- Wine-devel - list.winehq.org

Re: ComputerName
by Dmitry Timoshkov 06 Nov '02

06 Nov '02

"Martin Wilck" <Martin.Wilck(a)Fujitsu-Siemens.com> wrote: > +/****************************************************************************** > + * netbios_char (INTERNAL) > + */ > +static WCHAR netbios_char ( WCHAR wc ) > +{ > + static const WCHAR special[] = {'!','@','#','$','%','^','&','\'',')','(','-','_','{','}','~'}; > + static const WCHAR deflt = '_'; > + int i; > + > + if ( isalnumW ( wc ) ) return wc; > + for ( i = 0; i < sizeof (special); i++ ) > + if ( wc == special[i] ) return wc; > + return deflt; > +} Shouldn't be sizeof(special) above divided by sizeof(WCHAR)? -- Dmitry.

2 1

Re: Games
by Mark Hannessen 06 Nov '02

06 Nov '02

here we are. Zsolt about Safedisc 1.x > When the patch was published, there was a discussion, and the conclusion was > that the code is very probably legal, and is not against DMCA > Are you sure about the above statements? Have you checked that, or it is > just your opinion? Carlos words regarding copy protection: > You aren't giving hints to decrypt some code, simply implementing the > win32 API, and sometimes implementing a PC architecture, it is far away > of decrypt code ;). well i'am not a lawyer, so i guess i was probably wrong about copyprotection being illegal after all. > Zsolt also said he could provide a safedisc patch against the current cvs. Zsolt, could you give us a status of your safedisc patch ? does it work with all winver versions or is this one limited to nt40 ? ( most games do not run in nt40 mode ) is it safedisc 1.x only or safedisc 2.x as well. anyway, any work on copyprotection is very very usefull for everbody. so please impent everything you have. Mark Hannessen

9 11

Re:COM Error
by kevin 06 Nov '02

06 Nov '02

COM error! I have test COM On wine. Tonight,I wrote a test program First,I called CoInitializeEx(NULL, COINIT_MULTITHREADED)... Second,I called CoGetClassObject(rclsid, dwClsContext, NULL,IID_IClassFactory, (PVOID*)&pcf) and return "RPC_S_INVALID_STRING_BINDING", It means The string binding is invalid. who can tell why?? Thanks kevin

2 1

RE: Big Problem compiling gdi tests
by Patrik Stridvall 06 Nov '02

06 Nov '02

> I don't if it's related to me, but I got a memory problem when > compiling the gdi tests today. > > I know the C code is lot bigger than any other one but I > think there is > an infinite loop somewhere.According to the following report, > gcc tries > to allocate 340 Mo (if succeeded, could be more...) > > Using RedHat 8.0 updated, gcc 3.2.7 on a Athlon 1600+ > > make[3]: Entre dans le répertoire `/home/wine/dlls/gdi/tests' > gcc -c -I. -I. -I../../../include -I../../../include -g -O2 -Wall > -mpreferred-stack-boundary=2 -fPIC -DSTRICT -DNONAMELESSUNION > -DNONAMELESSSTRUCT -D_REENTRANT -o generated.o generated.c > > cc1: Cannot allocate 188247240 bytes after allocating 15480320 bytes Hmm. It work fine if you remove -O2. I almost never compile Wine with optimization so I haven't detected it. OK. I will see what I can do. It takes A LOT longer to compile with -O2 on my computer.

2 1

How to debug destroyed call stack?
by Fabian Cenedese 06 Nov '02

06 Nov '02

Hi I have a program that crashes at startup. The backtrace shows only one entry (and obviously a wrong one). What's the best way to find this error? Is it possible that my program can write into wine's memory? It runs fine in Windows so I don't think that there are many flaws in it (though still possible of course :) It's a multithreaded ocx so it's not that easy to debug. It happens in various versions from cvs. Thanks for any hints. bye Fabi

1 0

Re: Lost Wages (round 2)
by Dustin Navea 06 Nov '02

06 Nov '02

--- Jeremy Newman <jnewman(a)codeweavers.com> wrote: > On Tue, 2002-11-05 at 15:00, Dustin Navea wrote: > > One thing I noticed is that the Classic Theme's Text on the word > Development > > in the graphic at the top is the same color as the background making it > > invisible, therefore making it look like: > > Wine HQ > > I noticed this with Netscape 4. The logo is a PNG, with the background > transparent. But Netscape 4 (and some other browsers) do not support > opacity in PNG. To see what the logo is supposed to look like when PNG > is supported properly, load up in Mozilla 1+. > It showed this in IE5.5, I am at work without access to a linux box so I cant check it until tonight > I am of a mindset to not support Netscape 4. The whole JPG/Gif issues > notwithstanding. > > > Also, I still say there should be some other color options besides dark > red, > > that color almost makes my eyes melt out of their sockets. >;) I would > say > > add a white wine skin and maybe a champaigne or a mad dog (the malt > liquor) > > skin... ;) > > I'll make some skin docs when I'm done. I'm more concerned with the > backend code ATM. > lol i know it was a just a suggestion for your todo -Dustin __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? HotJobs - Search new jobs daily now http://hotjobs.yahoo.com/

