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

glibc bug mmap/malloc
by Andreas Mohr July 17, 2001

July 17, 2001

[yeah, it's glibc bug time AGAIN] Hello all, I just wanted to let you all know that I found what I believe to be a glibc malloc bug. (yes, this happens even with 2.4.6 and latest Debian glibc 2.2.3-6). This is the only thing I did today, BTW. When Wine loads a very large (129 MB) exe file, it does an mmap() on it. After that it tries to do some malloc()s. That fails, which causes the entirely loading/execution of that file to abort. Thus I did malloc()/free() in a for loop after that 129 MB mmap() to test the problematic behaviour. Output: trace:module:map_image mapped PE file at 0x8051000-0xfc45000 err:virtual:VIRTUAL_CreateView now that the PE file has been mmap() /dev/zero:ed, we do some other malloc()s: malloc of 4 bytes: 0x804d878 malloc of 8 bytes: 0x804d878 malloc of 12 bytes: 0x804d878 malloc of 16 bytes: 0x804d878 malloc of 20 bytes: 0x804db20 <---- (chunk size optimization algorithm) malloc of 24 bytes: 0x804db20 <---- ("") malloc of 28 bytes: 0x804e7f8 <---- ("") malloc of 32 bytes: 0x804e7f8 malloc of 36 bytes: 0x804e7f8 . . . malloc of 10224 bytes: 0x804e7f8 malloc of 10228 bytes: 0x804e7f8 malloc of 10232 bytes: 0x804e7f8 up to 0x8050fef malloc of 10236 bytes: (nil) (0x8050ff3, which probably touches mmap() management headers) malloc of 10240 bytes: (nil) . . . malloc of 131052 bytes: (nil) malloc of 131056 (0x1fff0) bytes: (nil) ... malloc of 131060 bytes: 0x404c2008 malloc of 131064 bytes: 0x404c2008 . . . You can clearly see that malloc() is able to squeeze up to 10232 bytes into the memory range just before the mmap()ed area, but when it gets slightly larger, it is NOT capable of switching to an entirely different memory area, throws its arms up in desperation and simply returns a shabby NULL. It only uses a new memory area in case the values get *much* larger, i.e. at least 131060 bytes. This is a BUG. (IMHO) What else should it be ? I already contacted Ulrich Drepper about it, and I'll hopefully get a positive reply soon. -- Andreas Mohr Stauferstr. 6, D-71272 Renningen, Germany Microsoft Windows: Made for the Internet The Internet: Made for Unix

1 0

Re: Significant change to WINEPS - please test!
by Gerard Patel July 17, 2001

July 17, 2001

At 07:29 PM 15/07/2001 -0500, you wrote: >So please give me your feedback. I particularly want to know if it >breaks anything before I submit it. Anything ? everything is a better word. I use a 'latin' language. No unicode for me. I test with the software I use to send this mail. There is a 'preview' feature and I can preview (and print) a mail. This is working fine with current Cvs. If I use your patch, most characters in the mail body, are overlayed, printed scattered in black heaps with small lines all around , strangely evoking some insects. Pretty funny :-) If my description is not clear, I can send you a screen capture. Strangely the page header and footer are still correct, though. Gerard

2 1

Re: Small OpenGL fix
by Alexandre Julliard July 17, 2001

July 17, 2001

Lionel Ulmer <lionel.ulmer(a)free.fr> writes: > In the current code, there seems to be two different mechanisms for driver > calling : > > - one that is 'GDI' specific with the 'dc->funcs->pFUNC_NAME' sort of calls > > - the other for 'USER' with 'USER_Driver.pFUNC_NAME' > > So which one of the two methods should I use the 'WGL' that is neither in > GDI nor in USER ? You can't really use either. The GDI one requires calling DC_GetDCPtr which you cannot do from outside GDI, and the USER one requires a reference to a global variable that isn't visible outside USER. A possible way is to use the Escape function and add a few x11drv-specific escape codes. But first it would probably be a good thing to check how opengl32 is implemented under Windows; I have no idea how it works, but it probably needs some way to communicate with the graphics driver, and we could use the same mechanism. -- Alexandre Julliard julliard(a)winehq.com

2 1

Re: Small OpenGL fix
by Alexandre Julliard July 17, 2001

July 17, 2001

Lionel Ulmer <lionel.ulmer(a)free.fr> writes: > This is more a problem of inter-dependencies of X11DRV and USER32 (as the > former should NEVER be loaded before the latter)... But as I could not fix > this problem, I prefered going 'around' the problem :-) The dependencies between x11drv and user should certainly be fixed, but the real problem is that opengl32 and ddraw import x11drv at all. x11drv is an internal driver and should never be imported by any dll. Anybody feeling like fixing that? -- Alexandre Julliard julliard(a)winehq.com

2 1

using cvs diff
by Bill Medland July 17, 2001

July 17, 2001

I can't see it in TFM I thought I was keeping an eye on what patches had actually been applied to the wine source (especially to see if mine had) by using "cvs diff wine". It seemed to be working but I now realise it wasn't. I guess it was diffing my local code against the corresponding revisions. How do I diff my current set of code against the current cvs? Bill

3 2

ChangeDisplaySettings
by Travis Michielsen July 17, 2001

July 17, 2001

Hi, I was planning on implementing ChangeDisplaySettingsA soon but I'm not certain on how to do it. I have been browsing the source tree and was following the methods used by DirectDraw and was considering a similar approach. While I was browsing the source, I was eventually lead to dlls/x11drv/xvidmode.c which contains most of the functions that I will probably need. But I still have a few concerns: 1) Is the x11drv used for ddraw AND the gdi or just one? 2) what is the best way to query if the video exists? without knowing syncs? 3) and if i need to know syncs how do I find them? Another question I have is about pixel depth. From what I understand, it is imposible to change the pixel format of the screen while X is running. However, it is possible to start more than one X server with different configs (and depth) which we could use if we have to but probably not a good idea. Of course another posibility is to emulate the pixel depth, but that would probably cause performance problems, especially when used by games. Anyone have any suggestions or should we just leave changing depths as unimplemented? Thanks! - Travis Michielsen __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/

