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

Re: [ck] Re: Threading issues? [ck-request@vds.kolivas.org: ck Digest, Vol 3, Issue 16]

by Roger Olson

Hopefully, the below information will prove useful regarding this discussion: I have an app (United Devices), a distributed computing type program that is reliant upon threading priorities and remote operation processes. Under Windows98 -> me, the process tree looks as such: kernel32 Pri class High(13), 8 threads: TimeCrit(15), Norm(13), Lowest(11) |_msgsvr32 Pri class Norm(8), 1 thread Norm(8) |_explorer.exe Pri class Norm(8), 6 threads: AboveNorm(9), Norm(8), Lowest(6) |_UD.exe Pri class Norm(8), 3 threads Norm(8) |_UD_xxxxxxx.exe Pri class Idle(4), Norm(4), Idle(1) |_UD_ligfit_Release.exe Pri class Idle(4), 2 threads Norm(4), Idle(1) <== working BG process thread The working back ground process thread is programed to utilize all available CPU time but immediately relinquish the CPU to any user, sytem or other app requests hence the Idle(1) priority. Please see http://members.toast.net/obc/t_ud10.html for a screen shot of the task manager process tree used to discover this info if usefull. All these priorities are static btw. I recently patched my Wine with Alexander Yaworky's "Remote Opertaions" patch submittal to see how the app would respond. Basically, the app runs fine and does most everything expected under Windows except, upon completion of a work unit when the user interface (the Agent) is supposed to take over and close all the "BG working threads", compress the Work Unit file to prepare for uploading, the whole app goes to idle. Upon closing the Agent, the following Wine err msg appears while the two ligfit threads are left active when they should have been shut down by closing the Agent using the app exit procedure. Wine err msg after exiting application: err:ntdll:RtlpWaitForCriticalSection section 0x401f001c "?" wait timed out in thread 0011, blocked by 0010, retrying (60 sec) I must manually kill both those threads to restart the Agent under Wine to resume processing whereas it sometimes will complete, upload, retrieve a new work unit and process only to repeat this cycle again. I attached the outputs of ps -Afm --forest and top while Agent is in progress in the hopes of providing useful info. I also tried renice'ing the bg process threads and the wineserver to +19 but same problem so that doesn't appear to be a workaround for this app. Thanks, Roger

Aug. 31, 2004

Re: [wine] Linux registry

by David Lee Lambert

On Mon, Aug 30, 2004 at 03:27:49PM +0200, Robert van Herk wrote: > These people seem to be implementing a kinda Windows registry clone into > Linux, but then secure, stable 'n' stuff... I looked at this and, as it stands, the project is basically a bunch of hot air and a little bit of demo code that is far from "secure and stable". If it becomes widely used, it might create minor difficulties for Wine: 1. It has a tool called 'regedit', which conflicts with MS 'regedit.exe' and Wine 'regedit'; 2. It does not preserve the key/value dichotomy in the Windows API (i.e., I could make a key "HKCU\Software\LMert\xx" and a value "xx" in "HKCU\Software\LMert" and set them to different values -- this is of doubtful utility but a natural consequence of the Windows API). 3. It doesn't have the REG_DWORD type, or any integer type for that matter, yet. 4. Right now, the syntax is actually pretty text-editor-unfriendly: it has no support for numeric values and it creates a lot of little five-line files. However, the original author seems to want to move *all* config files in mainstream distributions over to his format, something that I don't see happening within the useful lifetime of Wine. Perhaps *they* should take a look at Wine code; as an LGPL project, Wine can't copy their (GPLv2) code directly anyway, and the Wine registry code actually has worked well for a long time. -- resume at http://www.cse.msu.edu/~lamber45/resume.htm PGP key at http://www.cse.msu.edu/~lamber45/newmail.htm#GPGKey

Aug. 31, 2004

regression: listbox stays disabled in created dialog-window

by Saulius Krasuckas

The [1] patch brings some regression. I have filled a bugreport: [2]. Here are two png screenshots: [3] [4], one made before the patch is applied, another made after the patch is applied. [1] http://www.winehq.org/hypermail/wine-cvs/2004/08/0341.html [2] http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2454 [3] http://bugs.winehq.org/attachment.cgi?id=681&action=view [4] http://bugs.winehq.org/attachment.cgi?id=682&action=view

Aug. 30, 2004

Re: mixing SHELL32.DLL and SHFOLDER.DLL

by Juan Lang

--- Saulius Krasuckas <saulius2(a)ar.fi.lt> wrote: > I don't know ordinal value of this function. I neither. I don't have this versions handy at the moment either. Maybe some kind soul who does can provide them? > Yes, I understand now. IMHO, the easiest way still > would be to move the > code from shell32 to shfolder. But forget it. I'm not sure that's true. It depends how the application decides whether to look for these functions in shfolder.dll. I'm not sure what the "correct" way is; MS isn't very clear on this. I think, reading from MSDN, you can ship shfolder.dll and dynamically load it if you can't find these exports in shell32.dll. But that apparently isn't what your app is doing, and I'm not sure what it is doing instead. For what it's worth, I'm working on the functions SHGetFolderPath/A/W, SHGetFolderLocation/A/W, SHGetSpecialFolderPath/A/W, and SHGetSpecialFolderLocation/A/W. They're a bit off at the moment, but not horribly so; I don't think too many apps will be broken by their incorrectness. But if your app is having trouble specifically because of these, help may be on the way :) --Juan __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail

