February 2004 - Wine-Devel - list.winehq.org

Re: Wine - update for Who's Who page
by Tom Feb. 6, 2004

Feb. 6, 2004

Brian Vincent wrote: > One of the to do items is update the Who's Who list on WineHQ. If > you look at it right now it's horribly out of date: > http://www.winehq.org/site/who Yea.. The idea is to create an Acknowledgment page for the guy's that are currently inactive, or just have a link to the authors.. (???) > > This is an opportunity to both recognize you for your contributions > and serve as a way to promote Wine. After talking with Dimi at Wineconf > it became immediately apparent that being immortalized on WineHQ will > lead to hordes of beautiful women knocking on your door. When I first started using linux everyone talked about all this free beer.. Now we get wemon to boot.. :-) > > I think the format will remain similar; What I was going to do is not have the CodeWeavers section, VIPs/Core Devel/etc categories, as maybe some people don't like classifications. There are developers from CodeWeavers, TransGaming, ReactOS and so on.. The best thing would be to just have a affiliation attribute to each person. This way the more developers they have working on wine the more linkage they receive. This is a "Wine" Who's Who! Should we add a small pic of each developer to there section? Comments or idea's are most welcome. Tom

1 0

Re: OLEPictureImpl_Load: fix for headerless pictures
by Fabian Cenedese Feb. 6, 2004

Feb. 6, 2004

>> >Then what type of picture it is? >> > >> >0x4947 GIF >> >0xd8ff JPEG >> >0x4d42 BMP >> >0x0000 ICON >> >0x746c ??? >> >> Well, as I didn't use any pictures I don't know what it's supposed to be. >> Might as well be "NoPic" :) But I have also seen this marker where the >> second field was not zero. > >It's probably some ole-storage magic. Don't know as i have no clue on how >ole works at all :) Neither do I :) >> Maybe this isn't even part of a picture and we shouldn't be reading this. >> How does it know that a picture is coming? Perhaps we shouldn't >> even enter OLEPictureImpl_Load if there is no picture at all. > >Fabi, > >I temporarly disable checking for (header[1]==0). even in such case your >test-case doesn't start: >fixme:ole:CoRegisterMessageFilter stub >fixme:ole:OleLoadPictureEx >(0x418ae294,774,0,{7bf80980-bf32-101a-8bbb-00aa00300cab},x=0,y=0,f=0,0x4075fb08), >partially implemented. >fixme:ole:OleLoadPictureEx >(0x418ae294,774,1,{7bf80980-bf32-101a-8bbb-00aa00300cab},x=0,y=0,f=0,0x4075fad8), >partially implemented. >fixme:ole:SPCF_CreateInstance >(0x40acdbc8,(nil),{7bf80980-bf32-101a-8bbb-00aa00300cab},0x402313a4), >creating stdpic with PICTYPE_NONE. >fixme:ole:SPCF_CreateInstance >(0x40acdbc8,(nil),{7bf80980-bf32-101a-8bbb-00aa00300cab},0x40231aac), >creating stdpic with PICTYPE_NONE. >fixme:ole:OLEPictureImpl_Load CreateIcon failed. >fixme:ole:OLEPictureImpl_Destroy Unsupported type 0 - unable to delete >fixme:dialog:MSGBOX_OnInit task modal msgbox ! Not modal yet. Where did you disable it? My patch or yours? With my patch it should never even get to try to call CreateIcon (which fails). So either the field is not 0 or you don't jump out. >and then > >MessageBox with >"Failed to load control 'SSTab' from TABCTL32.OCX. Your version of >TABCTL32.OCX is outdated...." > >Does it work at all? This is the error I wanted to eliminate, just look for my postings with SSTAB in the subject in the last two months :) When I jump out if header[1] is 0 then I don't get this error anymore and VB programs with the SSTab control come up. But I only tried those without icons as I assumed that those with icons don't have a 0 field. >If so, then we probably should figure out whethere there are some >ole-storage magic present and chek for them when decidign whether to look at header[1] and how to interpret it. This is definitely above me. Maybe some guru can help here. Who's a pro in ole pictures? Picking anyone's pride? :) bye Fabi

