winex11.drv: Bug#6501. XIM problem with XInitThreads().

[Byeong-Sik Jeon]

http://www.winehq.org/pipermail/wine-cvs/2006-October/026680.html
> winex11.drv: Give XInitThreads another chance.
>
> ---
>
> dlls/winex11.drv/x11drv_main.c |    2 ++
>  1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/dlls/winex11.drv/x11drv_main.c b/dlls/winex11.drv/x11drv_main.c
> index 0403b5d..95f9d10 100644
> --- a/dlls/winex11.drv/x11drv_main.c
> +++ b/dlls/winex11.drv/x11drv_main.c
> @@ -383,6 +383,8 @@ static BOOL process_attach(void)
>
> /* Open display */
>
> +    if (!XInitThreads()) ERR( "XInitThreads failed, trouble ahead\n" );
> +
>      if (!(display = XOpenDisplay( NULL ))) return FALSE;

Hi,

This patch makes the Bug #6501. Also Korean XIM(nabi, scim) have the
same problem.

Please fix this problem.

[Dmitry Timoshkov]

"Byeong-Sik Jeon" <wjsqudtlr(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> http://www.winehq.org/pipermail/wine-cvs/2006-October/026680.html
> > winex11.drv: Give XInitThreads another chance.
> >
> > ---
> >
> > dlls/winex11.drv/x11drv_main.c |    2 ++
> >  1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/dlls/winex11.drv/x11drv_main.c b/dlls/winex11.drv/x11drv_main.c
> > index 0403b5d..95f9d10 100644
> > --- a/dlls/winex11.drv/x11drv_main.c
> > +++ b/dlls/winex11.drv/x11drv_main.c
> > @@ -383,6 +383,8 @@ static BOOL process_attach(void)
> >
> > /* Open display */
> >
> > +    if (!XInitThreads()) ERR( "XInitThreads failed, trouble ahead\n" );
> > +
> >      if (!(display = XOpenDisplay( NULL ))) return FALSE;
>
> Hi,
>
> This patch makes the Bug #6501. Also Korean XIM(nabi, scim) have the
> same problem.
>
> Please fix this problem.

My impression is that it's an X11 bug, not a Wine one. So a proper place
to send such a request is most likely the Xorg bug tracker.

-- 
Dmitry.

[Byeong-Sik Jeon]

2006-11-03 (Fri), 11:57 +0800, Dmitry Timoshkov wrote:
> My impression is that it's an X11 bug, not a Wine one. So a proper place
> to send such a request is most likely the Xorg bug tracker.

I think xorg people knows this problem already.
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1182

I think we needs the any work-around.

Thanks.

[Tomas Carnecky]

Byeong-Sik Jeon wrote:
> I think xorg people knows this problem already.
> https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1182

Won't this be fixed in the next Xlib version (1.1)? XLib-1.1 will use
XCB which is said to be truly MT safe.

If we just wait until everybody has updated XLib to 1.1 then we don't
need to use the workaround.

tom