December 2012 - Wine-devel - list.winehq.org

Re: Aw: Re: [PATCH] comdlg32/tests: Accept win8 failure-code
by Dmitry Timoshkov 25 Dec '12

25 Dec '12

"Detlef Riekenberg" <wine.dev(a)web.de> wrote: > >> + /* win8: E_NOTIMPL */ > >> + ok(hr == E_FAIL || hr == E_NOTIMPL, "got 0x%08x.\n", hr); > > >A usual form for such comparisons is > >ok(hr == E_FAIL || hr == E_NOTIMPL /* win8 */, "got 0x%08x.\n", hr); > I disagree! > > Comments at the end of a line are ok, > but a comment in the middle /* broken */ of a line decrease /* ugly by design */ the readability > of the code /* not compiler related */ for humans/developers a lot and should be allowed > only for backwards compatibility. You are confusing a sentence and a set of statements. -- Dmitry.

1 0

Re: oledb32: Partial implementation of GetDataSource()
by Marvin 24 Dec '12

24 Dec '12

Hi, While running your changed tests on Windows, I think I found new failures. Being a bot and all I'm not very good at pattern recognition, so I might be wrong, but could you please double-check? Full results can be found at http://testbot.winehq.org/JobDetails.pl?Key=23600 Your paranoid android. === WVISTAADM (32 bit database) === database: unhandled exception c000001d at 0075006C === W2K8SE (32 bit database) === database: unhandled exception c0000005 at 00750064 === W7PRO (32 bit database) === database: unhandled exception c0000005 at 007500A7 === W7PROX64 (32 bit database) === database: unhandled exception c0000005 at 00750064 === TEST64_W7SP1 (32 bit database) === database: unhandled exception c0000005 at 00750064 === W7PROX64 (64 bit database) === Timeout === TEST64_W7SP1 (64 bit database) === Timeout

1 0

Re: msvcrt: Added _stricmp_l implementation
by Marvin 24 Dec '12

24 Dec '12

Hi, While running your changed tests on Windows, I think I found new failures. Being a bot and all I'm not very good at pattern recognition, so I might be wrong, but could you please double-check? Full results can be found at http://testbot.winehq.org/JobDetails.pl?Key=23596 Your paranoid android. === WNT4WSSP6 (32 bit string) === string.c:2462: Test failed: _stricmp returned -1 string.c:2464: Test failed: _stricmp returned 1 === W7PROX64 (64 bit string) === string.c:2448: Test failed: _stricmp returned -25 string.c:2450: Test failed: _stricmp returned 25 string.c:2452: Test failed: _stricmp returned -20 === TEST64_W7SP1 (64 bit string) === string.c:2448: Test failed: _stricmp returned -25 string.c:2450: Test failed: _stricmp returned 25 string.c:2452: Test failed: _stricmp returned -20

1 0

re: Clang static analyzer results / wine-1.5.19-186-g1cd0c4a
by Dan Kegel 21 Dec '12

21 Dec '12

I had a look at a couple warnings, e.g. file:///home/dank/Downloads/scan-build-2012-12-18-1/report-z07lcL.html#EndPath file:///home/dank/Downloads/scan-build-2012-12-18-1/report-9D2p5I.html#EndPath They're hard to follow, but mostly look like garbage :-( Too bad there's no web interface for marking them as checked. This one's real, but only affects a trace, and only if send fails: file:///home/dank/Downloads/scan-build-2012-12-18-1/report-RBGMAQ.html#EndPath

1 0

dsound: use event based threads, v2
by Joerg-Cyril.Hoehle＠t-systems.com 21 Dec '12

21 Dec '12

Maarten, > + hres = IAudioClient_GetStreamLatency(device->client, &period); > + device->sleeptime = period_ms * 5 / 2; > + ret = WaitForSingleObject(dev->sleepev, dev->sleeptime); Although it's a minor point, as we're solely discussing the case of the timeout when mmdevapi doesn't call SetEvent, I wonder why you insist on using GetStreamLatency as the basis of your timeout computations instead of GetDevicePeriod. You know that wineXYZ.drv use the device period as the basis for their SetEvent, thus IMHO the timeout too should be based on it, instead of a GetStreamLatency we know next to nothing about. If you visit testbot jobs 23521 and 23514, you'll see that I've measured the event rates. Sadly, all testbot VMs report a GetStreamLatency of 10.6666ms too close to the DefaultPeriod of 10.0000ms to tell for sure which is used as the average period. W7 and w2k8 machines seem to use DefaultPeriod: render.c:185: Returned periods: 10.0000 ms 3.0000 ms render.c:333: Returned latency: 10.6666 ms render.c:626: event after Start average 10.004ms render.c:2206: event average 9.992ms sigma 0.447 Vista may use its reported StreamLatency as period: render.c:185: Returned periods: 10.0000 ms 3.0000 ms render.c:333: Returned latency: 10.6666 ms render.c:626: event after Start average 10.697ms render.c:2206: event average 10.736ms sigma 0.834 The one w2k8 machine is peculiar as it appears to use the 15.600ms (or 15.625ms?) timers well known from pre-Vista times: render.c:185: Returned periods: 10.0000 ms 3.0000 ms render.c:333: Returned latency: 10.6666 ms render.c:626: event after Start average 15.547ms render.c:2206: event average 15.625ms sigma 5.625 However, the rate is certainly not the 20-30ms StreamLatency that e.g. winealsa returns. Regards, Jörg Höhle

2 3

Need help to install Xlib/xfree86 devlopnemt packeg in ubuntu 10 LTS
by Hamid Lohar 21 Dec '12

21 Dec '12

Dear sir, I am installing wine 1.3 from source file but i getting fail to install beacose of Xlib/xfree86 devlopnemt packeg so i neet that packege please help me.