2 1

App compiled with Delphi5 works, same App with Delphi7 does not.
by Samuel Herzog Feb. 5, 2004

Feb. 5, 2004

Dear Newsgroup, I have downloaded and installed Release 20040121. I have a very small application (for testing purpose) which I can compile with Delphi 5,Delphi 6,Delphi 7. The application compiled with Delphi5 works fine. The same application compiled with Delphi7 shows an exception <EAccessvioalation in Module zxtheme.dll at 00006A71>. Any hints what to do ? Thank you, Samuel Herzog

3 4

Investigating the XInitThreads deadlock bug
by Sami Aario Feb. 5, 2004

Feb. 5, 2004

Hi all, I decided to investigate this old bug: http://www.winehq.com/hypermail/wine-devel/2003/12/0158.html even though Alexander removed thread initialization from x11drv. So the first thing I did was apply this patch: Index: x11drv_main.c =================================================================== RCS file: /home/wine/wine/dlls/x11drv/x11drv_main.c,v retrieving revision 1.87 diff -u -r1.87 x11drv_main.c --- x11drv_main.c 30 Jan 2004 22:54:39 -0000 1.87 +++ x11drv_main.c 1 Feb 2004 18:02:26 -0000 @@ -332,6 +332,8 @@ /* Open display */ + if (!XInitThreads()) ERR( "XInitThreads failed, trouble ahead\n" ); + if (!(display = XOpenDisplay( NULL ))) { MESSAGE( "x11drv: Can't open display: %s\n", XDisplayName(NULL) ); I determined that the tests under user/tests were causing deadlock. The attached file debugrun1 shows this. Start the debugger with: winedbg user32_test.exe.so and repeat the steps I made, and the executable should deadlock at the call to XGetScreenSaver. (By the way, I used a version of the tests where I'd commented out all other tests except the test_SPI_GETSCREENSAVEACTIVE one, and that's why you only see "testing SPI_{GET,SET}SCREENSAVEACTIVE", but that's not important.) Next, I decided to investigate which mutual exclusion primitive is causing the trouble. This run is included as debugrun2. There are two threads involved: thread 0xb is the application main thread, and 0xe is a thread created by the main thread to generate the tests. Thread 0xb owns a critical section that 0xe wants, and hence deadlock. Note the call to "walk thread" in the beginning. Note also that I single-stepped thread 0xe right up to the call to RtlpWaitForCriticalSection that deadlocks. I also added some display commands to show you the details of the critical section in question. Now, if you look at what the display says you'll notice something odd: at first crit = 0x0011d1e0, but then it switches to 0x403112b8. And this is without any breakpoints having been set up within RtlEnterCriticalSection! So it can't be a context switch - it seems like a bug in the debugger. Or is this intentional in some way? Anyway, this critical section is the one the x11drv library sets up when XInitThreads is called. Next I attempted to find out where the main thread acquires the critical section, before the deadlock. This is attached as debugrun3. Notice that I worked around the odd debugger feature mentioned in the previous paragraph, by placing a breakpoint not at the entry point of RtlEnterCriticalSection, but a few next's later. This allowed me to add the condition crit==0x403112b8. The "crit" pointer seems to consistently stay the same between debugger sessions, so this works (for me at least). See how LockCount is 0, even though this is the first call to RtlEnterCriticalSection with crit==0x403112b8 during this session? It should be -1 for a critical section that is being acquired for the first time! So this made me suspect that the crit sect is acquired during initialization (and then not released), which is why I applied the following patch: Index: critsection.c =================================================================== RCS file: /home/wine/wine/dlls/ntdll/critsection.c,v retrieving revision 1.23 diff -u -r1.23 critsection.c --- critsection.c 5 Sep 2003 23:08:34 -0000 1.23 +++ critsection.c 4 Feb 2004 20:15:46 -0000 @@ -243,6 +243,7 @@ */ NTSTATUS WINAPI RtlEnterCriticalSection( RTL_CRITICAL_SECTION *crit ) { + if (crit==(RTL_CRITICAL_SECTION *)0x403112b8) TRACE("critsection=%p: LockCount=%ld\n", crit, crit->LockCount); if (interlocked_inc( &crit->LockCount )) { if (crit->OwningThread == (HANDLE)GetCurrentThreadId()) and then launched the debugger with: winedbg --debugmsg -all,+ntdll user32_test.exe.so (I didn't bother with making the reference to crit->LockCount thread-safe.) The result of this is attached as debugrun4. Notice this line: No debug information in ELF '/usr/X11R6/lib/libXrender.so.1' (0x40016000) See how after four calls to RtlEnterCriticalSection, LockCount starts to be 0? So a pretty good theory is that the critical section is acquired, and then not released, during the loading and initialization of /usr/X11R6/lib/libXrender.so.1. This theory is not bulletproof, which is why I attempted to see whether LockCount ever becomes -1 again, but the debugger consistently barfed on me (== crashed). Well, that's it for now - I'll let someone more knowledgeable in libraries and their initialization carry on with this, if the're interested. A final note: naturally, you most likely won't have the same address for the critical section as me, but you should be able to find out what it is if you redo the steps I made. Have fun! -- Sami

