December 2005 - Wine-Devel - list.winehq.org

Re: has the LGPL licence fell through ?

by Tom Wickline

There is a review here : http://digital.hmx.net/02contents/pc/linux/fuji.shtml You might need : http://babelfish.altavista.com/ to translate it. I'll post parts of there review here.... Ricoh TrueType font (JIS third fourth level support) Japanese input software ATOK for Linux Windows interchangeable middleware David <snip> Windows interchangeable middleware "David" The idea contest where the letter which is called to the task tray David enters is visible. David with the product of SpecOps Labs, is the software which makes the application for Windows execute on Linux. Turbolinux concluded the monopoly sale contract of David with SpecOps, Labs mounted on FUJI. The Windows interchangeable environment which David offers is actualized by result ones of open source software "wine" and the technology of individual development. David enters, mounting result ones of wine, but perfection of Windows environment approach differs from wine which designates re-mounting as goal e.g., Win32 API re-mounting is designated as minimum. Because of that, the plug in, David engine and the David rice plant which is offered to every application - the brassiere which offers application common Windows interchangeable function is offered by David, the rice plant - as for the Windows application where the brassiere was offered, is a feature that it operates quite with high compatibility. With FUJI the David engine and the tool and the rice plant which support the introduction of Windows application - the brassiere is offered. The rice plant - Turbolinux verifies the brassiere individually, in order to operate without trouble those which rework are offered, at present time the rice plant of Microsoft Office - the brassiere is offered. Unless the rice plant - there is a brassiere, it cannot introduce application and it cannot execute, but speaking conversely, because the rice plant - the brassiere stopping as for those which are offered operates without trouble, feeling at rest, there is a merit which you can use. If the rice plant - type of brassiere increases, from the fact that also the number of applications which are worked increases, in the future the rice plant - the number of brassieres that is thought whether it is not it increases. Furthermore, is informal, but also it is possible to move InternetExplorer with David of FUJI attachment. After inspecting with own power, we would like to have trying the one which has interest in self responsibility. -- Next is to order a copy and ask for the Wine source if its not included. Tom

Dec. 21, 2005

Re: has the LGPL licence fell through ?

by Tom Spear

Troy Rollo wrote: > On Wed, 21 Dec 2005 10:08, Jeremy White wrote: > > >>In fact, the only person that can demand anything wrt the LGPL is >>someone that is running their software. So if someone has bought >>a copy of TurboLinux 11 in Japan, they have the right to demand >>a copy of the source code to the Wine bits in Project David; presumably >>they'd have to ask Turbo Linux. > > > It's more complex than that. The only person who is entitled to a copy of the > source code is a person who has received a copy of the compiled code, however > that person has no legal right to enforce that entitlement. A person who has > copyright in the code has to then take enforcement action for breach of > copyright and breach of contract in order to enforce it. If a person with > copyright in the code receives the compiled code, then the rights are, more > conveniently, coincident in the same person. Uhhh.. Ok, anyways, if I find any of my code in there, ill enforce breach of copyright.. I wrote it, I dont want money for it, but I would like to be notified of it's use by something/someone other than the media. Tom

Dec. 21, 2005

Re: has the LGPL licence fell through ?

by Troy Rollo

On Wed, 21 Dec 2005 10:08, Jeremy White wrote: > In fact, the only person that can demand anything wrt the LGPL is > someone that is running their software. So if someone has bought > a copy of TurboLinux 11 in Japan, they have the right to demand > a copy of the source code to the Wine bits in Project David; presumably > they'd have to ask Turbo Linux. It's more complex than that. The only person who is entitled to a copy of the source code is a person who has received a copy of the compiled code, however that person has no legal right to enforce that entitlement. A person who has copyright in the code has to then take enforcement action for breach of copyright and breach of contract in order to enforce it. If a person with copyright in the code receives the compiled code, then the rights are, more conveniently, coincident in the same person. -- Troy Rollo - wine(a)troy.rollo.name

Dec. 20, 2005

Re: has the LGPL licence fell through ?

by Willie Sippel

Am Dienstag, 20. Dezember 2005 23:38 schrieb Marcus Meissner: > On Tue, Dec 20, 2005 at 05:24:40PM -0500, Tom Wickline wrote: > > Yes I have read the licence just re read it for that matter... > > So why no patches from SpecOps? should Wine move to GPL to keep from > > being robbed of its code? > > I would really like to see more than speculation on this product. > Well, I just checked TurboLinux press archive and amazon.co.jp, and it really is available to the public. Whatever David really is, TurboLinux considered it important enough to write two press releases, and make David the main attraction of TurboLinux FUJI. See: http://www.turbolinux.com/cgi-bin/newsrelease/index.cgi?date2=2005082117324… http://www.turbolinux.com/cgi-bin/newsrelease/index.cgi?date2=2005092203574… I'm still sceptical, though. After reading the press release, I still have no idea what David's supposed to be... -- Willie Sippel //////// | Tritium Studios // | ______________________________ //// /// | http://www.tritium-studios.com <willie(a)froq.net>

Dec. 20, 2005

Re: Bill Medland : msi: Use a default dialog font if nothing is specified.

