August 2007 - Wine-Devel - list.winehq.org

Re: Direct3D Game test framework

by martin pilka

> is wined3d built? That was it - I was missing some dev libs. Thanks! I fixed that, now I am receiving this error: Not all of the E2 drivers were found. Check that you have 3DMark installed properly. Attached are the log files from installation and run. Martin

Aug. 7, 2007

[Winetest] Possible removal of LoadLibrary and friends in the conformance tests

by Paul Vriens

Hi, With the current version of winetest, conformance tests for which the main dll is not available will not run anymore. This will be reported on test.winehq.org. We will be seeing the new approach as of 12:00 GMT when the new winetest.exe is available and the first tests come in. Several tests currently check for the existence of the dll via LoadLibrary and do a lot of GetProcAddress calls to retrieve function pointers. This should not be needed anymore in most cases. The tests that come to mind: d3d8 d3d9 d3drm gdiplus localspl localui pdh uxtheme and there are (and will be in the future) others. My plan, and this is open for discussion of course, is to: 1. Add the main dll back as part of the IMPORTS in the Makefile.in files 2. Change LoadLibrary to GetModuleHandle and still use GetProcAddress to catch unexported functions (for a short period). We do need to reporting missing functions. 3. Remove GetModuleHandle and/or GetProcAddress's if possible and make more use of 'skip' if needed. This will be a lengthy process so if there are volunteers, please step up. Eventhough this is some considerable amount of work to be done, in the end the code will be cleaner (and several lines shorter). Comments/remarks ? Cheers, Paul.

Aug. 7, 2007

Re: #1 winhttp: Forward WinHttpTime{From, To}SystemTime to their counterparts in wininet.

by Dmitry Timoshkov

"Hans Leidekker" <hans(a)it.vu.nl> wrote: > +static DWORD map_info_level(DWORD level) > +{ > + DWORD ret = 0; > + > + switch (level & QUERY_HEADER_MASK) > + { > + case WINHTTP_QUERY_MIME_VERSION: ret = HTTP_QUERY_MIME_VERSION; break; > + case WINHTTP_QUERY_CONTENT_TYPE: ret = HTTP_QUERY_CONTENT_TYPE; break; ... > + switch (option) > + { > + case WINHTTP_OPTION_CALLBACK: opt = INTERNET_OPTION_CALLBACK; break; > + case WINHTTP_OPTION_CONNECT_TIMEOUT: opt = INTERNET_OPTION_CONNECT_TIMEOUT; break; Probably a simple lookup table for both mappings above is enough since WINHTTP_QUERY_xxx and WINHTTP_OPTION_xxx values a sequential (perhaps excepting some reserved/undocumented ones). -- Dmitry.

Aug. 7, 2007

FW: [Bug 2520] menu bar problem

by Ann & Jason Edmeades

>Vitaliy >Jason, please don't forget to cc wine-bugs when you reassign the bug. Yeah, sorry... Its late here :-) Out of interest, why don't we fix bugzilla to always enforce that userid (ie if it gets removed, it automatically gets inserted back). I'm sure I'm not the only one who forgets to do it sometimes? Jason

Aug. 6, 2007

Re: [WINE] WIDL regression between 0.9.38 and 0.9.39

by Dan Hipschman

On Mon, Aug 06, 2007 at 04:24:39PM +0200, Herv? Poussineau wrote: > Hi Dan, > > I'm using Wine IDL compiler to compile some .idl files, and I found a > regression in WIDL between 0.9.38 and 0.9.39. > As you are the one who mostly changed WIDL between these releases, I'm > sending you this email ;) > > My .idl file looks like this one: > > [ > uuid (00112233-4455-6677-8899-AABBCCDDEEFF), > version(1.0), > pointer_default(unique) > #ifndef __midl > ,explicit_handle > #endif > ] > interface MyInterface > { > unsigned long GetRoot(handle_t BindingHandle, > [out, string, size_is(Length)] wchar_t > *RootString, > [in] unsigned long Length); > } > > Of course, Microsoft MIDL accepts to compile this file, so WIDL should too. > WIDL 0.9.38 was working, but WIDL 0.9.39 gives the following error: > error: write_string_tfs: Unimplemented for type 0x1b of name: RootString > > Type 0x1b is RPC_FC_CARRAY, but write_string_tfs function only supports > RPC_FC_BYTE, RPC_FC_CHAR and RPC_FC_WCHAR. > > Any idea how to fix it, or am I forced to keep WIDL 0.9.38? > > Thanks in advance, > > Hervé Hi Hervé. Thanks for the bug report. The code related to this problem was being worked on quite a bit recently, so I don't doubt there may be a regression. I may be a bit slow to look at this since I'm in the middle of working on something else at the moment, hence I'm CC-ing the list so other people can see that the problem exists. Dan

