January 2003 - Wine-Devel - list.winehq.org

Re: Symbol stripping?

by Shachar Shemesh

Eric Pouech wrote: > aren't you, by any chance, compiling with gcc >= 3.1 ? > if so, you need to force emission of stabs as a debugging format while > running configure > something like this should work > CFLAGS=-gstabs+ ./configure Maybe we should patch configure.ac to detect this and add the apropriate compile switch? > > A+

Jan. 7, 2003

Re: Web CVS annotation

by Shachar Shemesh

I'm not sure that's right, and I am sure that this is very unwanted. The reason I don't think this is right is that the rw access is required in order to create a lock file. Allowing it will have several very bad side effects. * Anyone who breaks into the web site will have instant write access to the CVS - VERY BAD!!! * The chances that, when Alexander runs "cvs ci", he will have to wait for CVS locks to be cleared. Instead, running cvs annotate with the -n switch (i.e. - "cvs -n annotate filename") doesn't create a lock file, and will probably not require rw access. Shachar Eric Pouech wrote: > Jeff Smith wrote: > >> I know nothing of cvs administration, but would it be possible >> (without too much effort) to add annotation to the web cvs >> interface? I find that knowing the last time a particular >> piece of code changed can make regression testing and assorted >> other tasks happen a lot faster. >> > > from the docs, it seems we need to have the user running the httpd > server have rw to the CVSROOT/history directory... > that shouldn't be too hard to do... > > just a matter of time... I've added a bug request for this (#1214) > > A+

Jan. 7, 2003

Re: Mac OS X/Darwin port of Wine

by Mike Hearn

> Do you have any references for those statistics? The figures came from this: A few months ago (don't recall exactly when) Apple were under pressure from Redmond to sell more copies of OS X so they could make the money back on Office X. They revealed that 1 in 10 mac users were using OS X. That's 0.4% of the worlds installed user base. That's probably gone up somewhat by then, but I've been told recently by somebody who'd know that the vast majority of Macs are still running OS 9. Around a similar time (perhaps a few months earlier again) IDC estimated (don't have a url handy sorry) that linux had roughly 2% of the desktop market. Even if we assume that was generous That's still nearly 5x the user base of MacOSX. I don't really care one way or another, but just thought I'd point out that you shouldn't make assumptions one way or another when nobody really knows what's going on out there. > I'm quite unlikely to set up a Linux/PPC box myself, although I am > *very* interested in hearing from folks working on Wine for *any* PPC > OS. Hmm, is there any reason for that? Linux/PPC would seem the logical place to start as WineLib already works on this platform, so the Bochs integration would have a solid foundation to work on. As you've said, raw Darwin (at least on x86) is more a showpiece than anything actually useful, and that probably won't change for some time (if ever). > I have been interested in ways to have Linux compatibility on Mac OS X > (it is a microkernel system after all), so I will spend a little time > investigating that. For Linux binary support you'd have to do a FreeBSD style ABI export. Considering that like 95% of the software available for it is open source though, it's normally easiest to recompile fink-style. Jeremy: > I've been waiting oh so long for that to tick from 1% to 2%; > that will signal the beginning of the desktop revolution to me. It'll happen (google told me they basically trunc then balance the numbers, but who knows how it's really calculated). Until then take solace in the fact that Linux is the 4th most popular technology search which beats Microsoft healthily :) have fun! -mike -- Mike Hearn <m.hearn(a)signal.qinetiq.com> QinetiQ - Malvern Technology Center

