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

Re: [winecfg] Audio device selection
by Alexandre Julliard March 9, 2005

March 9, 2005

Paul van Schayck <polleke(a)gmail.com> writes: > This is a resend. Patch was rejected probably because we don't want > this kind of settings in winecfg. Let me explain myself closer. > The patch allows the alsa audio device to be changed from audio tab. > It will just use default otherwise. Which is just fine for most users. The main problem is that this option is completely obscure; what are you supposed to enter in there? It should be a drop down listing possible devices. -- Alexandre Julliard julliard(a)winehq.org

3 2

unixfs
by Michael Jung March 9, 2005

March 9, 2005

Hello, Could you please tell me if you consider the unixfs shell namespace extension, which I've sent to wine-patches last week, a sensible way to go in order to access the unix filesystem from winecfg? I know that there is room for improvements, and I'm working on it. But if you think it is not the right thing to do, I will stop working on it and save some time for other stuff. Bye, -- Michael Jung mjung(a)iss.tu-darmstadt.de

3 4

Re: WIDL - Sync to ReactOS 20050308
by Alexandre Julliard March 8, 2005

March 8, 2005

Steven Edwards <steven_ed4153(a)yahoo.com> writes: > No one really got back to me on how handles should be done in the dcom.idl so I am going assume > this is correct. If this has gotten too big let me know and I can break it up in to smaller > patches over the next week. Yes please, every separate change should be a separate patch. -- Alexandre Julliard julliard(a)winehq.org

1 0

XML escaping problem in WWN 264
by Francois Gouget March 8, 2005

March 8, 2005

In WWN 264 there's the following: <rant> ... </rant> But it does not get through in the HTML page because it's getting transformed into <rant>...</rant> which the browser is correctly ignoring. We've had this problem before but I don't remember what the fix is... Do you? -- Francois Gouget fgouget(a)free.fr http://fgouget.free.fr/ We are Pentium of Borg. You will be approximated. Division is futile.

5 4

Re: WIDL - Sync to ReactOS 20050308
by Rob Shearman March 8, 2005

March 8, 2005

Steven Edwards wrote: >No one really got back to me on how handles should be done in the dcom.idl so I am going assume >this is correct. If this has gotten too big let me know and I can break it up in to smaller >patches over the next week. > > Sorry Steven, I meant to investigate this before but I forgot. >Index: dlls/ole32/dcom.idl >=================================================================== >RCS file: /home/wine/wine/dlls/ole32/dcom.idl,v >retrieving revision 1.1 >diff -u -b -r1.1 dcom.idl >--- dlls/ole32/dcom.idl 22 May 2003 03:36:26 -0000 1.1 >+++ dlls/ole32/dcom.idl 8 Mar 2005 18:28:18 -0000 >@@ -217,6 +217,7 @@ > > cpp_quote("#if 0") > [ >+ explicit_handle, > uuid(99fcfec4-5260-101b-bbcb-00aa0021347a), > pointer_default(unique) > ] > > explicit_handle is an ACF attribute and not something that should normally be put in an IDL file. Furthermore, it is not necessary, as stated by MSDN: "If the *[explicit_handle]* attribute is not used, the application can still specify that an operation have an explicit handle (binding or serialization) directing the call." I think there is an MIDL command-line option to allow ACF attributes in IDL files though. Rob

1 0

Re: More implementation of IRecordInfo
by Maxime Bellengé March 8, 2005

March 8, 2005

You have forgotten the patch :) On Tue, 2005-03-08 at 20:18 +0100, Jacek Caban wrote: > This patch makes IRecordInfo almost complete. > If anyone knows any application using it I could test on, > please let me know. > > Changelog: > More implementation of IRecordInfo > >

1 0

Re: [PATCH] Add search functionality to WINE regedit
by Oliver Stieber March 8, 2005

March 8, 2005

--- Mike Hearn <mike(a)navi.cx> wrote: > Jan Schiefer wrote: > > It's already fully cleaned up and ready to go! I > know other people hate > > my coding style... :) > > Awww, it's not hate, you just need to be careful > about how the code is > laid out and what features you use. You'll need to > fix this patch in a > few places so here are some comments: > Also.. if(uMsg != 193) { // if uMsg == 193, tmpLen is always 0! no C++ style comments. try to use /* comment */ I use this a file containing ^[[:space:]]+# // /\*[^[:space:]]\w \w[^[:space:]]\*/ if\( )[[:alpha:]] with find -mtime -10 -iregex ".*\.[c | h]" -exec egrep --file="filewithchecks" "{}" -n \; -print add -wError and -Werror-implicit-function-declaration and -Wdeclaration-after-statement for gcc >= 3.4 to cflags in your Makefile. I'll post a patch so that the whole of wine can be built with -wError on gcc >=3.3 soon, for the brave use: (long long) for shift errors >> 32 is greater than .... programs/winehlp uses %x so the Makefile needs -Wno-format-y2k in it's CFLAGS and add register int src char * in libs/port/memmove.c Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com

