June 2001 - Wine-Devel - list.winehq.org

New Application Database is ONLINE
by Jeremy Newman June 11, 2001

June 11, 2001

Hey all! The 'shiny' new Wine Application Database is up and ready for your comments. We will be spending the rest of the day getting the initial category structure and 1st round off applications in. Once we have enough input, and we fell stable enough, I will link the AppDB to Winehq.com and post to wine-users. http://wine.codeweavers.com/appdb/ There is one sample app in so far so you can see what we mean. in: Main > Utilities > Compression > WinZip Use that as a guideline for how this is going to work. Go at it guys! -- _ _WebGeek/NetAdmin CodeWeavers -= http://www.codeweavers.com | \| |_____ __ ___ __ __ _ _ _ -= http://jnewman.codeweavers.com | .` / -_) V V / ' \/ _` | ' \ -= mailto:jnewman(a)codeweavers.com |_|\_\___|\_/\_/|_|_|_\__,_|_||_| -= ICQ: 1842980 Yahoo: laxdragon

1 0

wine binary loader problem - incorrect code at entry point
by Mike McCormack June 11, 2001

June 11, 2001

Hi, Using the latest CVS, i'm trying to run the Adobe acrobat installer program (ar500enu.exe) and it crashes without doing anything at all. i have traced the problem to bad code at the program's entry point... which presumably means that the wrong piece of the program was mmapped into memory. i have run this program before using wine, (not recently though) and it has worked. Other programs (such as the netscape installer) at least start up and get going before crashing in a similar way. Mike from the debugger: 0x0040c110 (<Debugged process>.EntryPoint in <Debugged process>): decl 0x0(%edi) Using Sang Cho's disassembler i get: //******************** Program Entry Point ******** :0040C110 55 push ebp Disassembly of File: ./c/ar500enu.exe T.DateStamp = 351A66B8: Thu Mar 26 06:31:20 1998 Code Offset = 00000400, Code Size = 00010E00 Data Offset = 00011800, Data Size = 00003200 Number of Objects = 0005 (dec), Imagebase = 00400000h Object01: .text RVA: 00001000 Offset: 00000400 Size: 00010E00 Flags: 60000020 Object02: .rdata RVA: 00012000 Offset: 00011200 Size: 00000600 Flags: 40000040 Object03: .data RVA: 00013000 Offset: 00011800 Size: 00003200 Flags: C0000040 Object04: .idata RVA: 0001A000 Offset: 00014A00 Size: 00001000 Flags: C0000040 Object05: .rsrc RVA: 0001B000 Offset: 00015A00 Size: 0000A400 Flags: 40000040 and from the trace i get: trace:module:PE_LoadImage loading C:\ar500enu.exe trace:module:map_image mapped PE file at 0x400000-0x426000 trace:module:map_image mapping section .text at 0x401000 off 400 size 10e00 flags 60000020 trace:module:map_image mapping section .rdata at 0x412000 off 11200 size 600 flags 40000040 trace:module:map_image mapping section .data at 0x413000 off 11800 size 3200 flags c0000040 trace:module:map_image clearing 0x416200 - 0x417000 trace:module:map_image mapping section .idata at 0x41a000 off 14a00 size 1000 flags c0000040 trace:module:map_image mapping section .rsrc at 0x41b000 off 15a00 size a400 flags 40000040 trace:module:load_library loaded ntdll.dll 0x403512c4 40050000 ------------------------------------------ mailto:Mike_McCormack(a)looksmart.com.au ph +82 16 430 0425 __________________________________________________________________ Get your free Australian email account at http://www.Looksmart.com.au

1 0

[Problem report] X11DRV_ScrollWindowEx
by Gerard Patel June 11, 2001

June 11, 2001

This function hangs with the following apps (at least) - Notepad Win 3.11 - Notepad NT 4 - Eudora 1.5 In all cases, the problem appears when a text has several pages and I try to scroll toward the beginning of text. The problem disappears if I comment out the calls to X11DRV_StartGraphicsExposure and X11DRV_EndGraphicsExposure. The apps seem to work just as well. The hanging occurs because there is no X event generated in X11DRV_EndGraphicsExposure. I don't quite see why there should be one in this case. Gerard

