September 2003 - Wine-Devel

Re: compile time
by Ivan Leo Murray-Smith Sept. 10, 2003

Sept. 10, 2003

> Without knowing the rest of the systems (RAM, HD speed, present libs, > compiler used, etc.) it's rather meaningless to compare compile times. 512MB ddr, gcc 3.3.1, all optional wine stuff compiled in, 7200rpms hd.

1 0

something I found that might help GDI hackers
by Jonathan Wilson Sept. 10, 2003

Sept. 10, 2003

struct GDIHandleBitFields { unsigned long Index:0:10; unsigned long Type:10:5; unsigned long AltType:15:2; unsigned long Stock:17:1; unsigned long Unique:18:8; }; This might help people trying to understand the inner workings of GDI... Its current as of windows XP SP1.

2 1

Re: FAQ: Update the ports section
by Ivan Leo Murray-Smith Sept. 10, 2003

Sept. 10, 2003

I happen to be from the UK, and can tell you that >The following lists the x86 operating systems supported by >the list is now updated >the list is now up to date are all correct.

2 1

Re: FAQ: Update the ports section
by Ivan Leo Murray-Smith Sept. 10, 2003

Sept. 10, 2003

You must send me some of the stuff you're smoking! "The list are now up to date" doesn't exist in english, you must choose "The lists are now up to date" for a plural "The list is now up to date" for a singular

1 0

Re: [Resend winegcc03] winewrap can handle the default output name
by Dimitrie O. Paun Sept. 10, 2003

Sept. 10, 2003

On Tue, 9 Sep 2003, Richard Cohen wrote: > Slightly different from last time. > > > Default name that mingw uses is a.exe > > This also stops winewrap from segfaulting when passed no arguments. > > Changelog > Handle default linker output name (a.exe) in winewrap instead of > winegcc I'm still not sure I like this one, as I said, a.out is a gccism, and should be handled in winegcc. winewrap does not have to be command line compatible to the GNU tool (as it currently stands), we can require an output name for it. -- Dimi.

3 4

Re: FAQ: Update the ports section
by Tom Sept. 10, 2003

Sept. 10, 2003

Francois Gouget wrote: >Changelog: > > >- The following will list the x86 operating systems supported by >+ The following lists the x86 operating systems supported by > > Should be. The following list are the x86 operating systems supported by Tom

7 15

Re: [DSHOW-08] Implementation of IMemAllocator and IMediaSample (REVISED2)
by Dimitrie O. Paun Sept. 10, 2003

Sept. 10, 2003

On September 9, 2003 07:37 pm, Robert Shearman wrote: > --- /dev/null Mon Jun 24 01:53:01 2002 > +++ wine/dlls/quartz/list.h Mon Sep 8 00:48:58 2003 The list.h stuff seems to be fairly popular, why not stick a copy in wine/list.h? -- Dimi.

2 1

Re: [winegcc08] Handle -L in a separate array
by Dimitrie O. Paun Sept. 10, 2003

Sept. 10, 2003

On Tue, 9 Sep 2003, Richard Cohen wrote: > ...rather than adding -L<libpath> to both the DLLs and static libraries > No functional changes. I'm not sure this is correct, as the order of -L and -l may be significant. That is to say, if I do -LdirA -la -LdirB -lb then the system will search for a only in A, not in B, which is not the case if I do: -LdirA -LdirB -la -lb -- Dimi.

2 1

Re: BuildCommDCBAndTimeouts patch
by Jakob Eriksson Sept. 10, 2003

Sept. 10, 2003

Could you also make test.c into a regression test for inclusion into Wine? That is almost more important than the actual patch to Wine - if we have the conformance test, it ensures changes to Wine in the future does not destroy functionality. regards, Jakob

4 3

Re: Resend: Shlwapi ordinal fixes (Dave Miller)
by Robert Shearman Sept. 10, 2003

Sept. 10, 2003

On Wednesday 10 September 2003 5:32 am, Dave Miller wrote: > > Remove about a dozen ordinals we have defined which do not seem to be > important. (They vary from one windows version to another) Alexandre, please don't apply. I am doing a big update on the ordinals of Shlwapi and will incorporate these changes into my patch. Rob

1 0