by Bill Medland

On December 20, 2005 02:56 am, Alexandre Julliard wrote: > Module: wine > Branch: refs/heads/master > Commit: e0d4df6bb7c009c8cbfa579c22c8d9406025f65c > URL: > http://source.winehq.org/git/?p=wine.git;a=commit;h=e0d4df6bb7 >c009c8cbfa579c22c8d9406025f65c > > Author: Bill Medland <billmedland(a)mercuryspeed.com> > Date: Tue Dec 20 11:59:23 2005 +0100 > > msi: Use a default dialog font if nothing is specified. > > --- > > dlls/msi/dialog.c | 7 +++++++ > 1 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/dlls/msi/dialog.c b/dlls/msi/dialog.c > index 87e14e8..c4f9d2c 100644 > --- a/dlls/msi/dialog.c > +++ b/dlls/msi/dialog.c > @@ -1618,6 +1618,8 @@ static LRESULT msi_dialog_oncreate( HWND > { > static const WCHAR df[] = { > 'D','e','f','a','u','l','t','U','I','F','o','n','t',0 > }; + static const WCHAR dfv[] = { > + 'M','S',' ','S','h','e','l','l',' ','D','l','g',0 }; > msi_dialog *dialog = (msi_dialog*) cs->lpCreateParams; > MSIRECORD *rec = NULL; > LPWSTR title = NULL; > @@ -1644,6 +1646,11 @@ static LRESULT msi_dialog_oncreate( > HWND dialog->attributes = MSI_RecordGetInteger( rec, 6 ); > > dialog->default_font = msi_dup_property( dialog->package, > df ); + if (!dialog->default_font) > + { > + dialog->default_font = strdupW(dfv); Thanks for tidying and submitting this, Alexandre. Just asking; we are confident that strdupW is symmetric with msi_free, aren't we? That was why I had the three-line "msi_strdupW" > + if (!dialog->default_font) return -1; > + } > > title = msi_get_deformatted_field( dialog->package, rec, > 7 ); SetWindowTextW( hwnd, title ); -- Bill Medland mailto:billmedland(a)mercuryspeed.com http://webhome.idirect.com/~kbmed

Dec. 20, 2005

Re: sound enabled but no driver checked

by Cihan Altinay

Quoting Robert Reif <reif(a)earthlink.net>: > Cihan Altinay wrote: > > >With a fresh wine prefix sound is enabled but I can't > >see which driver is used because none of them is checked > >in the new winecfg sound dialog. > >Did we forget to initialize the boxes on first run? > > > >Cheers, > >Cihan > > > Use regedit to show HKCU/Software/wine/Drivers/Audio. > Chances are it's empty (no drivers checked) so sound is > disabled. It could be set to a driver that is not available > but winecfg checks for that and should give you an error. Well... the key doesn't exist unless I run winecfg at least once and change something. In that case it's not really important because a user will probably do that anyway. The only minor issue would be that someone runs winecfg for the first time and is satisfied with the defaults (no driver checked -> sound off) so without any changes he dismisses winecfg. And in this case it seems one of the drivers is used by default (sound on). Cheers, Cihan

Dec. 20, 2005

Re: [lostwages] Remove winetools from download page

by Steven Edwards

Hi, On 12/20/05, James Hawkins <truiken(a)gmail.com> wrote: > I agree. Winetools goes against our goal of not using native dlls, Ditto. Winetools had it day but now that we have a working DCOM, MSI and inital webbrowser implementation I think we should try to force builtin everything. I am not opposed to having scripts to automate install and configuration of certain things but we should only depend on Wine modules. -- Steven Edwards - ReactOS and Wine developer "There is one thing stronger than all the armies in the world, and that is an idea whose time has come." - Victor Hugo

Dec. 20, 2005

Re: has the LGPL licence fell through ?

by Jeremy White

> > It is not a requirement that patches be submitted - only that source code be > made available. Patches are normally submitted because it is more convenient > for the developer if the change is in the canonical version. If the developer > does not see the value of having their patch in the canonical tree, they will > not (and are not required to) submit it. In fact, the only person that can demand anything wrt the LGPL is someone that is running their software. So if someone has bought a copy of TurboLinux 11 in Japan, they have the right to demand a copy of the source code to the Wine bits in Project David; presumably they'd have to ask Turbo Linux. Be great if someone would do that... Cheers, Jeremy

Dec. 20, 2005

Re: [lostwages] Remove winetools from download page

by Segin

James Hawkins wrote: >On 12/20/05, Vitaliy Margolen <wine-patch(a)kievinfo.com> wrote: > > >>I can't say how many people have come to #winehq with different problems >>that were related to winetools. From what I could see, not a single >>person who I talked to had winetools installed and had Wine programs >>working properly. >> >> >> > >I agree. Winetools goes against our goal of not using native dlls, >and takes away needed testing of our builtin dlls. If people decide >to use it on their own, then that's cool with me, but we shouldn't >promote its use. > >-- >James Hawkins > > > > > I totally agree. Besides, isn't Winetools '~/.wine/config' based, while we're Registry based? Anyone wanna comment on that?

Dec. 20, 2005

Re: [lostwages] Remove winetools from download page

by James Hawkins

On 12/20/05, Vitaliy Margolen <wine-patch(a)kievinfo.com> wrote: > I can't say how many people have come to #winehq with different problems > that were related to winetools. From what I could see, not a single > person who I talked to had winetools installed and had Wine programs > working properly. > I agree. Winetools goes against our goal of not using native dlls, and takes away needed testing of our builtin dlls. If people decide to use it on their own, then that's cool with me, but we shouldn't promote its use. -- James Hawkins

Dec. 20, 2005