7 11

Fwd: WINE virus thing
by Dimitrie O. Paun 06 Nov '02

06 Nov '02

---------- Forwarded Message ---------- Subject: WINE virus thing Date: Tue, 5 Nov 2002 22:33:29 +0100 (MET) From: Marcel Partap <mpartap(a)gmx.net> To: dpaun(a)rogers.com Dear Dimitrie, I am not on the mailing list for wine so please redirect this to the list, thank you very much. I've read the Wine weekly news and would like to help out a bit. About that security thingie and the problem that some apps need manual parameters or something (the user has to do more than click-click) I would recommend following solution: Most Nintendo 64 Emulators use INI-files, in which for each game (ROM Image) the name and shit is listed and the best options specifically for this game. I would recommend to do it exactly like this in WINE: a Application database file with weekly updates (like Antivirus definitions) which contains the names and file attributes of the (tested) application (MD5??!) and eventually the parameters necessary to run the program. Wine could then have a secure mode (turned on by default) in which only applications from the DB (MD5!) can be run and an unsecure mode in which it will run any EXE. This would solve multiple problems at once: -the parameters the program needs to work will be used automatically -no "click-click-infections" because virii not in app database -approach for bringing structure into that nasty online app database :) BTW if MD5 is in the app database aswell, each existing version of the app (that *works*) needs to be verified by someone and the MD5 added to the database. I don't think that'd be a great problem. hope you hear me cya Marcel -- +++ GMX - Mail, Messaging & more http://www.gmx.net +++ NEU: Mit GMX ins Internet. Rund um die Uhr für 1 ct/ Min. surfen! ------------------------------------------------------- -- Dimi.

2 1

Lost Wages (round 2)
by Jeremy Newman 05 Nov '02

05 Nov '02

I spent some time implementing my theme idea to the lostwages devel version of the WineHQ website. Take a look at: http://lostwages.winehq.org On the home page, use one of the three theme links. I've made the skinning engine pretty simple so more themes/skins could be added in the future. I also removed the hidden menus, and returned to the standard view like Francois has been evangelizing. Most of the links go 404 for the moment. But the About page is in as a sample. Next on my list is to work on using /about/ style URLs instead of page=About get style. Then I need to port WWN to use the new theme engine (its busticated in the lostwages version). That's all for now. -- __ _WebGeek/SysAdmin CodeWeavers -= http://www.codeweavers.com | \| |_____ __ ___ __ __ _ _ _ -= http://www.dracowulf.com | / -_) | | / ' \/ _` | ' \ -= jnewman(a)codeweavers.com |_|\_\___|\_/\_/|_|_|_\__,_|_||_| -= ICQ: 1842980 Yahoo: laxdragon

6 10

Avoiding FunctionA/W Duplication
by Jaco Greeff 05 Nov '02

05 Nov '02

I would like some comments on somthing that has been bugging me quite a bit. Implementing parts of the API can lead to duplication of code inside the same file. In my example, let's take two functions, one operating on a ASCII string and one one a Unicode string, let's call them "funcA" and "funcW". Upon implementation, the only real difference between these are the parameters, "funcA(const char *p)" and "funcW(const WCHAR *p)". What is the best way to keep the code maintainable and making sure that we don't have to fix a single bug in two places in the same file? I see 3 (maybe more) approaches: 1. Implement funcA, making funcW and exact copy with the relevant parameters and local variables changed; 2. Implement a generic solution as a macro and get both funcA and funcW to call it will specific parameters; 3. Do some preprosessor magic as implemented in dlls/msvcrt/scanf.[hc] What is the general feeling as to the right way to approach this? What is the preferred approach? (And maybe it is something I haven't listed here.) At this point, I've been following approach 1, which makes me a bit uncomfortable with regardsto code bloat and forever having to make sure that funcA is on par with funcW and vice versa. I've toyed with the idea of 2, but as Dimitrie rightly said, it is a bit C++-ish :) (Plus it doesn't do wonders for debugging...) Number 3, yes it works, but it can add extra files. (Altough it almost seems the best of the 3 I've listed.) Your comments would be appreciated, somewhere there is the best solution that will be agreeable to all and which makes sure things stay relatively simple. (Well, simplicity across two functions at least.) Greetings, Jaco

4 4

[Fwd: x11drv WND separation]
by David Fraser 05 Nov '02

05 Nov '02

Hi Have had trouble getting through to wine-devel(a)winehq.com, so reposting this to see... Funny, nothing's bounced... David -------- Original Message -------- Subject: x11drv WND separation Date: Mon, 04 Nov 2002 15:27:27 +0200 From: David Fraser <davidf(a)sjsoft.com> To: dpaun(a)rogers.com, wine-devel(a)winehq.com CC: julliard(a)winehq.com References: <200210311738.10609.dpaun(a)rogers.com> <87k7jy5i0i.fsf(a)mail.wine.dyndns.org> <200210312356.30812.dpaun(a)rogers.com> Dimitrie O. Paun wrote: >On October 31, 2002 06:02 pm, Alexandre Julliard wrote: > > >>"Dimitrie O. Paun" <dpaun(a)rogers.com> writes: >> >> >>>What is NOT in 0.8: >>> -- stable server protocol: no binary compatibility >>> -- DLL separation: ditto >>> >>> >>IMO the goals for 0.9 will be reached before the ones for 0.8 so you >>might as well put everything together... >> >> > >Maybe so, you know this better. But 0.9 needs what's listed >here anyhow, if we hit the 0.9 targets before, no harm's done. >I am not that optimistic about the DLL separation. The x11drv >is a bit of a mess, as we have a WND structure maintained by >USER, which x11drv needs access to. It needs work. And in >general, the separation work that's left is not trivial, >and you seem to be the only one qualified to do it. And you >are one busy guy... > > Does anyone have any info on what needs to be done to separate out the WND structure from USER? Is there any other stuff that should be separated out into x11drv? Presumably even if the separation isn't trivial some pointers could enable others to give it a try... David

3 2