? > In some situations IDirect3DDevice9::UpdateSurface or > IDirect3DDevice9::StretchRect may be a faster way to achieve what this code > does(without colorkeying though). Hi, The function just fails with D3DXERR_INVALIDDATA if the surface is not lockable, just as D3DXLoadSurfaceFromMemory will when it's implemented. Of course UpdateSurface could be used, but as you said it doesn't support color keying (nor palettes I guess) or filtering and it only works in very specific cases (i.e. same dimensions, no color keying, no filtering), applications are more likely to do things like that on their own probably. D3DX has been created for the general case mostly, so optimizations like this would just make the code more complicated ;) Tony

1 0

oleaut32:usrmarshal tests on Win95
by Paul Vriens 26 Jun '09

26 Jun '09

Hi, I'm looking into the failures for the usrmarshal tests on Win95. The attached patch shows the differences between NT+ and Win95. I'm not able to pinpoint the correct way to fix these failures yet. Some other results: - older Win98 boxes behave the same as Win95 - newer Win98 boxes and WinME behave partly the same (need those '+4' every now and then) but crash later on Any ideas how to properly fix this? -- Cheers, Paul. diff --git a/dlls/oleaut32/tests/usrmarshal.c b/dlls/oleaut32/tests/usrmarshal.c index 38827b1..ce1a88f 100644 --- a/dlls/oleaut32/tests/usrmarshal.c +++ b/dlls/oleaut32/tests/usrmarshal.c @@ -572,6 +572,7 @@ static void test_marshal_VARIANT(void) LPSAFEARRAY lpsa; DECIMAL dec, dec2; HeapUnknown *heap_unknown; + int win95_correction = 4; stubMsg.RpcMsg = &rpcMsg; @@ -600,11 +601,11 @@ static void test_marshal_VARIANT(void) rpcMsg.BufferLength = stubMsg.BufferLength = VARIANT_UserSize(&umcb.Flags, 0, &v); ok(stubMsg.BufferLength == 21, "size %d\n", stubMsg.BufferLength); - buffer = rpcMsg.Buffer = stubMsg.Buffer = stubMsg.BufferStart = HeapAlloc(GetProcessHeap(), 0, stubMsg.BufferLength); - stubMsg.BufferEnd = stubMsg.Buffer + stubMsg.BufferLength; + buffer = rpcMsg.Buffer = stubMsg.Buffer = stubMsg.BufferStart = HeapAlloc(GetProcessHeap(), 0, stubMsg.BufferLength + win95_correction); + stubMsg.BufferEnd = stubMsg.Buffer + stubMsg.BufferLength + win95_correction; next = VARIANT_UserMarshal(&umcb.Flags, buffer, &v); - ok(next == buffer + stubMsg.BufferLength, "got %p expect %p\n", next, buffer + stubMsg.BufferLength); - wirev = (DWORD*)buffer; + ok(next == buffer + stubMsg.BufferLength + win95_correction, "got %p expect %p\n", next, buffer + stubMsg.BufferLength); + wirev = (DWORD*)(buffer + win95_correction); check_variant_header(wirev, &v, stubMsg.BufferLength); wirev += 5; @@ -614,7 +615,7 @@ static void test_marshal_VARIANT(void) VariantInit(&v2); stubMsg.Buffer = buffer; next = VARIANT_UserUnmarshal(&umcb.Flags, buffer, &v2); - ok(next == buffer + stubMsg.BufferLength, "got %p expect %p\n", next, buffer + stubMsg.BufferLength); + ok(next == buffer + stubMsg.BufferLength + win95_correction, "got %p expect %p\n", next, buffer + stubMsg.BufferLength); ok(V_VT(&v) == V_VT(&v2), "got vt %d expect %d\n", V_VT(&v), V_VT(&v2)); ok(V_I1(&v) == V_I1(&v2), "got i1 %x expect %x\n", V_I1(&v), V_I1(&v2)); @@ -630,11 +631,11 @@ static void test_marshal_VARIANT(void) rpcMsg.BufferLength = stubMsg.BufferLength = VARIANT_UserSize(&umcb.Flags, 0, &v); ok(stubMsg.BufferLength == 22, "size %d\n", stubMsg.BufferLength); - buffer = rpcMsg.Buffer = stubMsg.Buffer = stubMsg.BufferStart = HeapAlloc(GetProcessHeap(), 0, stubMsg.BufferLength); - stubMsg.BufferEnd = stubMsg.Buffer + stubMsg.BufferLength; + buffer = rpcMsg.Buffer = stubMsg.Buffer = stubMsg.BufferStart = HeapAlloc(GetProcessHeap(), 0, stubMsg.BufferLength + win95_correction); + stubMsg.BufferEnd = stubMsg.Buffer + stubMsg.BufferLength + win95_correction; next = VARIANT_UserMarshal(&umcb.Flags, buffer, &v); - ok(next == buffer + stubMsg.BufferLength, "got %p expect %p\n", next, buffer + stubMsg.BufferLength); - wirev = (DWORD*)buffer; + ok(next == buffer + stubMsg.BufferLength + win95_correction, "got %p expect %p\n", next, buffer + stubMsg.BufferLength); + wirev = (DWORD*)(buffer + win95_correction); check_variant_header(wirev, &v, stubMsg.BufferLength); wirev += 5; @@ -644,7 +645,7 @@ static void test_marshal_VARIANT(void) VariantInit(&v2); stubMsg.Buffer = buffer; next = VARIANT_UserUnmarshal(&umcb.Flags, buffer, &v2); - ok(next == buffer + stubMsg.BufferLength, "got %p expect %p\n", next, buffer + stubMsg.BufferLength); + ok(next == buffer + stubMsg.BufferLength + win95_correction, "got %p expect %p\n", next, buffer + stubMsg.BufferLength); ok(V_VT(&v) == V_VT(&v2), "got vt %d expect %d\n", V_VT(&v), V_VT(&v2)); ok(V_I2(&v) == V_I2(&v2), "got i2 %x expect %x\n", V_I2(&v), V_I2(&v2)); @@ -661,8 +662,8 @@ static void test_marshal_VARIANT(void) rpcMsg.BufferLength = stubMsg.BufferLength = VARIANT_UserSize(&umcb.Flags, 0, &v); ok(stubMsg.BufferLength == 26, "size %d\n", stubMsg.BufferLength); - buffer = rpcMsg.Buffer = stubMsg.Buffer = stubMsg.BufferStart = HeapAlloc(GetProcessHeap(), 0, stubMsg.BufferLength); - stubMsg.BufferEnd = stubMsg.Buffer + stubMsg.BufferLength; + buffer = rpcMsg.Buffer = stubMsg.Buffer = stubMsg.BufferStart = HeapAlloc(GetProcessHeap(), 0, stubMsg.BufferLength + win95_correction); + stubMsg.BufferEnd = stubMsg.Buffer + stubMsg.BufferLength + win95_correction; next = VARIANT_UserMarshal(&umcb.Flags, buffer, &v); ok(next == buffer + stubMsg.BufferLength, "got %p expect %p\n", next, buffer + stubMsg.BufferLength); wirev = (DWORD*)buffer; @@ -697,11 +698,11 @@ static void test_marshal_VARIANT(void) rpcMsg.BufferLength = stubMsg.BufferLength = VARIANT_UserSize(&umcb.Flags, 0, &v); ok(stubMsg.BufferLength == 24, "size %d\n", stubMsg.BufferLength); - buffer = rpcMsg.Buffer = stubMsg.Buffer = stubMsg.BufferStart = HeapAlloc(GetProcessHeap(), 0, stubMsg.BufferLength); - stubMsg.BufferEnd = stubMsg.Buffer + stubMsg.BufferLength; + buffer = rpcMsg.Buffer = stubMsg.Buffer = stubMsg.BufferStart = HeapAlloc(GetProcessHeap(), 0, stubMsg.BufferLength + win95_correction); + stubMsg.BufferEnd = stubMsg.Buffer + stubMsg.BufferLength + win95_correction; next = VARIANT_UserMarshal(&umcb.Flags, buffer, &v); - ok(next == buffer + stubMsg.BufferLength, "got %p expect %p\n", next, buffer + stubMsg.BufferLength); - wirev = (DWORD*)buffer; + ok(next == buffer + stubMsg.BufferLength + win95_correction, "got %p expect %p\n", next, buffer + stubMsg.BufferLength); + wirev = (DWORD*)(buffer + win95_correction); check_variant_header(wirev, &v, stubMsg.BufferLength); wirev += 5; @@ -712,7 +713,7 @@ static void test_marshal_VARIANT(void) VariantInit(&v2); stubMsg.Buffer = buffer; next = VARIANT_UserUnmarshal(&umcb.Flags, buffer, &v2); - ok(next == buffer + stubMsg.BufferLength, "got %p expect %p\n", next, buffer + stubMsg.BufferLength); + ok(next == buffer + stubMsg.BufferLength + win95_correction, "got %p expect %p\n", next, buffer + stubMsg.BufferLength); ok(V_VT(&v) == V_VT(&v2), "got vt %d expect %d\n", V_VT(&v), V_VT(&v2)); ok(V_I4(&v) == V_I4(&v2), "got i4 %x expect %x\n", V_I4(&v), V_I4(&v2)); @@ -729,11 +730,11 @@ static void test_marshal_VARIANT(void) rpcMsg.BufferLength = stubMsg.BufferLength = VARIANT_UserSize(&umcb.Flags, 0, &v); ok(stubMsg.BufferLength == 24, "size %d\n", stubMsg.BufferLength); - buffer = rpcMsg.Buffer = stubMsg.Buffer = stubMsg.BufferStart = HeapAlloc(GetProcessHeap(), 0, stubMsg.BufferLength); - stubMsg.BufferEnd = stubMsg.Buffer + stubMsg.BufferLength; + buffer = rpcMsg.Buffer = stubMsg.Buffer = stubMsg.BufferStart = HeapAlloc(GetProcessHeap(), 0, stubMsg.BufferLength + win95_correction); + stubMsg.BufferEnd = stubMsg.Buffer + stubMsg.BufferLength + win95_correction; next = VARIANT_UserMarshal(&umcb.Flags, buffer, &v); - ok(next == buffer + stubMsg.BufferLength, "got %p expect %p\n", next, buffer + stubMsg.BufferLength); - wirev = (DWORD*)buffer; + ok(next == buffer + stubMsg.BufferLength + win95_correction, "got %p expect %p\n", next, buffer + stubMsg.BufferLength); + wirev = (DWORD*)(buffer + win95_correction); check_variant_header(wirev, &v, stubMsg.BufferLength); wirev += 5; @@ -743,7 +744,7 @@ static void test_marshal_VARIANT(void) VariantInit(&v2); stubMsg.Buffer = buffer; next = VARIANT_UserUnmarshal(&umcb.Flags, buffer, &v2); - ok(next == buffer + stubMsg.BufferLength, "got %p expect %p\n", next, buffer + stubMsg.BufferLength); + ok(next == buffer + stubMsg.BufferLength + win95_correction, "got %p expect %p\n", next, buffer + stubMsg.BufferLength); ok(V_VT(&v) == V_VT(&v2), "got vt %d expect %d\n", V_VT(&v), V_VT(&v2)); ok(V_UI4(&v) == V_UI4(&v2), "got ui4 %x expect %x\n", V_UI4(&v), V_UI4(&v2)); @@ -761,8 +762,8 @@ static void