June 2006 - Wine-Devel - list.winehq.org

Re: wine autorun utility

by Chris

On Thursday 29 June 2006 07:49, you wrote: > what is the gain of autorun, while i dont have wine running? would not > the common user expect, once she knows, that wine support autorun.inf, > that she can insert a cd and away it goes? while the explorer.exe is > not running permanently - e.g. via xinitrc - then i still would have to > deal with starting my setup.exe by hand. i have my doubts, that wine is > the correct place to implement this - but something like hotplugd or > whatevernowadaysdoesthetrickwithcdroms should handle this? One could think of Wine as a service, and start it with X if they wanted, so they could then run Windows programs whenever they wanted with potentially faster startup times, and with Windows "features" like autorun, and with a persistant Windows state (eg. instead of being shut down when all Windows programs close, it would stay around until Wine itself is explicitly stopped). Or, like me currently, they could run a Windows desktop/taskbar replacement in a Wine virtual desktop with managed windows off on a seperate X desktop and pretend to have Windows running along side X. I'd think if Wine were trying to "emulate" Windows as much as possible, it'd be backwards to not have autorun capabilities. As I said before, autorun.inf needs to be parsed anyway since it can define an icon to use for the drive, so if you're going to automatically parse it to load an icon, why not also ask (one time only) if the user wants to turn autorun on or off to run the defined program?

June 30, 2006

Re: wine autorun utility

by nlaw＠nildram.co.uk

William Knop wrote: > > On Jun 29, 2006, at 8:59 PM, Vitaliy Margolen wrote: >> Thursday, June 29, 2006, 12:02:38 PM, William Knop wrote: >>> Having the ability to autorun cds is most definitely not a misfeature. >> Of course it's not. It's the perfect means of distributing trojans, >> backdoors, >> rootkits and other very useful software an every CD, including DVDs >> and music >> CDs. > > If your assuming said media is compromised in such a way, requiring > the user to manually run the executable will not protect him. The fact > is, most media is not compromised. Software publishers ensure they are > not. Most windows users can trust their software publishers. For those > who cannot, they can simply click "No" when the dialog pops up. Or > they can set it to never autorun. Or they could set it to virus-scan > before autorunning. Everybody's happy. > > One thing I'm sure of: If regular guy Joe Schmo has to run executables > from CDs manually, he will either say CDs don't work in wine or say > that wine is a PITA to use. > I totally agree, autorun is a must (ok put in all the checks) but wine is being put together for the average user isn't it, that means if they put in a CD they expect it to do something, and don't care whether it's 100% secure, (that's the job of the virus/spyware detection software). Now wouldn't that be something wine with AVG/Spybot/Adaware buildin. Although I heard today Microsoft has just done that, a security suite for windows of course you have to pay a subscription otherwise they can't guarantee windows will be secure, mmm ... However, seeing as you can't even install a multi CD game in wine without the game complaining about the fact it can't find CD 2, perhaps priorities need to be sorted. What's the point of autorun when the app throws a wobbly when it gets to CD2

June 30, 2006

Re: wine autorun utility

by Vitaliy Margolen

Thursday, June 29, 2006, 7:37:16 PM, William Knop wrote: > On Jun 29, 2006, at 8:59 PM, Vitaliy Margolen wrote: >> Thursday, June 29, 2006, 12:02:38 PM, William Knop wrote: >>> Having the ability to autorun cds is most definitely not a >>> misfeature. >> Of course it's not. It's the perfect means of distributing trojans, >> backdoors, >> rootkits and other very useful software an every CD, including DVDs >> and music >> CDs. > If your assuming said media is compromised in such a way, requiring > the user to manually run the executable will not protect him. The > fact is, most media is not compromised. Software publishers ensure > they are not. Most windows users can trust their software publishers. That's what SONY been telling all along... Vitaliy

June 30, 2006

Re: wine autorun utility

by William Knop

On Jun 29, 2006, at 8:59 PM, Vitaliy Margolen wrote: > Thursday, June 29, 2006, 12:02:38 PM, William Knop wrote: >> Having the ability to autorun cds is most definitely not a >> misfeature. > Of course it's not. It's the perfect means of distributing trojans, > backdoors, > rootkits and other very useful software an every CD, including DVDs > and music > CDs. If your assuming said media is compromised in such a way, requiring the user to manually run the executable will not protect him. The fact is, most media is not compromised. Software publishers ensure they are not. Most windows users can trust their software publishers. For those who cannot, they can simply click "No" when the dialog pops up. Or they can set it to never autorun. Or they could set it to virus-scan before autorunning. Everybody's happy. One thing I'm sure of: If regular guy Joe Schmo has to run executables from CDs manually, he will either say CDs don't work in wine or say that wine is a PITA to use.