Jan. 7, 2003

Re: getting started

by Francois Gouget

On Tue, 7 Jan 2003, Dimitrie O. Paun wrote: [...] > Compiling under the SDK using MS tools gives us little value. We already > know that works. If you don't want to spend the cash on MSVC (and not make > MS any richer :)), and are willing to invest some time into it, I suggest > the following path: > 1. Get the latest mingw 2.0 distribution from http://www.mingw.org > 2. Modify the makefiles that come in the book to work with GNU make, > and the mingw tool chain. Make sure you use forward slashes (/)! :) > 3. Build on Windows with your newly created Makefiles, and verify > that everthing runs under Windows just fine. > 4. If you feel like it, document what steps you took to convert the > makefiles. Maybe we'll put that on the Winelib page, to help > others in the future. > 5. Take the exact same Makefiles you used under Windows, change > 3 lines in them (CC=winegcc, CXX=wineg++, WINDRES=wrc), and > try to compile under Linux. Use the latest Wine tree, and > you should have native Linux apps. If you get errors in this > step, they are Wine error, please report them, and let's try > to fix them. This is the real value of this exercise. > 6. Once everything builds, run the apps, and make sure they run fine. > If they have problems, and you feel brave, let the debugging begin! Or: 1. get the sources to a Linux machine 2. run winemaker on the sources to generate Makefiles 3. use the Makefiles to compile the examples using Winelib In this step you may find that winemaker made some mistakes about how to generate the Makefiles. You can either fix the makefiles (the simplest option), or try to improve winemaker. I bet the examples come with .dsp and .dsw files and improving winemaker to understand these would greatly improve its accuracy. 4. fix the compilation and link errors thus improving Winelib. 5. once everything, builds run the apps, and make sure they run fine. If they have problems, and you feel brave, let the debugging begin! This is pretty much what I have done with three programming books. However I have not had time to work on this for a long time and the Winelib compilation procedure has changed so much that probably nothing compiles anymore... But you are welcome to have a look at what I did and see if there is something salvageable: http://fgouget.free.fr/wine/booktesting-en.shtml > Welcome to the team! Yep. The more the merrier. -- Francois Gouget fgouget(a)free.fr http://fgouget.free.fr/ The software said it requires Win95 or better, so I installed Linux.

Jan. 7, 2003

Re: A humble request for help

by Stefan Görling

Thank you for your comments, >It's not clear whether you're only interested in Wine-related employers >here, or any employer. For example, all of Martin Wilck's mails >prominently display "Fujitsu Siemens", which would be hard to miss, but >still isn't recorded in your list, yet Bill Medland is listed as "ACCPAC", >so it's a little confusing. > > Sorry for confusing you, I am interested in obtaining information about any employer, provided that they allow you (directly or simply by ignorance) to hack Wine during working time. When someone is sending mails from a Wine-related company, it's quite obvious that this is the case. But when the mail comes from a company, not directly affiliated with Wine, it might only be that the person is using his company mailbox. As for Martin Wilck, there were a lot of comments during the License-change debate that "This is not the view of my employer", so I came to the conclution that he probably only used the mailbox. He corrected me on this, and I am therefore grateful. > > >>Also, if you belive that there are others who should be on this list, >>I've only got one person from Transgaming so far, don't they contribute >>or are they simply silent on the mailinglist? >> >> > >Well, I'm pretty sure a few other TransGaming employees (like Gavriel >State, David Hammerton, Peter Hunnisett) *have* been seen on the list, but >probably only occasionally, maybe only a few postings in all of 2002. For >the most part, issues with Wine (the free version) are my responsibility >at TransGaming, so the others aren't seen much here. (I suppose they might >still be interested in answering questions, though, if you want to ask >them.) > > > >>Andreas Mohr,Codeweavers >> >> > >Maybe Andreas can speak for himself, but just in case he doesn't: he's not >at CodeWeavers. (His only affiliation was an internship a long time ago, >if I remember right.) > Thanks, Andreas was another one of my uncertainties, in some Weekly list he was affiliated with CodeWeavers, and it sounded probable that someone that active should be paid in a project where many are. Best Regards, Stefan Görling

Jan. 7, 2003

getting started

by Glen Kaukola

Hi everyone, I forget who's advice it was I took, but I went out and bought a few books on windows programming. And I plan to get started trying to help out with the wine project by trying to get the sample applications from the books to run under wine. If nothing else I guess I can let everyone know what it is I can't get working under wine (hopefully everyone welcomes that sort of input). So what I'm wondering now is what I should be using to compile my applications on windows. One of the books I have says all I need is the win32 sdk and I can compile apps. The closest thing I can find on msdn is the microsoft platform sdk, or perhaps the .net sdk. I've installed the microsoft platform sdk core but it doesn't seem to contain nmake.exe like the book I have talks about. So maybe I just need more pieces of the sdk? Or maybe I've installed the wrong thing entirely? I know of some other things I could use like borland's compiler or the bloodshed ide, that uses mingw I believe, but I was thinking it might be better if I stuck with microsoft development apps so everything happens the microsoft way in my programs. So maybe I just need to take one for the team and go out and buy visual studio? Thanks in advance, Glen