1 0

FYI: ControlSpy has stopped working
by Guy L. Albertelli June 10, 2001

June 10, 2001

Using the current CVS (6/9), certain ControlSpy modules (REBAR and COMBOBOXEX) no longer seem to work, even with the native versions of COMCTL32. The internal child windows in the left pane are no longer drawn. Seems to have occured sometime since 6/1. I will look into it tomorrow after some rest. Strange. Guy Albertelli <<galberte(a)neo.lrun.com>>

2 1

Re: FYI: ControlSpy has stopped working
by Gerard Patel June 10, 2001

June 10, 2001

At 11:56 PM 09/06/2001 -0400, you wrote: >Using the current CVS (6/9), certain ControlSpy modules (REBAR and >COMBOBOXEX) no longer seem to work, even with the native versions of >COMCTL32. The internal child windows in the left pane are no longer drawn. >Seems to have occured sometime since 6/1. I will look into it tomorrow after >some rest. Strange. Strange ??? After this patch : ChangeSet ID: 991691718458116964902729 CVSROOT: /opt/cvs-commit Module name: wine Changes by: julliard(a)wine2. 01/06/04 17:55:18 (...) Log message: Create an X window for every window, including children. I see a lot of problems in most of my test apps after the implementation of this evil scheme. I have already sent several patches to work around some of these problems, two have been applied, one has been ignored so far, but even with this last Wine's status is beyond the usual breakage level. Gerard

2 1

Help needed
by Renukaprasad, MR June 9, 2001

June 9, 2001

Hi, We are planning to port wine onto Tru64 Unix. I have some basic Questions. Can you tell me how to go about it. How do we start. How big is the task and how to start about it.. Thanks And Regards, Renuka

1 0

Re: VirtualProtect() fixup
by Alexandre Julliard June 8, 2001

June 8, 2001

520053692817-0001(a)t-online.de (Andreas Mohr) writes: > (you do know that I disagree on these things, right ? after all Wine emulates > *Windows*, and if Windows does it that way, then we should do it, too, for > heaven's sake, especially if it's not really painful) There is no such thing as "Windows", there are multiple versions that do different things, and we have to choose what we emulate. In this case it's clear that it makes more sense to emulate the NT behavior, since this is what is documented. Of course we could do a winver check, but if we do this for every single difference between Win98 and NT, we'll end up with a mess of spaghetti code with more version checks than actual code. So winver checks must be limited to cases where they are demonstrably necessary for a real-world application. -- Alexandre Julliard julliard(a)winehq.com

1 0

Re: VirtualProtect() fixup
by Alexandre Julliard June 8, 2001

June 8, 2001

520053692817-0001(a)t-online.de (Andreas Mohr) writes: > What isn't the case ? Both fixups ? Or only one of these ? The return value: NT returns a BOOL, 0 or 1. I haven't checked the old protection behavior; but anyway this doesn't belong in VirtualProtect, if we have to ignore the execute permission it must be done consistently throughout the code. > Well, to be exact, no application. > I just found this out by accident. That's what I suspected ;-) > IMHO the probability that some applications exist that are too lazy > to supply their own old_prot variable and that check the return value instead > is rather high, so I think that patch is necessary. We can't start breaking things based only on your suspicion that someone somewhere will have used a feature that isn't documented at all (plus there is a documented way of doing exactly the same thing). If you have an app that needs it sure, otherwise we'll just keep returning a BOOL, as the function is documented to do. > Maybe we should add a winver check, though. No thanks. -- Alexandre Julliard julliard(a)winehq.com

2 1

Re: wcmd fix
by Francois Gouget June 8, 2001

June 8, 2001

On Fri, 8 Jun 2001, Andreas Mohr wrote: > Hi all, > > file_size.XXXPart should be file_size.s.XXXPart. > > Thanks to Lasse Melsaeter for spotting this. That's the 'Dummy struct name problem in wcmd' I sent this morning. But actually whether there should an 's.' depends on the compiler (for Winelib applications) so you should test for NONAMELESSSTRUCT as I did in my patch. -- Francois Gouget fgouget(a)free.fr http://fgouget.free.fr/ If it stinks, it's chemistry. If it moves, it's biology. If it does not work, It's computer science.

1 0

Re: VirtualProtect() fixup
by Alexandre Julliard June 8, 2001

June 8, 2001

Andreas Mohr <a.mohr(a)mailto.de> writes: > VirtualProtect had two big problems: > > - undocumented return value > - should return protection flags only instead of whole flag setting This isn't the case under NT. Which application depends on that? -- Alexandre Julliard julliard(a)winehq.com

2 1