June 30, 2006

Re: wine autorun utility

by Vitaliy Margolen

Thursday, June 29, 2006, 12:02:38 PM, William Knop wrote: > On 6/29/06, Vincent Povirk <madewokherd+d41d(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> On 6/29/06, Chris <chris.kcat(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> > One could argue Windows itself is a mis-feature. :P Isn't the point of Wine to >> > duplicate Windows, feature-for-feature and bug-for-bug? IMO, autorun >> > capabilities should be included, though I personally don't care if it's on or >> > off by default, as long as there's an option in winecfg. I'll just turn it >> > off myself. Or perhaps even a popup notification upon the first detected >> > autorun-capable disc, asking if you want to turn autorun on or off. >> > autorun.inf needs to be parsed anyway, since it can set an icon for the >> > drive. >> No, I think the point of Wine is to run Windows programs on top of >> Unix. We don't need autorun to run Windows programs at all. Wine often >> leaves out features that are in Windows because they aren't needed to >> get Windows programs to run. >> >> Running whatever code happens to be on a cd without asking the user is >> a very bad idea. I don't want to see it happen, and I think most real >> Wine devs probably feel the same way. >> >> Gnome already has a feature that can ask the user what to do when a cd >> is inserted. KDE probably has a similar feature. I think they'd be the >> people to ask if you want something like Windows' autorun. > Having the ability to autorun cds is most definitely not a misfeature. Of course it's not. It's the perfect means of distributing trojans, backdoors, rootkits and other very useful software an every CD, including DVDs and music CDs. Vitaliy.

June 30, 2006

Re: [Tools/Wine.inf] Set Internet Explorer version

by Vitaliy Margolen

Thursday, June 29, 2006, 6:28:11 PM, Olaf Leidinger wrote: > On Thu, 29 Jun 2006 10:56:12 -0700 > "James Hawkins" <truiken(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> On 6/28/06, Maarten Lankhorst <M.B.Lankhorst(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> Should we require that people install Internet Explorer or should we put >>> in patches that increase application compatibility with vanilla wine? >> >> I don't know why we would require people to install IE, when we have a >> replacement for it already. > Web designers - to see what their pages look like in IE. But they could also install IE 7. As been mentioned before this argument is invalid. Native IE does not and will not behave like on real windows. Thus rendering any such tests invalid. Vitaliy.

June 30, 2006

Re: [Tools/Wine.inf] Set Internet Explorer version

by Olaf Leidinger

On Thu, 29 Jun 2006 10:56:12 -0700 "James Hawkins" <truiken(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On 6/28/06, Maarten Lankhorst <M.B.Lankhorst(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Should we require that people install Internet Explorer or should we put > > in patches that increase application compatibility with vanilla wine? > > > > I don't know why we would require people to install IE, when we have a > replacement for it already. Web designers - to see what their pages look like in IE. But they could also install IE 7.

June 30, 2006

Re: [Tools/Wine.inf] Set Internet Explorer version

by James Hawkins

On 6/29/06, Olaf Leidinger <leidola(a)newcon.de> wrote: > On Thu, 29 Jun 2006 10:56:12 -0700 > "James Hawkins" <truiken(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > On 6/28/06, Maarten Lankhorst <M.B.Lankhorst(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > Should we require that people install Internet Explorer or should we put > > > in patches that increase application compatibility with vanilla wine? > > > > > > > I don't know why we would require people to install IE, when we have a > > replacement for it already. > > Web designers - to see what their pages look like in IE. But they could also install IE 7. > He was asking if we should *require* people to install IE, and I said no, we shouldn't. If someone wants to install IE, go ahead, but apps that depend on the presence of IE should work with builtin IE. -- James Hawkins

June 29, 2006

Re: urlmon: Implement URLDownloadToCacheFile

by James Hawkins

On 6/29/06, Troy Rollo <wine(a)troy.rollo.name> wrote: > > This is not the correct behaviour - doing this will result in the cache > directories filling up with files that are not mentioned in the cache index. > You should be calling CreateUrlCacheEntryW to get the file name for the new > file. I was looking for something like that, thanks Troy. -- James Hawkins

June 29, 2006

Re: DDRAW: Releasing attached surfaces

by Stefan Dösinger

Am Donnerstag 29 Juni 2006 16:43 schrieb Krzysztof Benkowski: > Hello, > In the latest version of wine (0.9.16) there is a regression which makes > Dune 2000 crash. > After some debugging i found that the problem lays in > IDirectDrawSurfaceImpl_Release method. > The game (Dune 2000) shows that the assumption that all attached > surfaces should be destroyed > regardless of their refcount is wrong. After a long google session I found a downloadable demo, but I can't reproduce the bug. The game starts fine and I can play just fine. The game doesn't clean up properly, it doesn't release the front buffer(stays at refcount 1), and of course the back buffer is left with refcount 2. The cleanup code in dllMain releases both surfaces and the directdraw interface. I noticed that 8 bit graphics do not work. Can you make sure that you have updated to the latest git code and mail me a +ddraw trace if the problem still occurs? Stefan

June 29, 2006