Aug. 30, 2004

Re: SHAllocShared fixes

by Alexandre Julliard

Francois Gouget <fgouget(a)free.fr> writes: > This actually calls for two more notes: > * This looks very much what one would get by calling the corresponding > functions in shlwapi (which seems much more complete). However in > shell32 there is talk of sending messages around (WM_USER+2) so maybe > it's the same concept but a different implementation? The WM_USER+2 thing is something a specific caller was doing, it's not part of the function itself. I think the shell32 functions should simply forward to the shlwapi ones. -- Alexandre Julliard julliard(a)winehq.org

Aug. 30, 2004

Re: mixing SHELL32.DLL and SHFOLDER.DLL

by Saulius Krasuckas

On Mon, 30 Aug 2004, Saulius Krasuckas wrote: > Jumping to the native shell32.dll. Builtin, builtin. =)

Aug. 30, 2004

Re: working together on stdole.tlb and a end to dcom9x

by Filip Navara

Jacek Caban wrote: > I know that. My patch: > http://www.winehq.org/hypermail/wine-patches/2004/08/0167.html > fixes this problem (patch is applied). Sorry, I was using slightly (well, not so slighly) outdated version of Wine. - Filip

Aug. 30, 2004

Re: mixing SHELL32.DLL and SHFOLDER.DLL

by Saulius Krasuckas

On Mon, 30 Aug 2004, Alexandre Julliard wrote: > Saulius Krasuckas <saulius2(a)ar.fi.lt> writes: > > You know it can take quite a long time, maybe several years. And I want > > to run the apps right now. > > Then use native shfolder. And no, I don't think it would take several > years to fix the builtins, a lot of apps work fine with them today, > they are not that bad. OK, I agree and hope I was too desperate here. > > So, you basically disagree with moving SHGetFolder[AW] code from > > shell32.dll to shfolder.dll, right? > > I don't think it's going to solve the problem. Pretty much the only > way to make it work right in all cases is to duplicate the whole > thing, and I don't see any good reason to do that. I'm having problem with the aesthetics of using native dlls. The less dlls are needed for me the better. Just it, pretty personal. And thanks for taking your time to explain this. Jumping to the native shell32.dll.

Aug. 30, 2004

Re: mixing SHELL32.DLL and SHFOLDER.DLL

by Saulius Krasuckas

On Mon, 30 Aug 2004, Juan Lang wrote: > From MSDN on SHGetFolderPath: > > This function is a superset of SHGetSpecialFolderPath, > included with earlier versions of the Shell. On > systems preceeding those including Shell32.dll version > 5.0 (Windows Millennium Edition (Windows Me) and > Windows 2000), SHGetFolderPath was obtained through > SHFolder.dll, distributed with Microsoft Internet > Explorer 4.0 and later versions. SHFolder.dll always > calls the current platform's version of this function. > If that fails, it will try to simulate the appropriate > behavior. > > So, I think your patch is a good first step, to use > GetProcAddress rather than letting the linker do it. Maybe, but it became of no use. > A next step would be, I think, to do what I suggested: > if this fails, try to GetProcAddress for > SHGetSpecialFolderPath, since this was available on > older versions of shell32. You might have to search > by ordinal if searching by name fails. I don't know ordinal value of this function. The only way to get it for me would be to debug shfolder.dll DllMain() from/on some old windows boxes. OTOH, Juergen writes [1]: * > Which means Win98's shell32 does not have an SHGetFolderPath at * > all. * * It has a SHGetFolderPathA exported by ordinal. (like the nt4 one has * SHGetFolderPathW on the _same_ ordinal). Later versions did it in a * clean way. So if SHGetSpecialFolderPath* can be found this way, maybe SHGetFolderPath* could be found also? It is a pity I have no Win95 box at my hand and cannot test this situation with very old version of shell32.dll. > So, I don't think my suggestion is that different from > Juergen's, just that I suggest an implementation of > "try to simulate the appropriate behavior" if the > function is not in fact in shell32. Yes, I understand now. IMHO, the easiest way still would be to move the code from shell32 to shfolder. But forget it. [1] http://www.winehq.org/hypermail/wine-devel/2000/12/0049.html

Aug. 30, 2004

Re: WineHQ - Hosted by PayPal

by Steven Edwards

--- Tom <twickline(a)sitestar.net> wrote: > Well if you want to eat at wineconf 2005 I would say NOOOOOOOOOO! :D Eat? I thought that was beer money. <g> Thanks Steven __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail

Aug. 30, 2004