2 1

DrawText
by Travis Michielsen July 17, 2001

July 17, 2001

Hi all, I have put together a quick patch that SHOULD fully implement the DrawText functions. However, I have not had time to thoroughly tested most of the logic so I thought I would post it here rather than sending it directly to the patches list. I welcome any/all comments/suggestions. - Travis Michielsen Index: wine/dlls/user/text.c =================================================================== RCS file: /home/wine/wine/dlls/user/text.c,v retrieving revision 1.12 diff -u -r1.12 text.c --- wine/dlls/user/text.c 2001/07/17 00:51:00 1.12 +++ wine/dlls/user/text.c 2001/07/17 13:55:22 @@ -235,6 +235,7 @@ int prefix_x = 0; int prefix_end = 0; TEXTMETRICW tm; + int lmargin = 0, rmargin = 0; int x = rect->left, y = rect->top; int width = rect->right - rect->left; int max_width = 0; @@ -242,10 +243,8 @@ TRACE("%s, %d , [(%d,%d),(%d,%d)]\n", debugstr_wn (str, count), count, rect->left, rect->top, rect->right, rect->bottom); - if(dtp) { - FIXME("Ignores params:%d,%d,%d,%d\n", dtp->cbSize, - dtp->iTabLength, dtp->iLeftMargin, dtp->iRightMargin); - } + if (dtp) TRACE("Params: iTabLength=%d, iLeftMargin=%d, iRightMargin=%d\n", + dtp->iTabLength, dtp->iLeftMargin, dtp->iRightMargin); if (!str) return 0; if (count == -1) count = strlenW(str); @@ -258,8 +257,17 @@ else lh = tm.tmHeight; + if (dtp) + { + lmargin = dtp->iLeftMargin * tm.tmAveCharWidth; + rmargin = dtp->iRightMargin * tm.tmAveCharWidth; + if (!(flags & (DT_CENTER | DT_RIGHT))) + x += lmargin; + dtp->uiLengthDrawn = 0; //This param RECEIVES number of chars processed + } + if (flags & DT_TABSTOP) - tabstop = flags >> 8; + tabstop = dtp ? dtp->iTabLength : flags >> 8; if (flags & DT_EXPANDTABS) { @@ -292,7 +300,7 @@ if (flags & DT_SINGLELINE) { - if (flags & DT_VCENTER) y = rect->top + + if (flags & DT_VCENTER) y = rect->top + (rect->bottom - rect->top) / 2 - size.cy / 2; else if (flags & DT_BOTTOM) y = rect->bottom - size.cy; @@ -312,7 +320,7 @@ if (flags & DT_WORD_ELLIPSIS) flags |= DT_WORDBREAK; - if (flags & DT_PATH_ELLIPSIS) + if (flags & DT_PATH_ELLIPSIS) { WCHAR* lastBkSlash = NULL; WCHAR* lastFwdSlash = NULL; @@ -320,14 +328,11 @@ line[totalLen] = '\0'; lastBkSlash = strrchrW(line, BACK_SLASHW[0]); lastFwdSlash = strrchrW(line, FORWARD_SLASHW[0]); - fnameDelim = lastFwdSlash ? lastFwdSlash : lastBkSlash; - if (lastBkSlash && lastFwdSlash) /* which is last? */ - if (lastBkSlash > lastFwdSlash) - fnameDelim = lastBkSlash; + fnameDelim = lastBkSlash > lastFwdSlash ? lastBkSlash : lastFwdSlash; if (fnameDelim) fnameLen = &line[totalLen] - fnameDelim; - else + else fnameDelim = (WCHAR*)str; strcpyW(swapStr, ELLIPSISW); @@ -343,16 +348,16 @@ } len = MAX_STATIC_BUFFER; - TEXT_NextLineW(hdc, swapStr, &count, line, &len, width, flags); + TEXT_NextLineW(hdc, swapStr, &count, line, &len, width, flags); /* if only the ELLIPSIS will fit, just let it be clipped */ len = max(3, len); GetTextExtentPointW(hdc, line, len, &size); /* FIXME: - * NextLine uses GetTextExtentPoint for each character, + * NextLine uses GetTextExtentPoint for each character, * rather than GetCharABCWidth... So the whitespace between - * characters is ignored in the width measurement, and the + * characters is ignored in the width measurement, and the * reported len is too great. To compensate, we must get * the width of the entire line and adjust len accordingly. */ @@ -365,10 +370,10 @@ if (fnameLen < len-3) /* some of the path will fit */ { /* put the ELLIPSIS between the path and filename */ - strncpyW(swapStr, &line[fnameLen+3], len-3-fnameLen); + strncpyW(swapStr, &line[fnameLen+3], len-3-fnameLen); swapStr[len-3-fnameLen] = '\0'; - strcatW(swapStr, ELLIPSISW); - strncpyW(swapStr+strlenW(swapStr), &line[3], fnameLen); + strcatW(swapStr, ELLIPSISW); + strncpyW(swapStr+strlenW(swapStr), &line[3], fnameLen); } else { @@ -382,12 +387,15 @@ line[len] = '\0'; strPtr = NULL; } + if (flags & DT_MODIFYSTRING) + strcpyW(str, swapStr); } } if (!(flags & DT_CALCRECT)) { - if (!ExtTextOutW(hdc, x, y, (flags & DT_NOCLIP) ? 0 : ETO_CLIPPED, - rect, line, len, NULL )) return 0; + if (!ExtTextOutW( hdc, x, y, + ( (flags & DT_NOCLIP) ? 0 : ETO_CLIPPED ) | ( (flags & DT_RTLREADING) ? 0 : ETO_RTLREADING ), + rect, line, len, NULL )) return 0; if (prefix_offset != -1) { HPEN hpen = CreatePen( PS_SOLID, 1, GetTextColor(hdc) ); @@ -410,20 +418,35 @@ break; } } + if (dtp) + dtp->uiLengthDrawn += len; } while (strPtr); + if (flags & DT_CALCRECT) { rect->right = rect->left + max_width; rect->bottom = y; + if (dtp) + rect->right += lmargin + rmargin; } return y - rect->top; } /*********************************************************************** - * DrawTextA (USER32.@) + * DrawTextW (USER32.@) */ -INT WINAPI DrawTextA( HDC hdc, LPCSTR str, INT count, LPRECT rect, UINT flags ) +INT WINAPI DrawTextW( HDC hdc, LPCWSTR str, INT count, + LPRECT rect, UINT flags ) +{ + return DrawTextExW(hdc, str, count, rect, flags, NULL); +} + +/*********************************************************************** + * DrawTextExA (USER32.@) + */ +INT WINAPI DrawTextExA( HDC hdc, LPCSTR str, INT count, + LPRECT rect, UINT flags, LPDRAWTEXTPARAMS dtp ) { WCHAR *wstr; INT ret = 0; @@ -437,32 +460,19 @@ { MultiByteToWideChar( CP_ACP, 0, str, count, wstr, wcount ); ret = DrawTextExW( hdc, wstr, wcount, rect, flags, NULL ); + if (flags & DT_MODIFYSTRING) + WideCharToMultiByte( CP_ACP, 0, wstr, -1, str, count, NULL, NULL ); HeapFree(GetProcessHeap(), 0, wstr); } return ret; } /*********************************************************************** - * DrawTextW (USER32.@) - */ -INT WINAPI DrawTextW( HDC hdc, LPCWSTR str, INT count, - LPRECT rect, UINT flags ) -{ - return DrawTextExW(hdc, str, count, rect, flags, NULL); -} - -/*********************************************************************** - * DrawTextExA (USER32.@) + * DrawTextA (USER32.@) */ -INT WINAPI DrawTextExA( HDC hdc, LPCSTR str, INT count, - LPRECT rect, UINT flags, LPDRAWTEXTPARAMS dtp ) +INT WINAPI DrawTextA( HDC hdc, LPCSTR str, INT count, LPRECT rect, UINT flags ) { - TRACE("(%d,%s,%d,%p,0x%08x,%p)\n",hdc,debugstr_an(str,count),count,rect,flags,dtp); - if(dtp) { - FIXME("Ignores params:%d,%d,%d,%d\n",dtp->cbSize, - dtp->iTabLength,dtp->iLeftMargin,dtp->iRightMargin); - } - return DrawTextA(hdc,str,count,rect,flags); + return DrawTextExA( hdc, str, count, rect, flags, NULL ); } /*********************************************************************** __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/

1 0

Re: another debugstr patch
by Alexandre Julliard July 17, 2001

July 17, 2001

Andreas Mohr <a.mohr(a)mailto.de> writes: > BTW, Alexandre, why didn't you apply my "debugstr patch" from Jun 04 ? It got lost somewhere; I've applied it now. BTW for everybody, when you submitted a patch and didn't see it applied and didn't hear anything about it, *please* resubmit or ask me what's going on. Patches can get dropped for multiple reasons, and it's your responsibility to follow what happens to your patch, until it is either applied or you know why it wasn't. -- Alexandre Julliard julliard(a)winehq.com

1 0

Re: Mouse trouble
by Alexandre Julliard July 17, 2001

July 17, 2001

Ove Kaaven <ovehk(a)ping.uio.no> writes: > I did consider that, but who's going to intercept and handle that message? > It's not an operation that is or should be known outside of the x11drv, so > sending the window a custom message will either conflict with some other > message, or get the message ignored (I doubt DefWindowProc passes custom > messages back to x11drv or anything). Or did you have any particular ideas > in this area? You can set a new window procedure to intercept the message, and pass all other messages straight through to the original window procedure. -- Alexandre Julliard julliard(a)winehq.com

1 0

Re: Mouse trouble
by Alexandre Julliard July 17, 2001

July 17, 2001

Ove Kaaven <ovehk(a)ping.uio.no> writes: > Known bug in the current CVS. Turn dxgrab off. If it's on, mouse events > are lost. I'm working on it, but have not yet thought of a way to fix it; > I need to run a procedure (GrabPointer) in the context of the thread that > owns the window that gets the grab. My latest idea was to queue an APC to > the owner of the window, but QueueUserAPC requires a thread handle, while > GetWindowThreadProcessId only returns a thread ID. I'd strongly suggest using some kind of SendMessage instead of QueueUserAPC. -- Alexandre Julliard julliard(a)winehq.com

2 1

fnt2bdf.c and font names
by Bill Medland July 16, 2001

July 16, 2001

I've just been playing with fonts (sserife and vgasys) to get things working. In the process I notice that fnt2bdf seems to do some strange stuff about choosing a font name, pixel size etc. I don't want to submit a patch that merely demonstrates my stupidity/lack of understanding but am willing to put in my suggested fix. This will result in for example the MS Sans Serif 8 pt font getting a name of -windows-MS Sans Serif-medium-r-normal-sans-13-80-96-96-p-50-microsoft-cp1252 SIZE 8 96 96 as opposed to the current -windows-MS Sans Serif-medium-r-normal-sans-13-130-72-72-p-50-microsoft-cp1252 SIZE 13 96 96 (I don't understand why the 72 dpi is hard-coded) Do I submit it or am I misunderstanding something Bill

