Re: [1/3] comctl32: Do not call parent of tool window for tip text

[Ann & Jason Edmeades]

Hi Alexander,
> In the process of debugging I 
> also determined that Windows doesn't seem to send this message to 
> parent at all (tested on win98-Qemu, winXP SP2-Qemu and winXP SP1 
> normal installation). So I'm deleting this second call altogether and 
> a conformance test for this situation will be included in the next 
> patch.

Under some circumstances, it must - see bug 9233 (and my patch at url below)
http://www.winehq.org/pipermail/wine-patches/2007-August/042660.html
http://www.winehq.org/pipermail/wine-cvs/2007-August/035236.html

I debugged this through to the point where the parent was definitely
retrieving the information (I watched spy logs of the application in
question) and I believe reversing this patch will break radmin again... It's
a free download, can you please test you havent regressed that application
with the patch

Jason

[1/3] comctl32: Do not call parent of tool window for tip text

[Alexander Dorofeyev]

Hi. Thanks for your input. I did download this application, and, yeah, it 
appears that my patch regresses it. However, I did a bit of debugging of my own 
and I don't think that the real problem in RAdmin case is not sending the 
message to the parent, just like it isn't in DCPlusPlus, the real problem seems 
to be on toolbar's side again. Sending message to parent in tooltip code 
probably simply works around toolbar's broken behavior. In this case I think 
I've identified a line in toolbar.c that fails to properly detect empty string 
causing not appearing tooltips in Radmin. I'll try to submit another patch with 
this fix shortly.

Ann & Jason Edmeades wrote:
> Hi Alexander,
> > In the process of debugging I 
> > also determined that Windows doesn't seem to send this message to 
> > parent at all (tested on win98-Qemu, winXP SP2-Qemu and winXP SP1 
> > normal installation). So I'm deleting this second call altogether and 
> > a conformance test for this situation will be included in the next 
> > patch.
>
> Under some circumstances, it must - see bug 9233 (and my patch at url below)
> http://www.winehq.org/pipermail/wine-patches/2007-August/042660.html
> http://www.winehq.org/pipermail/wine-cvs/2007-August/035236.html
>
> I debugged this through to the point where the parent was definitely
> retrieving the information (I watched spy logs of the application in
> question) and I believe reversing this patch will break radmin again... It's
> a free download, can you please test you havent regressed that application
> with the patch
>
> Jason