Jan. 7, 2003

Re: dlls/Makefile.in

by Marcus Meissner

On Mon, Jan 06, 2003 at 01:55:26PM -0600, Jeff Smith wrote: > Changelog: > Make use of the automatic variable "$<" in dll make rules. > advapi32.dll$(DLLEXT): advapi32/advapi32.dll$(DLLEXT) >- $(RM) $@ && $(LN_S) advapi32/advapi32.dll$(DLLEXT) $@ >+ $(RM) $@ && $(LN_S) $< $@ Some not so compatible versions of make only like this variable in pattern replacement rules, so this might not work on all platforms. And I don't see a reason for this change, these entries are generated by a script and who should care if they are longer or not? Ciao, Marcus

Jan. 7, 2003

Re: getting started

by Dimitrie O. Paun

On January 7, 2003 03:03 am, Glen Kaukola wrote: > So what I'm wondering now is what I should be using to compile my > applications on windows. One of the books I have says all I need is the > win32 sdk and I can compile apps. The closest thing I can find on msdn > is the microsoft platform sdk, or perhaps the .net sdk. I've installed > the microsoft platform sdk core but it doesn't seem to contain nmake.exe > like the book I have talks about. So maybe I just need more pieces of > the sdk? Or maybe I've installed the wrong thing entirely? Compiling under the SDK using MS tools gives us little value. We already know that works. If you don't want to spend the cash on MSVC (and not make MS any richer :)), and are willing to invest some time into it, I suggest the following path: 1. Get the latest mingw 2.0 distribution from http://www.mingw.org 2. Modify the makefiles that come in the book to work with GNU make, and the mingw tool chain. Make sure you use forward slashes (/)! :) 3. Build on Windows with your newly created Makefiles, and verify that everthing runs under Windows just fine. 4. If you feel like it, document what steps you took to convert the makefiles. Maybe we'll put that on the Winelib page, to help others in the future. 5. Take the exact same Makefiles you used under Windows, change 3 lines in them (CC=winegcc, CXX=wineg++, WINDRES=wrc), and try to compile under Linux. Use the latest Wine tree, and you should have native Linux apps. If you get errors in this step, they are Wine error, please report them, and let's try to fix them. This is the real value of this exercise. 6. Once everything builds, run the apps, and make sure they run fine. If they have problems, and you feel brave, let the debugging begin! Welcome to the team! -- Dimi.

Jan. 7, 2003

Re: Windows XP conformance test update 1/5

by Dave

Well, whatever the problem I can't get my XP laptop to do it. It could be something goofy with this one system. I'll do future tests on my laptop and avoid the problem. :) At 12:30 AM 1/5/2003 -0800, you wrote: >On Sun, 5 Jan 2003, David Miller wrote: > > > Not much to report this time but there is something... strange. > > > > kernel32/drive reported the following. >[...] > > Previously this test passed, so I rebooted to see if the problem went > > away. After reboot the kernel32 test clamed not to be a valid win32 > > application. Turns out the size was 0 bytes. I re-extracted the zip file > > and ran kernel32/drive again. This time is passed. I have not seen the > > failure before but I did run into the "not a valid win32 application" > > message before, and the file size was 0 bytes. > >Yes, that's pretty strange. I don't see what could cause this problem. > > > > oleaut32/safearray reports 8 failures but the page only shows 4 failures. >[...] > > Also I don't see urlmon/generated on the status page at all. It passed. > > > > C:\winetests>urlmon_test.exe generated > > generated: 4 tests executed, 0 marked as todo, 0 failures. > >Thanks, I updated the page. > > >-- >Francois Gouget fgouget(a)free.fr http://fgouget.free.fr/ > I haven't lost my mind, it's backed up on tape around here somewhere...

Jan. 7, 2003

Wine Fun v0.3

by Dimitrie O. Paun

Hi folks, I haven't released a version of the Fun page in a loooong time, and a _lot_ of things changed. In fact, I would say at least 90% of it has changed since last time. Here it is for your viewing pleasure: http://www.dssd.ca/wine/Wine-Fun-0.3.html Check it out, maybe you'll find something that tickles your fancy! ;) -- Dimi.

Jan. 7, 2003