3 2

Re: Re: [Winecfg] - redo applications tab, misc changes
by chmorgan＠charter.net Feb. 5, 2004

Feb. 5, 2004

> On February 4, 2004 05:20 pm, chmorgan(a)charter.net wrote: > > I'm pretty sure lots of other wine code uses 2 space indents, I know I > > started using them after working with wine. > > Yes, other code does so, but I think the preferred style is 4-space. > Now, as I said, if you feel strongly about it, it will stay 2-space. > But if you're flexible on this issue, 4-space indents would be nice. > > > No other comments on the ui changes in winecfg? ;-) I'll submit to > > wine-patches tonight after going through the code once more. > > Hey, I was at work (so I couldn't test). But now I got a chance to > look at it, so here are my comments: > -- it looks good. This is good stuff, I think we're getting > very close to the finish line. > -- have the Applications be the first page is a bit confusing. > This is advanced functionality, I'd start with something > else, like the Drives tab. > -- I could delete the "Global Settings" in the Application > tab, which also hosed my registry Doh. We should probably prevent users from deleting any of the global settings and ensure that the global settings are always present. > -- Whenever I've tried to add a app, and change it's settings, > it will disappear right away (whenever I tried to change > any of it's settings). > -- whenever I've tried changing something, I got errors like > this: > err:winecfg:setConfigValue Unable to set configuration key (null) in section AppDefaults\coolplayer.exe\Version to (null), res=1021 > Maybe my installation is faulty? > Winecfg is using the ~/.wine/config file right now, this isn't writeable so if you try to add/delete apps you won't be able to change anything. When you try to add the app the keys are created and then the treeview is completely rebuilt, I know, not the most efficent but it works. So, you click to add the app, the keys are created(but don't create since you can't modify your config file), and then the treeview is refreshed so your changes are lost. Chris