1 0

Re: Added sanity check to WINPROC_CallWndProc
by Uwe Bonnes July 16, 2001

July 16, 2001

>>>>> "Jukka" == Jukka Heinonen <jhei(a)iki.fi> writes: Jukka> DeusEx causes Wine to crash (segmentation fault) because it calls Jukka> CallWindowProc and passes null in HWND parameter. While I Jukka> suspect that this is because some Wine function that should Jukka> return a valid HWND is returning a null pointer, the crashing can Jukka> be fixed simply by adding a sanity check to WINPROC_CallWndProc. How does Windows behave on those invalid arguments? Jukka> After this patch, both DeusEx installer and DeusEx dialog for Jukka> choosing rendering engine work. However, DeusEx still crashes Jukka> later because DeusEx for some reason generates a division by zero Jukka> FP exception. DeusEx handler for this exception calls Jukka> __CxxFrameHandler which is not implemented by Wine and thus Jukka> exception handling ends into infinite recursion. Luckily stack Jukka> overflow makes Wine to crash :) Native msvcrt has __CxxFrameHandler, but I aggree that wine-msvcrt needs exception facilities too. Bye -- Uwe Bonnes bon(a)elektron.ikp.physik.tu-darmstadt.de Institut fuer Kernphysik Schlossgartenstrasse 9 64289 Darmstadt --------- Tel. 06151 162516 -------- Fax. 06151 164321 ----------

2 1

Mouse trouble
by Daniel Bingham July 16, 2001

July 16, 2001

Hi, I just got the latest CVS and when I tried to run starcraft my mouse won't move. I have dxgrab turned on so as not to have my mouse going off the screen when I try to move. I am not very knowledgeable about wine or programming, so I thought I'd tell someone who was. If I have something set up wrong I can't find it and don't find any documentation to address it either. Any help would be much appreciated. Please email me directly because I get the digest and tend to ignore it. Thanks. Daniel Bingham db78(a)att.net

3 2

Re: Added sanity check to WINPROC_CallWndProc
by Jon Griffiths July 16, 2001

July 16, 2001

Hi, >Native msvcrt has __CxxFrameHandler, but I aggree that wine-msvcrt needs >exception facilities too. While I'm still on holiday, i just bought a laptop to do some wine coding on. I had improved the exception handling in builtin msvcrt but my last run of patches to it werent accepted due to using asm instead of register funcs. Once I get my old sources mailed to me I will begin hacking on it again. I'm interested in getting the konqueror/ActiveX stuff working with builtin msvcrt, since the dot.kde.org press release singled it out as non-functional (much to my shame <g>). Meanwhile I'm strolling through shlwapi and should have some patches for that soon. Its great to see the progress made since february though, very impressive. Cheers, Jon ===== "Don't wait for the seas to part, or messiahs to come; Don't you sit around and waste this chance..." - Live jon_p_griffiths(a)yahoo.com __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/

1 0

Significant change to WINEPS - please test!
by Ian Pilcher July 16, 2001

July 16, 2001

The attached patch makes a fundamental change to the way the PostScript driver deals with character encodings -- it ignores them. Instead, the driver now operates directly on 16-bit Unicode characters. This should be a more robust strategy for handling non-Latin, and especially multi-byte, character sets. I really have no idea, however, how the rest of Wine handles non-Latin characters. As an English speaker, I'm not well equipped to test it. So please give me your feedback. I particularly want to know if it breaks anything before I submit it. Thanks! -- ======================================================================== Ian Pilcher ian.pilcher(a)home.com ======================================================================== diff -urN ../wine-20010714cvs/dlls/wineps/font.c ./dlls/wineps/font.c --- ../wine-20010714cvs/dlls/wineps/font.c Sun Jul 15 16:07:36 2001 +++ ./dlls/wineps/font.c Sun Jul 15 16:27:27 2001 @@ -5,6 +5,7 @@ * */ #include <string.h> +#include <stdlib.h> /* for bsearch() */ #include "winspool.h" #include "psdrv.h" #include "debugtools.h" @@ -294,6 +295,7 @@ return TRUE; } +#if 0 /*********************************************************************** * PSDRV_UnicodeToANSI */ @@ -321,9 +323,52 @@ return 0xff; } } +#endif + +/****************************************************************************** + * PSDRV_UVMetrics + * + * Find the AFMMETRICS for a given UV. Returns first glyph in the font + * (space?) if the font does not have a glyph for the given UV. + */ +static int MetricsByUV(const void *a, const void *b) +{ + return (int)(((const AFMMETRICS *)a)->UV - ((const AFMMETRICS *)b)->UV); +} + +const AFMMETRICS *PSDRV_UVMetrics(LONG UV, const PSDRV_PDEVICE *physDev) +{ + AFMMETRICS key; + const AFMMETRICS *needle; + + /* + * Ugly work-around for symbol fonts. Wine is sending characters which + * belong in the Unicode private use range (U+F020 - U+F0FF) as ASCII + * characters (U+0020 - U+00FF). + */ + + if ((physDev->font.afm->Metrics->UV & 0xff00) == 0xf000 && UV < 0x100) + UV |= 0xf000; + + key.UV = UV; + + needle = bsearch(&key, physDev->font.afm->Metrics, + physDev->font.afm->NumofMetrics, sizeof(AFMMETRICS), + MetricsByUV); + + if (needle == NULL) + { + WARN("No glyph for U+%.4lX in %s\n", UV, physDev->font.afm->FontName); + needle = physDev->font.afm->Metrics; + } + + return needle; +} + /*********************************************************************** * PSDRV_GetTextExtentPoint */ +#if 0 BOOL PSDRV_GetTextExtentPoint( DC *dc, LPCWSTR str, INT count, LPSIZE size ) { @@ -346,11 +391,30 @@ return TRUE; } +#endif +BOOL PSDRV_GetTextExtentPoint(DC *dc, LPCWSTR str, INT count, LPSIZE size) +{ + PSDRV_PDEVICE *physDev = (PSDRV_PDEVICE *)dc->physDev; + int i; + float width = 0.0; + + for (i = 0; i < count && str[i] != '\0'; ++i) + width += PSDRV_UVMetrics(str[i], physDev)->WX; + + width *= physDev->font.scale; + + size->cx = GDI_ROUND((FLOAT)width * dc->xformVport2World.eM11); + size->cy = GDI_ROUND((FLOAT)physDev->font.tm.tmHeight * + dc->xformVport2World.eM22); + + return TRUE; +} /*********************************************************************** * PSDRV_GetCharWidth */ +#if 0 BOOL PSDRV_GetCharWidth( DC *dc, UINT firstChar, UINT lastChar, LPINT buffer ) { @@ -365,7 +429,24 @@ return TRUE; } +#endif +BOOL PSDRV_GetCharWidth(DC *dc, UINT firstChar, UINT lastChar, LPINT buffer) +{ + PSDRV_PDEVICE *physDev = (PSDRV_PDEVICE *)dc->physDev; + UINT i; + + if (lastChar > 0xffff || firstChar > lastChar) + { + SetLastError(ERROR_INVALID_PARAMETER); + return FALSE; + } + + for (i = firstChar; i < lastChar; ++i) + *buffer++ = PSDRV_UVMetrics(i, physDev)->WX * physDev->font.scale; + + return TRUE; +} /*********************************************************************** * PSDRV_SetFont diff -urN ../wine-20010714cvs/dlls/wineps/ps.c ./dlls/wineps/ps.c --- ../wine-20010714cvs/dlls/wineps/ps.c Sun Jul 15 16:07:36 2001 +++ ./dlls/wineps/ps.c Sun Jul 15 16:25:12 2001 @@ -115,6 +115,9 @@ static char psshow[] = /* string */ "(%s) show\n"; +static const char psglyphshow[] = /* glyph name */ +"/%s glyphshow\n"; + static char pssetfont[] = /* fontname, xscale, yscale, ascent, escapement */ "/%s findfont\n" "[%d 0 0 %d 0 0]\n" @@ -634,6 +637,7 @@ return TRUE; } +#if 0 BOOL PSDRV_WriteShow(DC *dc, LPCWSTR str, INT count) { char *buf, *buf1; @@ -671,6 +675,32 @@ return TRUE; } +#endif + +BOOL PSDRV_WriteShow(DC *dc, LPCWSTR str, INT count) +{ + char buf[128]; + int i; + + for (i = 0; i < count; ++i) + { + LPCSTR name; + int l; + + name = PSDRV_UVMetrics(str[i], (PSDRV_PDEVICE *)dc->physDev)->N->sz; + l = snprintf(buf, sizeof(buf), psglyphshow, name); + + if (l < sizeof(psglyphshow) - 2 || l > sizeof(buf) - 1) + { + WARN("Unusable glyph name '%s' - ignoring\n", name); + continue; + } + + PSDRV_WriteSpool(dc, buf, l); + } + + return TRUE; +} BOOL PSDRV_WriteFill(DC *dc) { diff -urN ../wine-20010714cvs/dlls/wineps/psdrv.h ./dlls/wineps/psdrv.h --- ../wine-20010714cvs/dlls/wineps/psdrv.h Tue May 29 17:06:11 2001 +++ ./dlls/wineps/psdrv.h Sun Jul 15 16:11:36 2001 @@ -421,6 +421,7 @@ GLYPHNAME *PSDRV_GlyphName(LPCSTR szName); VOID PSDRV_IndexGlyphList(); BOOL PSDRV_GetTrueTypeMetrics(); +const AFMMETRICS *PSDRV_UVMetrics(LONG UV, const PSDRV_PDEVICE *physDev); #endif