1 0

Re: [PATCH] Add search functionality to WINE regedit
by Mike Hearn March 8, 2005

March 8, 2005

Jan Schiefer wrote: > It's already fully cleaned up and ready to go! I know other people hate > my coding style... :) Awww, it's not hate, you just need to be careful about how the code is laid out and what features you use. You'll need to fix this patch in a few places so here are some comments: It's usually a good idea to submit the backend *first* and then the frontend, or better .. have them done all at once. Patches are supposed to be standalone, not stuff that'll only start working later (in the general case). For now I'd combine the two patches. > + GROUPBOX "Look at",IDC_FIND_GROUPBOX, 5, 25, 194, 46, BS_GROUPBOX > + CHECKBOX "Keys", IDC_CHECKBOX_KEYS, 10, 36, 60, 10 Try and keep alignment consistent, otherwise there's just extra visual noise for no good reason! > +LRESULT CALLBACK findedit_proc (HWND hWnd, UINT uMsg, WPARAM wParam, LPARAM lParam) { > +if(uMsg != 193) { // if uMsg == 193, tmpLen is always 0! > +int tmpLen = SendMessage(hWnd, EM_LINELENGTH, 0, 0); > +if(tmpLen != searchStringLen) { > +if(tmpLen > 0)EnableWindow(hFindButton, TRUE); > +else EnableWindow(hFindButton, FALSE); > +searchStringLen = tmpLen; > +} > +} > +return CallWindowProc ((WNDPROC) prevWndProcEdit, hWnd, uMsg, wParam, lParam); > +} I'm afraid that unless my mail client is playing up that type of code isn't acceptable. You need to use indenting! Also please try and space stuff out, eg rather than: if(tmpLen > 0)EnableWindow use if (tmpLen > 0) EnableWindow(....); > + > +INT_PTR CALLBACK searchingdlg_proc(HWND hWnd, UINT uMsg, WPARAM wParam,LPARAM lParam) { > + switch(uMsg) { > + case WM_INITDIALOG: > + //SearchRegistryRecrusively("",HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT,TRUE); No C++/C99 style comments unfortunately. Also please don't submit patches that have code commented out for no obvious reason. > + break; > + case WM_COMMAND: > + switch(LOWORD(wParam)) { > + case IDCANCEL: > + HeapFree(GetProcessHeap(),0,searchString); > + EndDialog(hWnd, 0); > + return(TRUE); > + break; > + } Indenting is good, but indenting consistently is even better! > + break; > + } > + > +return(FALSE); > +} > + > +INT_PTR CALLBACK finddlg_proc(HWND hWnd, UINT uMsg, WPARAM wParam,LPARAM lParam) { > + > + switch(uMsg) { > + case WM_INITDIALOG: > + hFindEdit = GetDlgItem(hWnd, IDC_FINDEDIT); > + hFindButton = GetDlgItem(hWnd, IDOK); > + prevWndProcEdit = SetWindowLongPtr (hFindEdit, GWLP_WNDPROC, (LONG_PTR) findedit_proc); > + EnableWindow(hFindButton, FALSE); > + CheckDlgButton( hWnd, IDC_CHECKBOX_KEYS, BST_CHECKED ); > + CheckDlgButton( hWnd, IDC_CHECKBOX_VALUES, BST_CHECKED ); > + CheckDlgButton( hWnd, IDC_CHECKBOX_DATA, BST_CHECKED ); > + return(TRUE); I think you may be mixing tabs and spaces or something here. Also making return look like a function is rather non-standard for C, use it as a statement: return TRUE; > + break; > + case WM_COMMAND: > + switch(LOWORD(wParam)) { > + case IDOK: > + searchString = (LPTSTR)HeapAlloc(GetProcessHeap(),0,searchStringLen + 1); > + GetWindowText(hFindEdit, searchString, searchStringLen + 1 ); > + > + searchForKeys = (IsDlgButtonChecked( hWnd, IDC_CHECKBOX_KEYS ) == BST_CHECKED); > + searchForValues = (IsDlgButtonChecked( hWnd, IDC_CHECKBOX_VALUES ) == BST_CHECKED); > + searchForData = (IsDlgButtonChecked( hWnd, IDC_CHECKBOX_DATA ) == BST_CHECKED); > + searchMatchWholeString = (IsDlgButtonChecked( hWnd, IDC_CHECKBOX_MATCHSTRING ) == BST_CHECKED); If you're going to fall through please put a comment like /* fall through */ otherwise it looks an awful lot like a mistake. thanks -mike

1 0

Suggestion For Wine Loader
by Jason Couture March 8, 2005

March 8, 2005

How hard would it be to introduce a "Re-Compiler" instead of an interpreter? To convert PE -> ELF without having the source. The output would not have to be a user runnable file maybe just a cache? Possiable Speed up? To avoid copyright issues maybe the elf could require the pe to run? In my experience JIT Compiling or interpreting is much slower than a recompiled program... Let me know what you people think.

4 4

Gmail accounts
by Jason Couture March 8, 2005

March 8, 2005

Sorry i know this seems like spam but it is an offer. Anyone who emails plaguethenet(a)gmail.com will recieve a gmail invite until i run out of invites. later

1 0