test_marshal_VARIANT(void) rpcMsg.BufferLength = stubMsg.BufferLength = VARIANT_UserSize(&umcb.Flags, 0, &v); ok(stubMsg.BufferLength == 28, "size %d\n", stubMsg.BufferLength); - buffer = rpcMsg.Buffer = stubMsg.Buffer = stubMsg.BufferStart = HeapAlloc(GetProcessHeap(), 0, stubMsg.BufferLength); - stubMsg.BufferEnd = stubMsg.Buffer + stubMsg.BufferLength; + buffer = rpcMsg.Buffer = stubMsg.Buffer = stubMsg.BufferStart = HeapAlloc(GetProcessHeap(), 0, stubMsg.BufferLength + win95_correction); + stubMsg.BufferEnd = stubMsg.Buffer + stubMsg.BufferLength + win95_correction; next = VARIANT_UserMarshal(&umcb.Flags, buffer, &v); ok(next == buffer + stubMsg.BufferLength, "got %p expect %p\n", next, buffer + stubMsg.BufferLength); wirev = (DWORD*)buffer; @@ -794,11 +795,11 @@ static void test_marshal_VARIANT(void) rpcMsg.BufferLength = stubMsg.BufferLength = VARIANT_UserSize(&umcb.Flags, 0, &v); ok(stubMsg.BufferLength == 24, "size %d\n", stubMsg.BufferLength); - buffer = rpcMsg.Buffer = stubMsg.Buffer = stubMsg.BufferStart = HeapAlloc(GetProcessHeap(), 0, stubMsg.BufferLength); - stubMsg.BufferEnd = stubMsg.Buffer + stubMsg.BufferLength; + buffer = rpcMsg.Buffer = stubMsg.Buffer = stubMsg.BufferStart = HeapAlloc(GetProcessHeap(), 0, stubMsg.BufferLength + win95_correction); + stubMsg.BufferEnd = stubMsg.Buffer + stubMsg.BufferLength + win95_correction; next = VARIANT_UserMarshal(&umcb.Flags, buffer, &v); - ok(next == buffer + stubMsg.BufferLength, "got %p expect %p\n", next, buffer + stubMsg.BufferLength); - wirev = (DWORD*)buffer; + ok(next == buffer + stubMsg.BufferLength + win95_correction, "got %p expect %p\n", next, buffer + stubMsg.BufferLength); + wirev = (DWORD*)(buffer + win95_correction); check_variant_header(wirev, &v, stubMsg.BufferLength); wirev += 5; @@ -808,7 +809,7 @@ static void test_marshal_VARIANT(void) VariantInit(&v2); stubMsg.Buffer = buffer; next = VARIANT_UserUnmarshal(&umcb.Flags, buffer, &v2); - ok(next == buffer + stubMsg.BufferLength, "got %p expect %p\n", next, buffer + stubMsg.BufferLength); + ok(next == buffer + stubMsg.BufferLength + win95_correction, "got %p expect %p\n", next, buffer + stubMsg.BufferLength); ok(V_VT(&v) == V_VT(&v2), "got vt %d expect %d\n", V_VT(&v), V_VT(&v2)); ok(V_R4(&v) == V_R4(&v2), "got r4 %f expect %f\n", V_R4(&v), V_R4(&v2)); @@ -890,11 +891,11 @@ static void test_marshal_VARIANT(void) rpcMsg.BufferLength = stubMsg.BufferLength = VARIANT_UserSize(&umcb.Flags, 0, &v); ok(stubMsg.BufferLength == 22, "size %d\n", stubMsg.BufferLength); - buffer = rpcMsg.Buffer = stubMsg.Buffer = stubMsg.BufferStart = HeapAlloc(GetProcessHeap(), 0, stubMsg.BufferLength); - stubMsg.BufferEnd = stubMsg.Buffer + stubMsg.BufferLength; + buffer = rpcMsg.Buffer = stubMsg.Buffer = stubMsg.BufferStart = HeapAlloc(GetProcessHeap(), 0, stubMsg.BufferLength + win95_correction); + stubMsg.BufferEnd = stubMsg.Buffer + stubMsg.BufferLength + win95_correction; next = VARIANT_UserMarshal(&umcb.Flags, buffer, &v); - ok(next == buffer + stubMsg.BufferLength, "got %p expect %p\n", next, buffer + stubMsg.BufferLength); - wirev = (DWORD*)buffer; + ok(next == buffer + stubMsg.BufferLength + win95_correction, "got %p expect %p\n", next, buffer + stubMsg.BufferLength); + wirev = (DWORD*)(buffer + win95_correction); check_variant_header(wirev, &v, stubMsg.BufferLength); wirev += 5; @@ -904,7 +905,7 @@ static void test_marshal_VARIANT(void) VariantInit(&v2); stubMsg.Buffer = buffer; next = VARIANT_UserUnmarshal(&umcb.Flags, buffer, &v2); - ok(next == buffer + stubMsg.BufferLength, "got %p expect %p\n", next, buffer + stubMsg.BufferLength); + ok(next == buffer + stubMsg.BufferLength + win95_correction, "got %p expect %p\n", next, buffer + stubMsg.BufferLength); ok(V_VT(&v) == V_VT(&v2), "got vt %d expect %d\n", V_VT(&v), V_VT(&v2)); ok(V_BOOL(&v) == V_BOOL(&v2), "got bool %x expect %x\n", V_BOOL(&v), V_BOOL(&v2)); @@ -996,11 +997,11 @@ static void test_marshal_VARIANT(void) rpcMsg.BufferLength = stubMsg.BufferLength = VARIANT_UserSize(&umcb.Flags, 0, &v); ok(stubMsg.BufferLength == 20, "size %d\n", stubMsg.BufferLength); - buffer = rpcMsg.Buffer = stubMsg.Buffer = stubMsg.BufferStart = HeapAlloc(GetProcessHeap(), 0, stubMsg.BufferLength); - stubMsg.BufferEnd = stubMsg.Buffer + stubMsg.BufferLength; + buffer = rpcMsg.Buffer = stubMsg.Buffer = stubMsg.BufferStart = HeapAlloc(GetProcessHeap(), 0, stubMsg.BufferLength + win95_correction); + stubMsg.BufferEnd = stubMsg.Buffer + stubMsg.BufferLength + win95_correction; next = VARIANT_UserMarshal(&umcb.Flags, buffer, &v); - ok(next == buffer + stubMsg.BufferLength, "got %p expect %p\n", next, buffer + stubMsg.BufferLength); - wirev = (DWORD*)buffer; + ok(next == buffer + stubMsg.BufferLength + win95_correction, "got %p expect %p\n", next, buffer + stubMsg.BufferLength); + wirev = (DWORD*)(buffer + win95_correction); check_variant_header(wirev, &v, stubMsg.BufferLength); if (VARIANT_UNMARSHAL_WORKS) @@ -1008,7 +1009,7 @@ static void test_marshal_VARIANT(void) VariantInit(&v2); stubMsg.Buffer = buffer; next = VARIANT_UserUnmarshal(&umcb.Flags, buffer, &v2); - ok(next == buffer + stubMsg.BufferLength, "got %p expect %p\n", next, buffer + stubMsg.BufferLength); + ok(next == buffer + stubMsg.BufferLength + win95_correction, "got %p expect %p\n", next, buffer + stubMsg.BufferLength); ok(V_VT(&v) == V_VT(&v2), "got vt %d expect %d\n", V_VT(&v), V_VT(&v2)); VARIANT_UserFree(&umcb.Flags, &v2); @@ -1022,11 +1023,11 @@ static void test_marshal_VARIANT(void) rpcMsg.BufferLength = stubMsg.BufferLength = VARIANT_UserSize(&umcb.Flags, 0, &v); ok(stubMsg.BufferLength == 20, "size %d\n", stubMsg.BufferLength); - buffer = rpcMsg.Buffer = stubMsg.Buffer = stubMsg.BufferStart = HeapAlloc(GetProcessHeap(), 0, stubMsg.BufferLength); - stubMsg.BufferEnd = stubMsg.Buffer + stubMsg.BufferLength; + buffer = rpcMsg.Buffer = stubMsg.Buffer = stubMsg.BufferStart = HeapAlloc(GetProcessHeap(), 0, stubMsg.BufferLength + win95_correction); + stubMsg.BufferEnd = stubMsg.Buffer + stubMsg.BufferLength + win95_correction; next = VARIANT_UserMarshal(&umcb.Flags, buffer, &v); - ok(next == buffer + stubMsg.BufferLength, "got %p expect %p\n", next, buffer + stubMsg.BufferLength); - wirev = (DWORD*)buffer; + ok(next == buffer + stubMsg.BufferLength + win95_correction, "got %p expect %p\n", next, buffer + stubMsg.BufferLength); + wirev = (DWORD*)(buffer + win95_correction); check_variant_header(wirev, &v, stubMsg.BufferLength); if (VARIANT_UNMARSHAL_WORKS) @@ -1034,7 +1035,7 @@ static void test_marshal_VARIANT(void) VariantInit(&v2); stubMsg.Buffer = buffer; next = VARIANT_UserUnmarshal(&umcb.Flags, buffer, &v2); - ok(next == buffer + stubMsg.BufferLength, "got %p expect %p\n", next, buffer + stubMsg.BufferLength); + ok(next == buffer + stubMsg.BufferLength + win95_correction, "got %p expect %p\n", next, buffer + stubMsg.BufferLength); ok(V_VT(&v) == V_VT(&v2), "got vt %d expect %d\n", V_VT(&v), V_VT(&v2)); VARIANT_UserFree(&umcb.Flags, &v2); @@ -1123,11 +1124,11 @@ static void test_marshal_VARIANT(void) rpcMsg.BufferLength = stubMsg.BufferLength = VARIANT_UserSize(&umcb.Flags, 0, &v); ok(stubMsg.BufferLength == 152, "size %d\n", stubMsg.BufferLength); - buffer = rpcMsg.Buffer = stubMsg.Buffer = stubMsg.BufferStart = HeapAlloc(GetProcessHeap(), 0, stubMsg.BufferLength); - stubMsg.BufferEnd = stubMsg.Buffer + stubMsg.BufferLength; + buffer = rpcMsg.Buffer = stubMsg.Buffer = stubMsg.BufferStart = HeapAlloc(GetProcessHeap(), 0, stubMsg.BufferLength + win95_correction); + stubMsg.BufferEnd = stubMsg.Buffer + stubMsg.BufferLength + win95_correction; next = VARIANT_UserMarshal(&umcb.Flags, buffer, &v); - ok(next == buffer + stubMsg.BufferLength, "got %p expect %p\n", next, buffer + stubMsg.BufferLength); - wirev = (DWORD*)buffer; + ok(next == buffer + stubMsg.BufferLength + win95_correction, "got %p expect %p\n", next, buffer + stubMsg.BufferLength); + wirev = (DWORD*)(buffer + win95_correction); check_variant_header(wirev, &v, stubMsg.BufferLength); wirev += 5; @@ -1141,7 +1142,7 @@ static void test_marshal_VARIANT(void) VariantInit(&v2); stubMsg.Buffer = buffer; next = VARIANT_UserUnmarshal(&umcb.Flags, buffer, &v2); - ok(next == buffer + stubMsg.BufferLength, "got %p expect %p\n", next, buffer + stubMsg.BufferLength); + ok(next == buffer + stubMsg.BufferLength + win95_correction, "got %p expect %p\n", next, buffer + stubMsg.BufferLength); ok(V_VT(&v) == V_VT(&v2), "got vt %d expect %d\n", V_VT(&v), V_VT(&v2)); ok(SafeArrayGetDim(V_ARRAY(&v)) == SafeArrayGetDim(V_ARRAY(&v)), "array dims differ\n"); SafeArrayGetLBound(V_ARRAY(&v), 1, &bound); @@ -1164,11 +1165,11 @@ static void test_marshal_VARIANT(void) rpcMsg.BufferLength = stubMsg.BufferLength = VARIANT_UserSize(&umcb.Flags, 0, &v); ok(stubMsg.BufferLength == 152, "size %d\n", stubMsg.BufferLength); - buffer = rpcMsg.Buffer = stubMsg.Buffer = stubMsg.BufferStart = HeapAlloc(GetProcessHeap(), 0, stubMsg.BufferLength); - stubMsg.BufferEnd = stubMsg.Buffer + stubMsg.BufferLength; + buffer = rpcMsg.Buffer = stubMsg.Buffer = stubMsg.BufferStart = HeapAlloc(GetProcessHeap(), 0, stubMsg.BufferLength + win95_correction); + stubMsg.BufferEnd = stubMsg.Buffer + stubMsg.BufferLength + win95_correction; next = VARIANT_UserMarshal(&umcb.Flags, buffer, &v); - ok(next == buffer + stubMsg.BufferLength, "got %p expect %p\n", next, buffer + stubMsg.BufferLength); - wirev = (DWORD*)buffer; + ok(next == buffer + stubMsg.BufferLength + win95_correction, "got %p expect %p\n", next, buffer + stubMsg.BufferLength); + wirev = (DWORD*)(buffer + win95_correction); check_variant_header(wirev, &v, stubMsg.BufferLength); wirev += 5; @@ -1184,7 +1185,7 @@ static void test_marshal_VARIANT(void) VariantInit(&v2); stubMsg.Buffer = buffer; next = VARIANT_UserUnmarshal(&umcb.Flags, buffer, &v2); - ok(next == buffer + stubMsg.BufferLength, "got %p expect %p\n", next, buffer + stubMsg.BufferLength); + ok(next == buffer + stubMsg.BufferLength + win95_correction, "got %p expect %p\n", next, buffer + stubMsg.BufferLength); ok(V_VT(&v) == V_VT(&v2), "got vt %d expect %d\n", V_VT(&v), V_VT(&v2)); ok(SafeArrayGetDim(*V_ARRAYREF(&v)) == SafeArrayGetDim(*V_ARRAYREF(&v)), "array dims differ\n"); SafeArrayGetLBound(*V_ARRAYREF(&v), 1, &bound); @@ -1257,11 +1258,11 @@ static void test_marshal_VARIANT(void) rpcMsg.BufferLength = stubMsg.BufferLength = VARIANT_UserSize(&umcb.Flags, 0, &v); ok(stubMsg.BufferLength > 32, "size %d\n", stubMsg.BufferLength); - buffer = rpcMsg.Buffer = stubMsg.Buffer = stubMsg.BufferStart = HeapAlloc(GetProcessHeap(), 0, stubMsg.BufferLength); - stubMsg.BufferEnd = stubMsg.Buffer + stubMsg.BufferLength; + buffer = rpcMsg.Buffer = stubMsg.Buffer = stubMsg.BufferStart = HeapAlloc(GetProcessHeap(), 0, stubMsg.BufferLength + win95_correction); + stubMsg.BufferEnd = stubMsg.Buffer + stubMsg.BufferLength + win95_correction; memset(buffer, 0xcc, stubMsg.BufferLength); next = VARIANT_UserMarshal(&umcb.Flags, buffer, &v); - wirev = (DWORD*)buffer; + wirev = (DWORD*)(buffer + win95_correction); check_variant_header(wirev, &v, next - buffer); wirev += 5; @@ -1270,10 +1271,10 @@ static void test_marshal_VARIANT(void) *wirev == (DWORD_PTR)V_UNKNOWN(&v) + 1 /* NT */, "wv[5] %08x\n", *wirev); wirev++; todo_wine - ok(*wirev == next - buffer - 0x20, "wv[6] %08x\n", *wirev); + ok(*wirev == next - buffer - win95_correction - 0x20, "wv[6] %08x\n", *wirev); wirev++; todo_wine - ok(*wirev == next - buffer - 0x20, "wv[7] %08x\n", *wirev); + ok(*wirev == next - buffer - win95_correction - 0x20, "wv[7] %08x\n", *wirev); wirev++; todo_wine ok(*wirev == 0x574f454d, "wv[8] %08x\n", *wirev);