1 0

RE: Documentation fixes
by Patrik Stridvall July 15, 2001

July 15, 2001

> Patrik Stridvall <ps(a)leissner.se> writes: > > > What kludge? Ugly OK, that is your subjective opinion, but kludge? > > Even if we only see it from a purely C language perspective, > > it solves the problem of making sure that the C library functions > > have the prototypes we expect them to have. There is no other > > way to solve that problem that I can think of so it is certainly > > not a kludge. > > Not only is it not a problem we need to solve, but it's more likely to > actually cause new problems. I wouldn't be surprised at all if your > patch broke compile on some platforms that have some slight > differences in prototypes (like char* vs. const char*). Well, believe it or not the thought actually occured to me before I submitted the patch, so I actually tested it on Solaris, FreeBSD and Linux, and the only thing I had to change was the include order or stdarg.h to make it work on all platforms. The thing is that if it actually breaks on some platform it is a red light that something might be (and probably is) wrong. We can always fix it with #ifdef:s and winapi_{check,extract,fixup} or whatever can use the #ifdef to generate a correct entry for that platform if need be. Of course the more likely scenario will be that it serves as a reminder that we really can't export the C library function directly because of platform incompabillities and simply don't do it. And no, I don't believe const/non-const is a problem. Beside even if it turn out I'm wrong we can just add a "#define const /* nothing */" at the top of each externs.c file. That, I admit, is a kludge but only a very small and harmless one. > > If you are not convinced now, you never will be. > > I think we agree on this one ;-) Probably. I don't have much hope of convincing you with the statement above either.

1 0

Re: Handling X errors using exception handlers
by Alexandre Julliard July 15, 2001

July 15, 2001

Lionel Ulmer <lionel.ulmer(a)free.fr> writes: > When discussing with Ove yesterday on #WineHQ about the handling of X > errors, he told me about an idea of his : using exceptions to handle X > errors. The main problem with that is that I don't think you can jump out of Xlib without corrupting its state. Also you'd need to properly unlock the tsx11 lock in case of exception, which will probably require an finally handler around each X call. My idea was to have the following two functions: void X11DRV_expect_error( unsigned char request, unsigned char error, XID id ); int X11DRV_check_error(void); You'd call X11DRV_expect_error before doing an X call that can fail; then if an X error happens that matches what you expect, the X error handler will simply set a flag and ignore the error (if it doesn't match you get the standard error handling). Then after the call you use X11DRV_check_error to see if your error happened or not. Would this work for what you need? -- Alexandre Julliard julliard(a)winehq.com

2 1

Wine freshman class
by Paul Gaynor July 15, 2001

July 15, 2001

Hi, I am new to the development of wine, part of the wine freshman class :) I am really interested in developing wine for use with OpenGL hopefully to push the performance of the 3-D to window$ level. I am interested in making a striped build that just handles OpenGL strictly for gaming. Any pointers that any of you can give to get me started on my journey would be wonderfully appreciated. :) How much Win$/Linux programming experience is needed with the various tasks associated with developing wine? What are the different areas (and how much programming) is required for each task of developing wine? What do you think a good place for a beginning programmer/ developer to start? I am very excited that this group exists and I am looking forward to hacking on wine :) Paul Gaynor gpk2(a)uswest.net

2 1

re: small named pipe patch
by Mike McCormack July 15, 2001

July 15, 2001

Hi Ove, funny that, i had the same problems with install shield and thought about the same solution... but i don't know enough about COM to make it work. i'll have a go at implementing WaitForNamedPipe... it'd be great to have an interprocess COM implementation :-) Mike > I'm planning to use named pipes to implement a basic interprocess COM, to > support the stupid InstallShield v6 under Wine, so it would be nice if > they could be implemented fully (would e.g. be nice if someone implemented > WaitForNamedPipe for me, and things like that). > > (Would that be a good idea?) ------------------------------------------ mailto:Mike_McCormack(a)start.com.au ph +82 16 430 0425 __________________________________________________________________ Get your free Australian email account at http://www.Looksmart.com.au

1 0

Re: Documentation fixes
by Alexandre Julliard July 15, 2001

July 15, 2001

Patrik Stridvall <ps(a)leissner.se> writes: > What kludge? Ugly OK, that is your subjective opinion, but kludge? > Even if we only see it from a purely C language perspective, > it solves the problem of making sure that the C library functions > have the prototypes we expect them to have. There is no other > way to solve that problem that I can think of so it is certainly > not a kludge. Not only is it not a problem we need to solve, but it's more likely to actually cause new problems. I wouldn't be surprised at all if your patch broke compile on some platforms that have some slight differences in prototypes (like char* vs. const char*). > If you are not convinced now, you never will be. I think we agree on this one ;-) -- Alexandre Julliard julliard(a)winehq.com

1 0

Re: implement SetCommState16 using SetCommState
by lawson_whitney＠juno.com July 15, 2001

July 15, 2001

On Sat, 14 Jul 2001, Mike McCormack wrote: > > quickly checked. > > ChangeLog: > Rewrite SetCommState16 to use SetCommState > Okay, if you get this, juno 1.49 finds no fault in this patch either. Lawson ---cut here--- ________________________________________________________________ GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO! Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less! Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit: http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.

1 0

Win95 version fix
by Francois Gouget July 14, 2001

July 14, 2001

Hi, Bob Goodwin proposes the following change to misc/version.c as a fix for bug #232 (http://wine.codeweavers.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=232) --- cut here --- Index: misc/version.c =================================================================== RCS file: /home/wine/wine/misc/version.c,v retrieving revision 1.43 diff -u -r1.43 version.c --- misc/version.c 2001/07/02 19:59:49 1.43 +++ misc/version.c 2001/07/14 20:58:49 @@ -75,7 +75,7 @@ }, /* WIN95 */ { - 0x07005F03, + 0x07000304, 0xC0000004, { sizeof(OSVERSIONINFOA), 4, 0, 0x40003B6, --- cut here --- Note that the previous value for Win95 was the same as that for Win98 which is a bit strange. Can someone check the value proposed by Bob Goodwin? Or alternately, how would I check it myself? I have access to Win95/98/2000/Me so I could also check the value for Win2000 and even add one for Wine Me. Btw, if someone needs to check values for one of the above platforms and you can provide me with a simple test program, just let me know. I can probably help you. Of course, the simpler the program is to execute, the more likely I am to be able to help you. I can also accept source (Win32) so you can develop the test program with Winelib and just send me the source, I'll recompile it on Windows. -- Francois Gouget fgouget(a)free.fr http://fgouget.free.fr/ Avoid the Gates of Hell - use Linux.

1 0

RE: Documentation fixes
by Patrik Stridvall July 14, 2001

July 14, 2001

> Patrik Stridvall <ps(a)leissner.se> writes: > > > However I'm a little curious where the documentation, > > and yes I'm talking about real documentation not just > > the external name and the ordinal, should be placed. > > Sure you have the underlying Unix man pages at least > > if we are talking about the MSVCRT and NTDLL functions, > > but it would be nice to have a proper Windows style > > man page for them eventually. > > Given that nobody is writing documention for the Windows functions > anyway, I don't think the documentation of standard C library > functions is an issue at all. Well, lack of people writing documentation is a problem in most open source projects and Wine doesn't seem to be an exception. However, denying people the possiblity to do so for some functions doesn't help either. > > I can't fix winapi_check properly. I can kludge it yes, but fix no. > > Your proposed solution is not fixing it either, it's just moving the > kludge from winapi_check directly into the source. And that's not a > good thing IMO. What kludge? Ugly OK, that is your subjective opinion, but kludge? Even if we only see it from a purely C language perspective, it solves the problem of making sure that the C library functions have the prototypes we expect them to have. There is no other way to solve that problem that I can think of so it is certainly not a kludge. Of course you can always argue that it is a solution searching for a problem, but that is not a what I would call a kludge. Anyway, arguing about misuse of words is a waste of time and I don't think I have anything more to add that are likely to convince you. If you are not convinced now, you never will be.