1 0

[ddraw] asynchronous screen updates
by Piotr Pawlow Feb. 5, 2004

Feb. 5, 2004

If DGA is not available, Wine falls back to creating offscreen primary surface and blitting all changes to the screen. It knows which part of the surface might have changed by watching unlock calls. However, as Jukka Heinonen pointed out in his message posted on 17.10.2001, the update logic in asynchronous mode (when SYNC_UPDATE is not defined, which is the default) is broken: "(...)if more than one lock/unlock pair happens between update thread blits, display might not be updated correctly". Synchronous mode on the other hand, causes applications, which constantly lock and unlock big areas just to change a few pixels, run very slow. As this bug prevents me from playing "Warlords: Battlecry", I decided to do something about it. Here are my changes: - User_add_dirty_rect is now an asynchronous equivalent of User_copy_to_screen. It adds the rectangle to the list of dirty rectangles and signal the update thread that there is some work to do. - update thread calls User_get_dirty_rect to iterate over the list of dirty rectangles - current "naïve" algoritm keeps only one rectangle which is a union of all dirty rectangles, so it tends to redraw too much, but better algoritms may be implemented - removed now unused lastlockrect variable, and the code which updates it I attached the patch for your reviews, comments, suggestions. The game is almost playable now, there are remaining issues with DirectMusic (must be run with NODIRECTMUSIC switch or crashes) and windows managers (kwin cannot raise the window, metacity complains that the window attributes do not make sense). -- Piotr Pawlow mailto:pp(a)siedziba.pl

5 7

DIB_DirectDrawSurface_BltFast signed/unsigned comparision bug
by Piotr Pawlow Feb. 5, 2004

Feb. 5, 2004

Hello, I spotted this bug while trying to fix mouse pointer trails problem in Warlords Battlecry. All widths, heights and left/top coordinates are of DWORD type, so substracting them from each other always give positive numbers. Thus h and w are always >= 0, so DDERR_INVALIDRECT is returned only in a couple of boundary cases. I just added explicit casting to int where needed. It didn't fix the mouse trails, but previously missing mouseover effect on icons at the main screen appeared, so I guess it is a change in the right direction :) Patch attached.

3 4

Broken tests in CVS
by Paul Millar Feb. 5, 2004

Feb. 5, 2004

Hi everyone, It looks like last night's patches broke the conformance tests: http://www.astro.gla.ac.uk/users/paulm/WRT/wrt.php I'm away from my desk machines at the moment, so can't test this further. Does anyone else see these problems? Cheers, PS is winehq.org website dead at the moment? ---- Paul Millar

1 0

Re: Re: [Winecfg] - redo applications tab, misc changes
by chmorgan＠charter.net Feb. 5, 2004

Feb. 5, 2004

I'm pretty sure lots of other wine code uses 2 space indents, I know I started using them after working with wine. No other comments on the ui changes in winecfg? ;-) I'll submit to wine-patches tonight after going through the code once more. The x11 tab is global settings only at this point. I think we can remove a couple of options on this tab, UseRandR is the only one I can think of atm. If we do make x11 settings per-app/global, like the apps and libraries tab, it seems like we should somehow combine the tabs. Yet is is nice having distinct tabs. In any case, I don't use per-app x11 settings so unless someone decides to implement this I likely won't be back at it for a while. Thanks, Chris > > From: "Dimitrie O. Paun" <dimi(a)intelliware.ca> > Date: 2004/02/04 Wed PM 02:14:59 EST > To: Chris Morgan <chmorgan(a)charter.net> > CC: wine-devel(a)winehq.com > Subject: Re: [Winecfg] - redo applications tab, misc changes > > On Tue, 3 Feb 2004, Chris Morgan wrote: > > > Comments, questions, suggestions welcome ;-) > > The one complaint I have is that it changes the 4-space indentation > to 2-space indentation, which makes the code so much harder to follow. > I know, you're doing the work, so you get to chose :), but if it's not > too much to ask, can we please stick to 4-space indentation? > > -- > Dimi. > >

6 6

Re: winedbg fixup
by Dmitry Timoshkov Feb. 5, 2004

Feb. 5, 2004

"Eric Pouech" <pouech-eric(a)wanadoo.fr> wrote: > +static unsigned is_dt_flag_valid(unsigned d_tag) > +{ > +#ifndef DT_PROCNUM > +#define DT_PROCNUM 0 > +#endif > +#ifndef DT_EXTRANUM > +#define DT_PROCNUM 0 > +#endif Shouldn't in the latter case it be: #ifndef DT_EXTRANUM #define DT_EXTRANUM 0 #endif -- Dmitry.

1 0