1 0

Re: [PATCH 1/5] wined3d: Make sure queries have an active GL context.
by Stefan Dösinger 26 Jun '09

26 Jun '09

Am Friday 26 June 2009 10:07:08 schrieb Henri Verbeet: > + ActivateContext(This->wineD3DDevice, > This->wineD3DDevice->lastActiveRenderTarget, CTXUSAGE_RESOURCELOAD); + > if (((WineQueryOcclusionData *)This->extendedData)->ctx != > This->wineD3DDevice->activeContext || > This->wineD3DDevice->activeContext->tid != GetCurrentThreadId()) Wouldn't it be better to activate a context after the thread check? Ie, don't activate a context when we know that we can't make use of the GL query anyway?

2 2

Re: Potential patch for an oddity in dlls/d3d9/device.c
by Henri Verbeet 26 Jun '09

26 Jun '09

2009/6/25 Gerald Pfeifer <gerald(a)pfeifer.com>: > So, I wonder whether something like the patch below is the right fix, or > whether there is a deeper problem? > That fix is correct.

1 0

Re: Removing active maintainers
by Vitaliy Margolen 26 Jun '09

26 Jun '09

mellery wrote: > He has removed useful comments on apps I maintain too. I don't want to > complain on the dev-list but if you know who i should email about it, > I'd send an email. This is the only place that you can/should discuss this. Vitaliy

1 0

Re: [5/10] d3dx9: Implement D3DXLoadSurfaceFromSurface
by Stefan Dösinger 25 Jun '09

25 Jun '09

Am Thursday 25 June 2009 20:26:01 schrieb Tony Wasserka: Watch out, some surfaces aren't lockable. I don't know the d3dx9 api too well, but are you sure that you have a lockable surface here? In some situations IDirect3DDevice9::UpdateSurface or IDirect3DDevice9::StretchRect may be a faster way to achieve what this code does(without colorkeying though).

1 0

Re: drmclien: add stub dll
by Stefan Leichter 25 Jun '09

25 Jun '09

Am Thursday 25 June 2009 00:47:59 schrieb Austin English: > Makes IE6 installer a little happier > 0002-t2embed-add-stub-dll.txt > From 6b2a780718210b35cff17f519559a2c8faa80a07 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > From: Austin English <austinenglish(a)gmail.com> > Date: Mon, 4 May 2009 22:52:37 -0500 > Subject: [PATCH] t2embed: add stub dll > > configure.ac | 1 + > dlls/t2embed/Makefile.in | 13 +++++++++++++ > dlls/t2embed/main.c | 43 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > dlls/t2embed/t2embed.spec | 25 +++++++++++++++++++++++++ > 4 files changed, 82 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) > create mode 100644 dlls/t2embed/Makefile.in > create mode 100644 dlls/t2embed/main.c > create mode 100644 dlls/t2embed/t2embed.spec Did you pick the wrong patch ? This dll already exists !

2 1

Re: wine-devel Digest, Vol 47, Issue 86
by Tim Schwartz 25 Jun '09

25 Jun '09

> And Ben Klein is not the VOICE of WineHQ! > > Tom It doesn't matter who says something if what they are saying is correct. You sound like the troll to me.

2 1

ActiveX support in IE7
by arcoun 25 Jun '09

25 Jun '09

Hello, It is my understanding that IE7 installed in Wine (for exemple, by following instructions at http://www.wine-reviews.net/wine-reviews/applications/ie-7-on-linux-with-wi…) has no support for ActiveX. Does anyone know what are the missing parts (in Wine or by adding more native DLLs) to make it work ? Which native DLL is responsible for all the ActiveX stuff ? If we've got a clear understanding of what is missing and if a Wine dev is interested, I can sponsor it through a bounty. Regards, -- arcoun

5 6