1 0

Re: Documentation fixes
by Alexandre Julliard July 14, 2001

July 14, 2001

Patrik Stridvall <ps(a)leissner.se> writes: > However I'm a little curious where the documentation, > and yes I'm talking about real documentation not just > the external name and the ordinal, should be placed. > Sure you have the underlying Unix man pages at least > if we are talking about the MSVCRT and NTDLL functions, > but it would be nice to have a proper Windows style > man page for them eventually. Given that nobody is writing documention for the Windows functions anyway, I don't think the documentation of standard C library functions is an issue at all. > I can't fix winapi_check properly. I can kludge it yes, but fix no. Your proposed solution is not fixing it either, it's just moving the kludge from winapi_check directly into the source. And that's not a good thing IMO. -- Alexandre Julliard julliard(a)winehq.com

1 0

RE: Documentation fixes
by Patrik Stridvall July 14, 2001

July 14, 2001

> Patrik Stridvall <ps(a)leissner.se> writes: > > > What primarily intrests me now is how should the needed > information be > > stored? The problem with normal entry point is solved, the > question is > > how the stubs and forwards should be stored? Before we know that > > we can't really write any working extraction tool can we? > > Sure we can, that's the easy part; the hard part is making it work for > the normal entry points. And I'm not going to add anything to support > stubs etc. until it's clear that we can do it for normal entry points > in a way that I consider acceptable. Fair enough. However note that I'm not suggesting that we shuld. I said "While we probably should not actually change the .c files to look like this until we have a tool of acceptable complexity that can generate the .spec files, there is quite a few preparations that need to be done before that" But OK, I will concentrate on supporting normal entry points in an acceptable way first. > > While we probably should not actually change the .c files to > > look like this until we have a tool of acceptable complexity > > that can generate the .spec files, there is quite a few preparations > > that need to be done before that and I would really like to have the > > "Exported external functions" patch applied in the meantime > > for other reasons like winapi_check likes to know where all > > the DLL:s functions are "implemented". > > Then fix winapi_check. I don't want to have to add a bunch of external > declaration for C library functions, that's very ugly. First of all ugly is subjective, I can't see what is ugly about it, but OK you decide what you want, so arguing that point is no use. However I'm a little curious where the documentation, and yes I'm talking about real documentation not just the external name and the ordinal, should be placed. Sure you have the underlying Unix man pages at least if we are talking about the MSVCRT and NTDLL functions, but it would be nice to have a proper Windows style man page for them eventually. Perhaps the some of the functions have some limitation in Windows that the Unix variant doesn't have (or vice versa) and thus if you extend the Winelib application you really want to know that, so the Unix man page will not really be enough. So yes, I'm really curious to know where you think the documentation should be placed. I think my solution is quite good since it solve three problem. 1. Provides somewhere to write the documentation 2. Provides a C compiler checkable prototype that can give a warning if any of the native system functions happends to have another prototype. 3. Helps tools like winapi_check a place to check things that the .spec files entries are correct. Even if you still considers it ugly, it might be worth it considering what you get. > So no, I'm not > going to apply your patch. I can't fix winapi_check properly. I can kludge it yes, but fix no. There is no implementation or anything else in the source that indicates that it is supposed to use functions from another DLL. But sure I can kludge winapi_check to ignore the atom functions and lstrcmpi in USER. The functions from the C Library is already kludged since a long time ago, so what the hell lets just add another kludge, it is only 5 new functions. If you don't apply it I don't have much choice have I.

1 0

Re: Documentation fixes
by Alexandre Julliard July 14, 2001

July 14, 2001

Patrik Stridvall <ps(a)leissner.se> writes: > What primarily intrests me now is how should the needed information be > stored? The problem with normal entry point is solved, the question is > how the stubs and forwards should be stored? Before we know that > we can't really write any working extraction tool can we? Sure we can, that's the easy part; the hard part is making it work for the normal entry points. And I'm not going to add anything to support stubs etc. until it's clear that we can do it for normal entry points in a way that I consider acceptable. > While we probably should not actually change the .c files to > look like this until we have a tool of acceptable complexity > that can generate the .spec files, there is quite a few preparations > that need to be done before that and I would really like to have the > "Exported external functions" patch applied in the meantime > for other reasons like winapi_check likes to know where all > the DLL:s functions are "implemented". Then fix winapi_check. I don't want to have to add a bunch of external declaration for C library functions, that's very ugly. So no, I'm not going to apply your patch. -- Alexandre Julliard julliard(a)winehq.com

1 0

Re: hello all
by Travis Michielsen July 14, 2001

July 14, 2001

Hi all, After reading Brandon's message I was inspired to introduce myself to this list as well. Although I have been following wine for several months now, I have just recently started wine development (only 1 small patch so far :-( ). Currently I am focusing on learning the API before I persue patches that are significantly larger, but have started a todo list. I am an avid C/C++ programmer and have experimented with serveral other languages including Java(script), Pascal, Basic, etc. I have done allot of programming for Windows/DOS in the past but when I discovered linux about 2 years ago, I immediately switched OS's and began pursuing linux programming. I do, however, still run windows occasionally, when I have trouble running programs under wine, but I believe that someday (hopefully sooner rather than latter), we will be able to use linux (and wine) to run almost every program without thought. Anyways, Welcome Brandon, and Hello All. :) Travis Michielsen __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/

1 0

[PATCH] dde unicode warning
by Gerard Patel July 14, 2001

July 14, 2001

ChangeLog: * dlls/user/dde/misc.c Fix unicode warning

1 0

[PATCH] Toolbar : image list can be changed after TB_SETIMAGELIST;
by Gerard Patel July 14, 2001

July 14, 2001

The imagelist of a toolbar can be changed by the app after it has set it to the toolbar (using TB_SETIMAGELIST). In this case the bitmap number can be wrong, leading to some apps not displaying text correctly (although the bitmaps were still showing because of Wine code not really testing for bitmap number in this case). Fix for Winzip 8.0, replaces the preceding one (same problem) ChangeLog: * dlls/comctl32/toolbar.c Refresh bitmap count to take in account imagelist changes after TB_SETIMAGELIST

1 0

RE: Documentation fixes
by Patrik Stridvall July 14, 2001

July 14, 2001

> Patrik Stridvall <ps(a)leissner.se> writes: > > > Well, there is the issue of maintaining redundant information. > > Sure winapi_check can (and indeed was the original reason for it) > > find missmatchs. But given the number of errors I have seen people > > make that winapi_check detected, we really should avoid having > > redundant information if we can. > > If there is an easy way to avoid it, sure. But if it requires a Perl > script as complex as winapi_check, especially the maintaining of the > *.api files, I'm not sure it's a win. Well the *.api files (or at least the manual maintainance of them) will be eliminated some day. I will just have to implement parsing of the "typedefs" in the headers. However, note that I'm not suggesting that we change to automatic generation of spec files right now, but at some point in the future. What tool we should for it is a later problem. With the exception of which types maps to which "kinds" (long ptr str wstr) the tool will not nessarily be very complex and I'm not sure what the parsing of typedefs to find out will be very complex either. But I wont know until I try. What primarily intrests me now is how should the needed information be stored? The problem with normal entry point is solved, the question is how the stubs and forwards should be stored? Before we know that we can't really write any working extraction tool can we? While I'm not entirely happy with your: /* ##spec## foo "@ forward bar(ptr str) BAZ.bar" */ solution it is the better that any ideas I have. Simplicity has its charm. :-) Then we could just, taking USER as example add /* ##spec## user "name user" */ /* ##spec## user "type win16" */ /* ##spec## user "heap 65520" */ /* ##spec## user "file user.exe" */ /* ##spec## user "owner user32" */ /* ##spec## user "rsrc resources/version16.res" */ /* ##spec## user "2 stub OldExitWindows" */ /* ##spec## user "3 stub EnableOEMLayer" */ /* ##spec## user "4 stub DisableOEMLayer" */ /* ... */ in a appropriate place in say dlls/user/user_main.c. The order that winapi_extract finds the directive is not important the .spec file format happends to make it possible to always get everything in the right order anyway. However this solves the header, the debug_channels, forwards and stubs problem and could be used to solve the remaining problems with "Exported external functions" but I would rather have it solved with my patch with that name, that you didn't apply when applying the other patches. So will accept such a solution? While we probably should not actually change the .c files to look like this until we have a tool of acceptable complexity that can generate the .spec files, there is quite a few preparations that need to be done before that and I would really like to have the "Exported external functions" patch applied in the meantime for other reasons like winapi_check likes to know where all the DLL:s functions are "implemented". > And it seems to me you are > finding a lot more errors in the comments than in the spec files ;-) Well, considering that our developers have neglected the comments for many year and only changing the spec files that is not very suprising. That is the problem with having redundant information, most developers only change where it really count either out of ignorance or lack of time. > > In addition it will be much easier for the developers (especially > > newbies). If you change the prototype in the .c files or the > > ordinal in the comment above it, it will be enough. Stub files > > will be something normal developers needn't concern himself with. > > If normal developers need to change the spec file for an existing > function, something is seriously wrong. The spec entry is dictated by > the dll interface, and there is no reason to change it (except maybe > to change a 'ptr' into an 'str', but this is a cosmetic issue). Well, you also have implementing new functions. You have FooA and want to implement FooW for example. It is much easier and much more natural to be able to just cut and paste without having to change the spec files. I have seen many such errors detected by winapi_check over the years.