2 3

Re: msvcrt: fix prototypes ov _execvp, _wexecvp, _execvpe and _wexecvpe
by Alexandre Julliard 21 Dec '12

21 Dec '12

Jérôme Gardou <jerome.gardou(a)reactos.org> writes: > --- > dlls/msvcrt/process.c | 8 ++++---- > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) You should also fix the corresponding headers and remove the typecasts. -- Alexandre Julliard julliard(a)winehq.org

1 0

Re: jscript: Added null and undefined values support to to_object
by Marvin 21 Dec '12

21 Dec '12

Hi, While running your changed tests on Windows, I think I found new failures. Being a bot and all I'm not very good at pattern recognition, so I might be wrong, but could you please double-check? Full results can be found at http://testbot.winehq.org/JobDetails.pl?Key=23578 Your paranoid android. === WNT4WSSP6 (32 bit) === No test summary line found === W2KPROSP4 (32 bit) === No test summary line found === WXPPROSP3 (32 bit) === No test summary line found === W2K3R2SESP2 (32 bit) === No test summary line found === WVISTAADM (32 bit) === No test summary line found === W2K8SE (32 bit) === No test summary line found === W7PRO (32 bit) === No test summary line found === W7PROX64 (32 bit) === No test summary line found === TEST64_W7SP1 (32 bit) === No test summary line found === W7PROX64 (64 bit) === No test summary line found === TEST64_W7SP1 (64 bit) === No test summary line found

1 0

Re: [PATCH 2/2] msvcr100: Added _aligned_msize implementation
by Marvin 21 Dec '12

21 Dec '12

Hi, While running your changed tests on Windows, I think I found new failures. Being a bot and all I'm not very good at pattern recognition, so I might be wrong, but could you please double-check? Full results can be found at http://testbot.winehq.org/JobDetails.pl?Key=23573 Your paranoid android. === W7PROX64 (64 bit msvcr100) === msvcr100.c:344: Test failed: _aligned_msize returned 23 msvcr100.c:346: Test failed: _aligned_msize returned 23 msvcr100.c:348: Test failed: _aligned_msize returned 23 msvcr100.c:350: Test failed: _aligned_msize returned 24 msvcr100.c:357: Test failed: _aligned_msize returned 3 === TEST64_W7SP1 (64 bit msvcr100) === msvcr100.c:344: Test failed: _aligned_msize returned 23 msvcr100.c:346: Test failed: _aligned_msize returned 23 msvcr100.c:348: Test failed: _aligned_msize returned 23 msvcr100.c:350: Test failed: _aligned_msize returned 24 msvcr100.c:357: Test failed: _aligned_msize returned 3

1 0

Re: [1/2] wineps.drv: Add an ability to select device resolution from UI.
by Alexandre Julliard 21 Dec '12

21 Dec '12

Dmitry Timoshkov <dmitry(a)baikal.ru> writes: > @@ -224,10 +229,13 @@ typedef struct > static INT_PTR CALLBACK PSDRV_PaperDlgProc(HWND hwnd, UINT msg, > WPARAM wParam, LPARAM lParam) > { > + static const WCHAR resW[] = {'%','d',' ','d','p','i',0}; > + static const WCHAR resxyW[] = {'%','d','x','%','d',' ','d','p','i',0}; The "dpi" string needs to be loaded from resources. > @@ -267,6 +275,59 @@ static INT_PTR CALLBACK PSDRV_PaperDlgProc(HWND hwnd, UINT msg, > } > SendDlgItemMessageA(hwnd, IDD_DUPLEX, CB_SETCURSEL, Cursel, 0); > } > + > + if (list_empty( &di->pi->ppd->Resolutions )) > + { > + WCHAR buf[64]; > + struct item_res_data *data; > + > + sprintfW(buf, resW, di->pi->ppd->DefaultResolution); > + SendDlgItemMessageW(hwnd, IDD_QUALITY, CB_ADDSTRING, 0, (LPARAM)buf); > + > + data = HeapAlloc(GetProcessHeap(), 0, sizeof(*data)); > + data->resx = data->resy = di->pi->ppd->DefaultResolution; > + SendDlgItemMessageW(hwnd, IDD_QUALITY, CB_SETITEMDATA, 0, (LPARAM)data); > + Cursel = 0; You don't need a data structure, you can store the values directly with something like MAKELONG. -- Alexandre Julliard julliard(a)winehq.org

2 2