July 2026 - Wine-Bugs - list.winehq.org

[Bug 60102] New: Tab list is automatically scrolled such that active tab is always visible

by WineHQ Bugzilla

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=60102 Bug ID: 60102 Summary: Tab list is automatically scrolled such that active tab is always visible Product: Wine Version: 11.14 Hardware: x86-64 OS: Linux Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: minor Priority: P2 Component: comctl32 Assignee: wine-bugs(a)list.winehq.org Reporter: and44more(a)gmail.com Target Milestone: --- Distribution: --- At first glance, everything sounds right: A tab bar is automatically scrolled on resize such that the active (focused) tab is always visible. Except that windows isn't doing this at all! I found this bug in the application "notepad++". Here's how to replicate it: When you open notepad++, you see a horizontal tab bar. Create many tabs by spamming Ctrl+N until the bar bar is filled with tabs. The active tab is now the most right tab. Resize the window's right border to make the window smaller. You'll see that the tab bar "shifts to the left", i.e. the most left tab disappears and every tab takes the exact position of its left tab. This does almost certainly happen because wine tries to preserve the active's tab visibility. But windows isn't doing this at all! Under windows, the tab bar would just remain unchanged after any window resize, meaning the active tab would just disappear behind the window's borders when the window becomes too small. Under linux however, the bar bar changes when resizing the window. This isn't really problematic to me. However, there is a related issue to this: minimizing and restoring the window of notepad++. Apparently, minimizing and restoring a window causes resize events (?). When you minimize and restore the notepad++ window, the tab bar changes (shifts) such that the active tab will become the most left tab, meaning all tabs to the left just disappeared (scrolled out of view). Again, windows doesn't scroll (shift) the tab bar. I let a LLM search for the issue and I think I got somewhat useable information from it: In `dlls/comctl32/tab.c` the TAB_WindowProc function receives a WM_SIZE event when the tab bar is resized. Then, TAB_Size will be called which will then call TAB_SetItemBounds which will then call TAB_EnsureSelectionVisible. TAB_EnsureSelectionVisible apparently scrolls the tab bar such that the active tab is always visible. -- Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.

July 31, 2026

[Bug 59186] Starcraft 2 detects wrong graphics card

by WineHQ Bugzilla

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=59186 --- Comment #57 from Stian Low <wineryyyyy(a)gmail.com> --- Seems a solution to Red Dead hanging via INTEL env vars may have been found that changes rendering behavior that may be worth testing for your system if your drivers support them: - https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/mesa/mesa/-/work_items/14348#note_3594008 -- Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.

July 31, 2026

[Bug 40401] Built-in services do not run on first boot

by WineHQ Bugzilla

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=40401 --- Comment #1 from Janne <janne.kekkonen(a)gmail.com> --- Hello, is this still an issue with latest Wine? -- Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.

July 31, 2026

[Bug 33634] [UWIN] simple ls -l from the UWIN gives a lot of warnings

by WineHQ Bugzilla

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=33634 --- Comment #6 from Janne <janne.kekkonen(a)gmail.com> --- Hello, i found uwin-base.2012.08.06 from archive.org. In my system download seems to be in somekind of acceptance loop of Eclipse Public License. https://web.archive.org/web/20150930123305/http://www2.research.att.com/~as… Maybe it is time to close this case? -- Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.

July 31, 2026

[Bug 44351] [Feature Request] Test Result Draft

by WineHQ Bugzilla

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=44351 --- Comment #6 from Ken Sharp <imwellcushtymelike(a)gmail.com> --- This could be saved locally using the browser's storage so that the server doesn't need to keep track and remove stale drafts. Less useful than following the user across devices, but also less of a headache. -- Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.

July 31, 2026

[Bug 25229] rejected test cases never go back to queue

by WineHQ Bugzilla

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=25229 --- Comment #20 from Ken Sharp <imwellcushtymelike(a)gmail.com> --- Is this still true? I think this might be fixed. -- Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.

July 31, 2026

[Bug 25699] The URL in the "Test Results submitted" email does not show the Test Results

by WineHQ Bugzilla

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=25699 Ken Sharp <imwellcushtymelike(a)gmail.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Assignee|wine-bugs(a)list.winehq.org |imwellcushtymelike(a)gmail.co | |m -- Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.

July 31, 2026

[Bug 60100] AppDB migration to Content Management System

by WineHQ Bugzilla

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=60100 --- Comment #4 from Stian Low <wineryyyyy(a)gmail.com> --- (In reply to Stian Low from comment #2) > Indeed and a CMS may offer a heal to all everlasting patches otherwise > needed. Everlasting better phrased as never-ending. I'm not aware of the popularity or level of traffic for AppDB and therefore how to prioritize the bugs. Last year I volunteered to solve server separation because traffic problems seemed most obviously high priority since it was also impacting Bugzilla. However plan was not to spend much more time on the existing bugs. If AppDB bugs are higher priority and need to be addressed then I'm willing to work on them but overall upgrading to a CMS seems much more worthwhile long-term. It seems AppDB is in need of more than just bug fixes but also a revamp to fulfill modern user expectations that promote more engagement. -- Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.

July 31, 2026

[Bug 60100] AppDB migration to Content Management System

by WineHQ Bugzilla

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=60100 --- Comment #3 from Stian Low <wineryyyyy(a)gmail.com> --- (In reply to Stian Low from comment #2) > Much content already dumped to Bugzilla/Gitlab, especially screenshots and > comments constituting test results, may benefit from the ability to be > linked to a CMS which may then have flexibility to be reorganized in a form > equivalent to AppDB/ProtonDB and more. If Gitlab is capable of achieving similar CMS capabilities to provide an AppDB solution then it may be an even better way to go. If the plan is to eventually migrate Bugzilla to Gitlab then all the content would be consolidated and linkable via Gitlabs existing tools. I'm not aware of an example of Gitlab being used in such a way and it may negatively impact performance. Reintroducing traffic problems solved by separating AppDB and Bugzilla needs to be avoided. -- Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.

July 31, 2026

[Bug 60100] AppDB migration to Content Management System

by WineHQ Bugzilla

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=60100 --- Comment #2 from Stian Low <wineryyyyy(a)gmail.com> --- (In reply to Ken Sharp from comment #1) > I don't know about a CMS but it does need a proper review. Our patches are > bandaids. Indeed and a CMS may offer a heal to all everlasting patches otherwise needed. Many of my bug reports/comments are partial if not full AppDB test results but AppDB updates are completely absent from my workflows so there is a gap that may be bridged to support for linking bug comments to AppDB entries and vice versa. AppDB currently only supports linking to bug IDs but not comment ids and Bugzilla only supports linking one AppDB entry per bug ID. Duplicate bugs should not be required/created just to link separate AppDB entries. Supporting AppDB links to bug comments would offer more granularity. Bugzilla reporters often leave out relevant information that AppDB links may help solve such as app versions and distro info. If most Bugzilla comments resembled ProtonDB comments/test results it would help save time requesting missing info and reduce the noise it causes: - https://www.protondb.com/app/289070 AppDB approval process may cause bottlenecks for comment level linking however but removing approvals altogether risks flooding maintainers with overwhelming cleanup efforts so some balance may be required which ProtonDB may have found. Much content already dumped to Bugzilla/Gitlab, especially screenshots and comments constituting test results, may benefit from the ability to be linked to a CMS which may then have flexibility to be reorganized in a form equivalent to AppDB/ProtonDB and more. -- Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.

July 31, 2026