1 0

Handling X errors using exception handlers
by Lionel Ulmer July 14, 2001

July 14, 2001

Hi all, When discussing with Ove yesterday on #WineHQ about the handling of X errors, he told me about an idea of his : using exceptions to handle X errors. This way, when we have to explicitely handle X errors (as we will need to do for XVidmode and XDGA2 due to some (stupidly done IMHO :-) ) security fixes in XFree 4.x), we could do that using exceptions. Before doing this 'properly' (ie change the X11 drv, update the XShm error mechanism, the debugger, ...), here is what I did for now : 1) I created a new Wine-private exception type in include/wine/exception.h : /* unhandled X error */ #define EXCEPTION_WINE_X11DRV 0x80000104 2) I created a new X error handler that is installed at X11DRV initialization : static int X11DRV_XErrorHandler(Display *dpy, XErrorEvent *event) { EXCEPTION_RECORD rec; rec.ExceptionCode = EXCEPTION_WINE_X11DRV; rec.ExceptionFlags = 0; rec.ExceptionRecord = NULL; rec.ExceptionAddress = XGLErrorHandler; rec.NumberParameters = 4; rec.ExceptionInformation[0] = (DWORD)event->serial; rec.ExceptionInformation[1] = (DWORD)event->error_code; rec.ExceptionInformation[2] = (DWORD)event->request_code; rec.ExceptionInformation[3] = (DWORD)event->minor_code; RtlRaiseException(&rec); return 0; } 3) I changed the XVidMode detection code thus : /* handle only X errors */ static WINE_EXCEPTION_FILTER(xerror_handler) { switch (GetExceptionCode()) { case EXCEPTION_WINE_X11DRV: return EXCEPTION_EXECUTE_HANDLER; default: return EXCEPTION_CONTINUE_SEARCH; } } (...) void X11DRV_XF86VM_Init(void) { (...) wine_tsx11_lock(); (...) __TRY { if (!XF86VidModeQueryVersion(gdi_display, &xf86vm_major, &xf86vm_minor)) { xf86vm_major = 0; } XSync(gdi_display, False); } __EXCEPT(xerror_handler) { xf86vm_major = 0; } __ENDTRY wine_tsx11_unlock(); if (xf86vm_major == 0) { TRACE("No XVidmode\n"); return; } (...) } So what do you all think of this ? Is this something that I should add to the whole Wine tree ? The only problem with that is that it would make debugging X errors a bit more difficult as we won't have the standard X error message in debug reports from users... Lionel -- Lionel Ulmer - http://www.bbrox.org/

1 0

cvs changes
by mdew July 14, 2001

July 14, 2001

i havent had any problems until i updated to the latest CVS.., what exactly changed to cause this to pop up? (Using mIRC etc) fixme:console:SetConsoleCtrlHandler (0x3000f330,0) - no error checking or testing yet

1 0

Re: GetCommState16 ....
by Mike McCormack July 14, 2001

July 14, 2001

Hey Lawson, thanks for sending Juno... i got it, but i haven't tried it yet... i thought i'd just keep patching a bit at a time until somebody complained :-) If anybody knows of any free win3.1 terminal programs, please tell me. Anyhow, this is my TODO list: * use SetCommState in SetCommState16 * save and restore m_stat using Get/SetCommState in OpenComm16 * use ReadFileEx/WriteFileEx instead of service thread * finally, move 16bit comm implementation to USER Mike > Good day! > > If you get this, neither this patch nor any of the recently committed > patches that muck with 16 bit comms bother my 16 bit comms app. > > Mike, did you not get juno.tar.gz or do you just not want to be bothered > filling in the junk to make a new account? > > Regards, > > Lawson ------------------------------------------ mailto:Mike_McCormack(a)start.com.au ph +82 16 430 0425 __________________________________________________________________ Get your free Australian email account at http://www.Looksmart.com.au

1 0

Re: PATCH: createwindow small unicode prob
by Alexandre Julliard July 14, 2001

July 14, 2001

Marcus Meissner <marcus(a)jet.franken.de> writes: > Changelog: > WM_NCCREATE has a A/W struct, so check unicode flag for which call > to use. In what case did this cause a problem? The desktop window proc is Unicode-only, and the structure doesn't contain strings anyway, so it shouldn't make a difference. -- Alexandre Julliard julliard(a)winehq.com

1 0

Re: Documentation fixes
by Alexandre Julliard July 14, 2001

July 14, 2001

Patrik Stridvall <ps(a)leissner.se> writes: > Well, there is the issue of maintaining redundant information. > Sure winapi_check can (and indeed was the original reason for it) > find missmatchs. But given the number of errors I have seen people > make that winapi_check detected, we really should avoid having > redundant information if we can. If there is an easy way to avoid it, sure. But if it requires a Perl script as complex as winapi_check, especially the maintaining of the *.api files, I'm not sure it's a win. And it seems to me you are finding a lot more errors in the comments than in the spec files ;-) > In addition it will be much easier for the developers (especially > newbies). If you change the prototype in the .c files or the > ordinal in the comment above it, it will be enough. Stub files > will be something normal developers needn't concern himself with. If normal developers need to change the spec file for an existing function, something is seriously wrong. The spec entry is dictated by the dll interface, and there is no reason to change it (except maybe to change a 'ptr' into an 'str', but this is a cosmetic issue). -- Alexandre Julliard julliard(a)winehq.com

1 0

RE: Documentation fixes
by Patrik Stridvall July 13, 2001

July 13, 2001

> Patrik Stridvall <ps(a)leissner.se> writes: > > > For normal entry point, however, I respectfully disagree. > > One of the major reasons of having automatically > > generated .spec files is to avoid having to > > store redundant information. The needed information > > is already in the C function declaration and storing > > in a comment as well brings us back to the current > > situation. Sure it makes that generator less > > complicatated but it really isn't that important > > as long as it is reliable and not ambigeous. > > IMO, this is true if we can make the generator work purely on the > source code, so that you can give it the unmodified source of a > Windows dll and it spits out the spec file. If you need to add > comments before each and every exported function, then I don't see > much advantage to parsing the source. You might as well put all the > information in the comment (or leave it in the current spec file for > that matter). Well, the ordinal of each function and for that that matter which functions that should be exported must be specified somewhere. Currently winapi_extract takes this information from the comment lines looking like this in the nearest preceding comment: * Foo (BAR.@) All non-static functions with such preceding comment line(s) is considered exported using the name specified in the comment as the external name. Of course, I can take this information from anywhere, but for obvious reason I can't guess it. If the unmodified source contains Microsoft Visual C++ __declspec(dllexport) directives or the project has a Microsoft Export file (a .def file) I can generate a spec file. This is not supported yet, but is no particular problem supporting in itself. A little worse problem is that I currently doesn't extract the function "kinds" (long ptr double str wstr) from the source but use the tools/winapi_check/win{16,32}/*.api files to determine the "kinds". This is not a teoretical problem, however it might take some time to fix all the same. But after that winapi_extract will be able to take unmodified source if __declspec(dllexport) directives or a .def file exists. However I think we concentrate primarily on the Wine source. I think as far the it is concerned it will suffice to use comment lines like * Foo (BAR.@) to extract the normal entries for the spec files. The stubs and forwards need to have special handling but then so must it in the case of __declspec(dllexport) directives or a .def file as well. There is no problem for winapi_extract to support all the above either (except implementation time of course). > Basically, if the source parsing allows doing more than we do now > (like build spec files for new dlls) it's worthwhile; if all it does > is generate the existing spec files some other way I don't think > there's much point. After all, we have the spec files already, and > they are not going to change much. Well, there is the issue of maintaining redundant information. Sure winapi_check can (and indeed was the original reason for it) find missmatchs. But given the number of errors I have seen people make that winapi_check detected, we really should avoid having redundant information if we can. In addition it will be much easier for the developers (especially newbies). If you change the prototype in the .c files or the ordinal in the comment above it, it will be enough. Stub files will be something normal developers needn't concern himself with. > Another use of the source parser could be to generate more detailed > debugging information for +relay; but in this case I'd say it should > go to a completely different file, used by some external relay dumping > program. I don't want all the extra debug information to clutter up > the spec files. That is another thing that I have planned to do with winapi_extract. I don't have any good idea how this should look like yet. You (or somebody else) are welcome to write a specification on exactly what you want so I can fix the how when I have time.

1 0

Re: Documentation fixes
by Alexandre Julliard July 13, 2001

July 13, 2001

Patrik Stridvall <ps(a)leissner.se> writes: > For normal entry point, however, I respectfully disagree. > One of the major reasons of having automatically > generated .spec files is to avoid having to > store redundant information. The needed information > is already in the C function declaration and storing > in a comment as well brings us back to the current > situation. Sure it makes that generator less > complicatated but it really isn't that important > as long as it is reliable and not ambigeous. IMO, this is true if we can make the generator work purely on the source code, so that you can give it the unmodified source of a Windows dll and it spits out the spec file. If you need to add comments before each and every exported function, then I don't see much advantage to parsing the source. You might as well put all the information in the comment (or leave it in the current spec file for that matter). Basically, if the source parsing allows doing more than we do now (like build spec files for new dlls) it's worthwhile; if all it does is generate the existing spec files some other way I don't think there's much point. After all, we have the spec files already, and they are not going to change much. Another use of the source parser could be to generate more detailed debugging information for +relay; but in this case I'd say it should go to a completely different file, used by some external relay dumping program. I don't want all the extra debug information to clutter up the spec files. -- Alexandre Julliard julliard(a)winehq.com

1 0

Re: GetCommState16 ....
by lawson_whitney＠juno.com July 13, 2001

July 13, 2001

Good day! If you get this, neither this patch nor any of the recently committed patches that muck with 16 bit comms bother my 16 bit comms app. Mike, did you not get juno.tar.gz or do you just not want to be bothered filling in the junk to make a new account? Regards, Lawson ---cut--- ________________________________________________________________ GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO! Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less! Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit: http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.

1 0

hello all
by Brandon Kilgore July 13, 2001

July 13, 2001

Hi everyone, Just letting you all know that there's a new listener out here, eager to pick up on what you're discussing. I'm only 17, so I'll be pretty much staying out of the way, but I love programming so hopefully you won't mind if I stick my hand up to ask a question or respond to someone every once in a while. Just so you can know a bit about me...I used to be a purely QBasic programmer in my "early" days, but a few years ago I began broadening my horizons, mostly with HTML and Visual Basic. For a long time I had wanted to learn C but never really got around to it, but a little over a year ago I finally sat down and started learning, and now its one of the only languages I ever use. Some other languages I currently program in (or would come back to me if need be :-) : C/C++/Visual C++ (Q)Basic/Visual Basic HTML Perl BF (there's an interesting language...) Java/JavaScript WISE InstallMaster scripting ;-) Anyways, I'll let you all get back to the important development discussions. I'll be talking to you... - Brandon

2 2

RE: Documentation fixes
by Patrik Stridvall July 13, 2001

July 13, 2001

> Patrik Stridvall <ps(a)leissner.se> writes: > > > Like: > > > > > /************************************************************* > ********** > > * strcpy (MSVCRT.@) > > */ > > #if 0 /* Suppress warnings */ > > extern char *strcpy(char *dest, const char *src); > > #endif > > > > Perhaps we could do the same with atom functions and lstrcmpi? > > The #if 0 #endif isn't even needed for them I believe. > > That's quite ugly IMO. The #if 0 #endif or having to have a documentation comment at all? Anyway the #if 0 is not needed I thought it might be needed in some cases but it is not. I mistakingly believed it might be type conflicts but it can't be since any exported function must of course use the C library types otherwise you can't export them directly. If you are refering to the documentation comment, I can't really see why. All other functions have it and adding additional documentation might be a good idea in some cases as well. Furthermore the extern declaration makes it possible for the C compiler to check that the prototype is the same as the prototype in the included files. I spotted several error when doing the patch because of this. As hinted above, I have implemented a working solution that does what I have described above. See separate mail. > As long as we require comments, we might as > well put everything explicitly in the comment, something like: > > /* ##spec## msvcrt "@ cdecl strcpy(ptr str) strcpy" */ > > (we can probably come up with a better syntax, but you get the idea). > Then we can simply grep for '##spec##' and extract everything into the > spec file. We can do the same for forwards etc. (and in fact we could > do it for normal entry points as well). For forwards, stubs and other special cases, perhaps. I don't like it very much but it is acceptable. But we need not decide that now. I will think more about it and come back later with some kind of proposal that might or might not match yours. I'm not sure, we will see. For normal entry point, however, I respectfully disagree. One of the major reasons of having automatically generated .spec files is to avoid having to store redundant information. The needed information is already in the C function declaration and storing in a comment as well brings us back to the current situation. Sure it makes that generator less complicatated but it really isn't that important as long as it is reliable and not ambigeous. PS. For the record: I consider winapi_extract a prototype not something that nessary will finally use in "production". We might of course use it, but I would rather rewrite it so it becomes simpler and more reliable. Perhaps it shouldn't be in Perl but in C instead? Oh, well, that is a minor issue compared to how the information should be stored.

1 0

To strip or not to strip
by Jeremy White July 13, 2001

July 13, 2001

We've always built the CodeWeavers Wine RPM unstripped, in the theory that it made supporting Wine newbies easier. However, AFAICT from watching cemw, we never get into a situation where a newbie goes into winedbg; more often, they shift first to the CVS tip, and from there maybe to winedbg. So, it seems like shipping debug symbols may just be a waste of bandwidth. (Note, we build with all full logging enabled, and we'll never change that). However, before we go ahead and yank the debug info out of our RPM, I thought I'd post a note, and let someone tell me if I'm wrong. Thanks, Jer

1 0

Re: Documentation fixes
by Alexandre Julliard July 12, 2001

July 12, 2001

Patrik Stridvall <ps(a)leissner.se> writes: > Like: > > /*********************************************************************** > * strcpy (MSVCRT.@) > */ > #if 0 /* Suppress warnings */ > extern char *strcpy(char *dest, const char *src); > #endif > > Perhaps we could do the same with atom functions and lstrcmpi? > The #if 0 #endif isn't even needed for them I believe. That's quite ugly IMO. As long as we require comments, we might as well put everything explicitly in the comment, something like: /* ##spec## msvcrt "@ cdecl strcpy(ptr str) strcpy" */ (we can probably come up with a better syntax, but you get the idea). Then we can simply grep for '##spec##' and extract everything into the spec file. We can do the same for forwards etc. (and in fact we could do it for normal entry points as well). -- Alexandre Julliard julliard(a)winehq.com

2 1

RE: Documentation fixes
by Patrik Stridvall July 12, 2001

July 12, 2001

> > The problem is that if I say that the memory directory doesn't > > "belong" to dlls/user/user.spec winapi_{check,extract,fixup} will > > not find implementations for all functions, which will cause > > problems. > > > > For example how should winapi_extract know that I should > generate the line > > 471 pascal16 lstrcmpi(str str) lstrcmpiA > > when it generates the spec files? > > Well, it's a more general problem, namely that the spec files can > reference functions that are not implemented directly in the dll. > > You also have for instance: > > @ cdecl strcpy(ptr str) strcpy > > in MSVCRT, and strcpy is clearly not implemented there since it's in > the C library. So you cannot assume that only the functions contained > in the dll can be used in the spec files, it is legal for the spec > file to reference external functions. True. I didn't even thought of that particular problem. Functions like strcpy is currently suppressed by having it listed in tools/winapi_check/nativeapi.dat, but that is a little kludgy. [Thinking...] Well you could simply have an function documentation comment without a function implementation in some file that belongs to MSVCRT. Like: /*********************************************************************** * strcpy (MSVCRT.@) */ #if 0 /* Suppress warnings */ extern char *strcpy(char *dest, const char *src); #endif Perhaps we could do the same with atom functions and lstrcmpi? The #if 0 #endif isn't even needed for them I believe. > > I think that we need to move the solution of this problem one step > > up the "ladder" and discuss the more general problem: > > How should we store the information needed to generate > > the spec files in the source, especially concerning > > the forwards and stubs? > > You'll need a file somewhere that specifies all the entries that > cannot be determined automatically from the source. You simply cannot > build a 100% correct spec file based only on the function comments. Yes. I have some ideas, but no really good one. My currently best suggestion is having a .spec.in file that approximately looks like the .spec files but supports configure like substitutions. foo.spec.in: ---8<--- name foo type win32 init @init@ rsrc foo.res import baz.dll @debug_channels@ 101 forward Bar BAZ.Bar 102 stub BarFoo @fixed@ @ forward Foo BAZ.Foo @ stub FooBar @unfixed@ ---8<--- And simply let winapi_extract or whatever simple substitute @init@, @debug_channels@, @fixed@ and @unfixed@ with what can be extracted from the source. > And you definitely do not want to need to parse KERNEL source files > (like the ones in memory/) to build the USER spec file. Of course. The question was whether the memory directory belongs to USER or not. I have now accepted that it does not.

1 0

Re: Documentation fixes
by Alexandre Julliard July 12, 2001

July 12, 2001

Patrik Stridvall <ps(a)leissner.se> writes: > > No, USER does not use the memory directory. It links directly to > > libkernel32.so because it needs some internal functions in there, > > Like the atom functions that are implemented in memory/atom.c I guess > you mean. Actually no, the atom functions are similar to lstrcmpi, they are exported from kernel so we don't need to link to libkernel32.so to get them (and they shouldn't have USER comments either). The real problem is the internal kernel functions called by user, things like THUNK_Alloc or LOCAL_Alloc. > The problem is that if I say that the memory directory doesn't > "belong" to dlls/user/user.spec winapi_{check,extract,fixup} will > not find implementations for all functions, which will cause > problems. > > For example how should winapi_extract know that I should generate the line > 471 pascal16 lstrcmpi(str str) lstrcmpiA > when it generates the spec files? Well, it's a more general problem, namely that the spec files can reference functions that are not implemented directly in the dll. You also have for instance: @ cdecl strcpy(ptr str) strcpy in MSVCRT, and strcpy is clearly not implemented there since it's in the C library. So you cannot assume that only the functions contained in the dll can be used in the spec files, it is legal for the spec file to reference external functions. > I think that we need to move the solution of this problem one step > up the "ladder" and discuss the more general problem: > How should we store the information needed to generate > the spec files in the source, especially concerning > the forwards and stubs? You'll need a file somewhere that specifies all the entries that cannot be determined automatically from the source. You simply cannot build a 100% correct spec file based only on the function comments. And you definitely do not want to need to parse KERNEL source files (like the ones in memory/) to build the USER spec file. -- Alexandre Julliard julliard(a)winehq.com

1 0

RE: Documentation fixes
by Patrik Stridvall July 12, 2001

July 12, 2001

> Patrik Stridvall <ps(a)leissner.se> writes: > > > PS. And yes, the added lstrcmpi (USER.471) in memory/string.c > > should really be there. Both KERNEL and USER uses the memory > > directory. > > No, USER does not use the memory directory. It links directly to > libkernel32.so because it needs some internal functions in there, Like the atom functions that are implemented in memory/atom.c I guess you mean. > but > that's a different problem. lstrcmpi is a purely KERNEL function, that > happens to be imported by USER (and by other dlls too), That might be so, but it is also _exported_ by USER: grep lstrcmpi dlls/user/user.spec 471 pascal16 lstrcmpi(str str) lstrcmpiA and lstrcmpiA is not implemented anyware else The same goes for the atom functions: grep Atom dlls/user/user.spec 268 pascal16 GlobalAddAtom(str) GlobalAddAtomA 269 pascal16 GlobalDeleteAtom(word) GlobalDeleteAtom 270 pascal16 GlobalFindAtom(str) GlobalFindAtomA 271 pascal16 GlobalGetAtomName(word ptr s_word) GlobalGetAtomNameA > so USER must > not be mentioned in the comment IMO. The problem is that if I say that the memory directory doesn't "belong" to dlls/user/user.spec winapi_{check,extract,fixup} will not find implementations for all functions, which will cause problems. For example how should winapi_extract know that I should generate the line 471 pascal16 lstrcmpi(str str) lstrcmpiA when it generates the spec files? Of course the automatic generation of spec files is not 100% complete most importantly handling of forwards and stubs is not supported. I think that we need to move the solution of this problem one step up the "ladder" and discuss the more general problem: How should we store the information needed to generate the spec files in the source, especially concerning the forwards and stubs? I will address this issue in a separate mail, but you are welcome to add comments specific to this problem in this thread, I'm not sure I feel to writing it today. I have been postponing the writing of mail for quite some time and I'm currenly beginning to get rather tired. PS. Why not as an interim solution simply add support for forward in the Win16 spec files so 471 pascal16 lstrcmpi(str str) lstrcmpiA becomes 471 forward lstrcmpi(str str) USER32.lstrcmpiA which winebuild until actual need simply interprets as 471 pascal16 lstrcmpi(str str) lstrcmpiA Hmm. Perhaps we should have forward16 and forward to separate the pascal16 and pascal cases? Anyway this gives winapi_{check,fixup} enough information to handle the situation where the memory directory doesn't "belong" to dlls/user/user.spec.

1 0

Re: New problems with the debugger
by Uwe Bonnes July 12, 2001

July 12, 2001

>>>>> "Alexandre" == Alexandre Julliard <julliard(a)winehq.com> writes: Alexandre> Uwe Bonnes <bon(a)elektron.ikp.physik.tu-darmstadt.de> writes: >> WineDbg starting... file_set_error: No such process Can't attach >> process 8068d98: error 317 Alexandre> I don't see this here. Could you please run wineserver under Alexandre> gdb, put a breakpoint on the file_set_error message Alexandre> (server/file.c line 334), and send me the backtrace at this Alexandre> point? Thanks. Breakpoint 1, file_set_error () at file.c:334 334 default: perror("file_set_error"); set_error( ERROR_UNKNOWN /* FIXME */ ); break; (gdb) bt #0 file_set_error () at file.c:334 #1 0x804b1e5 in get_thread_context (thread=0x97fa210, flags=65537, context=0xbffff350) at context_i386.c:142 #2 0x804b567 in get_thread_single_step (thread=0x97fa210) at context_i386.c:481 #3 0x8051d2e in continue_thread (thread=0x97fa210) at ptrace.c:177 #4 0x8050e9f in resume_process (process=0x8068d98) at process.c:518 #5 0x804bfc6 in debugger_attach (process=0x8068d98, debugger=0x97fa778) at debugger.c:420 #6 0x804c278 in req_debug_process (req=0xbffff4d8) at debugger.c:540 #7 0x805669f in read_request (thread=0x97fa778) at request.c:168 #8 0x805922b in thread_poll_event (obj=0x97fa778, event=1) at thread.c:157 #9 0x8057642 in select_loop () at select.c:262 #10 0x804e5af in main (argc=1, argv=0xbffff6d4) at main.c:108 #11 0x40178baf in __libc_start_main () from /lib/libc.so.6 Perhaps to notice: I run 2.4.6 on a SMP machine, Suse 7.1 Hope this helps Bye -- Uwe Bonnes bon(a)elektron.ikp.physik.tu-darmstadt.de Institut fuer Kernphysik Schlossgartenstrasse 9 64289 Darmstadt --------- Tel. 06151 162516 -------- Fax. 06151 164321 ----------

1 0

Re: Documentation fixes
by Alexandre Julliard July 12, 2001

July 12, 2001

Patrik Stridvall <ps(a)leissner.se> writes: > PS. And yes, the added lstrcmpi (USER.471) in memory/string.c > should really be there. Both KERNEL and USER uses the memory > directory. No, USER does not use the memory directory. It links directly to libkernel32.so because it needs some internal functions in there, but that's a different problem. lstrcmpi is a purely KERNEL function, that happens to be imported by USER (and by other dlls too), so USER must not be mentioned in the comment IMO. -- Alexandre Julliard julliard(a)winehq.com

1 0

New problems with the debugger
by Uwe Bonnes July 12, 2001

July 12, 2001

Hallo, since the update yesterday evening ( and a fresh update recently), on a crash the debugger has problems like this one: 08067330:Call kernel32.UnhandledExceptionFilter(404e4b00) ret=7800f2b8 fixme:pthread_kill_other_threads_np FIXME:pthread_rwlock_rdlock FIXME:pthread_rwlock_unlock Could not stat /home/bon/ikda/vol2 (No such file or directory), ignoring drive Y: FIXME:pthread_rwlock_rdlock FIXME:pthread_rwlock_unlock Could not stat /home/bon/ikda/sys (No such file or directory), ignoring drive Z: WineDbg starting... file_set_error: No such process Can't attach process 8068d98: error 317 Beendet Is this known? Bye -- Uwe Bonnes bon(a)elektron.ikp.physik.tu-darmstadt.de Institut fuer Kernphysik Schlossgartenstrasse 9 64289 Darmstadt --------- Tel. 06151 162516 -------- Fax. 06151 164321 ----------

1 0

Re: The [Windows] section
by Alexandre Julliard July 12, 2001

July 12, 2001

"Bill Medland" <medbi01(a)accpac.com> writes: > The answer, for those interested > > In Windows 95 a load of configuration information moved from win.ini (esp > the [windows] section) to the registry. Now (when the edits are added to > the cvs) information should come from the [windows] section of win.ini if > the winelook is WIN31 and from the registry in general otherwise, with the > Tweak.Layout overriding both. Actually I have hacked your patch a bit when committing it (hope you don't mind ;-), with the idea of phasing out the Tweak.Layout stuff. So now the values come from the registry for Win95, and from win.ini (plus some hard-coded values) for Win3.1. -- Alexandre Julliard julliard(a)winehq.com

1 0

Re: PATCH: internetgetconnectionstate
by Gerard Patel July 12, 2001

July 12, 2001

At 11:37 PM 09/07/2001 +0200, you (Marcus Meissner) wrote: >Hi, > >QuickTimePlayer 5 is using InternetGetConnectedState to check whether to >download its 'homepage'. > >Just say we are connected, and on a LAN. > >Ciao, Marcus > >Changelog: > Have InternetGetConnectedState always return 'LAN connection'. Theoretically this could cause trouble when used with a computer having no connection to the Internet, as an app could think it can connect, try to do it, fail and terminate or display annoying messages. It's not really a strong objection, as most decent computers are connected to the Internet these days, but maybe a config option could be better ? Just a thought. Gerard

3 2