Aug. 6, 2007

Re: [PATCH] msi: correct buffer overrun in msi_get_deferred_action().

by James Hawkins

On 8/5/07, William Waghorn <willw(a)litany.me.uk> wrote: > --- > dlls/msi/custom.c | 2 +- > 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/dlls/msi/custom.c b/dlls/msi/custom.c > index 390113e..17f581c 100644 > --- a/dlls/msi/custom.c > +++ b/dlls/msi/custom.c > @@ -153,7 +153,7 @@ static LPWSTR msi_get_deferred_action(LPCWSTR > action, LPCWSTR actiondata, > return strdupW(action); > > len = lstrlenW(action) + lstrlenW(actiondata) + > - lstrlenW(usersid) + lstrlenW(prodcode) + 5; > + lstrlenW(usersid) + lstrlenW(prodcode) + 9; > deferred = msi_alloc(len * sizeof(WCHAR)); > > sprintfW(deferred, format, actiondata, usersid, prodcode, action); > This has been properly fixed in git. -- James Hawkins

Aug. 6, 2007

Re: Wine disassembly and reverse engineering rules.

by Jesse Allen

On 8/6/07, Stefan Dösinger <stefandoesinger(a)gmx.at> wrote: > Am Montag, 6. August 2007 21:02 schrieb James Hawkins: > > "The reverse engineer is required to ask permission first, however." > > > > ...good luck with that. > Asking is easy :-) > > Does the reverse engineer have to get permission? If he does need the blessing > of the creator of the reverse engineered software/device, then the whole > interoperability clause would be pointless. (note that I didn't read the > DMCA, nor that page since disassembling Windows is pointless for me and I do > not really speak assembler) > > While living in America and going to school seeking a computer related degree, I had to take an ethics class on the industry. I did a presentation on the DMCA. Yes, the DMCA seems to be written such that any reverse engineering has to be done with the permission of the author or done in a very academic sense. Definitely no black hats... Now, where the DMCA concerns us, is whether you engage in circumvention technology. As far as Wine as concerned, it is not being written for that, and we don't really engage in reverse engineering in the sense of the way the DMCA is written for or against. But then again a court can totally change the meaning here.

Aug. 6, 2007

Missing library - faultrep.

by Peter Dons Tychsen

Hello. Wine is missing the library "faultrep". The library comes with Windows, and is used by apps for error reporting. Most apps don't really need it (unless something goes wrong), but simply require the DLL to be present. To start with i just wanted to add the DLL to Wine. I tried to submit a patch for this missing lib, but got zero response. Probably because there was something wrong with my commit. Any guess on what was wrong? /Pedro

Aug. 6, 2007

Re: Can we please have at least a minimal coding style ?

by Kai Blin

On Monday 06 August 2007 12:52:08 Stephan Rose wrote: > > Easy solution to that. I'm in absolute heaven with this feature... > > Eclipse 3.3 with CDT has an automatic code formatting feature, Ctrl > +Shift+F, my favorite keyboard shortcut now. =) > > May want to load some files into that and run that over the file to > instantly clean up stuff like that. You can tweak the code style to your > liking too. Is there an option to make git commit ignore whitespace-only changes? Otherwise you'll be in hell of a mess trying to commit your changes. Formatting-only patches usually aren't accepted. Cheers, Kai -- Kai Blin WorldForge developer http://www.worldforge.org/ Wine developer http://wiki.winehq.org/KaiBlin Samba team member http://www.samba.org/samba/team/ -- Will code for cotton.

Aug. 6, 2007

Re: Wine disassembly and reverse engineering rules.

by Stefan Dösinger

Am Montag, 6. August 2007 21:02 schrieb James Hawkins: > "The reverse engineer is required to ask permission first, however." > > ...good luck with that. Asking is easy :-) Does the reverse engineer have to get permission? If he does need the blessing of the creator of the reverse engineered software/device, then the whole interoperability clause would be pointless. (note that I didn't read the DMCA, nor that page since disassembling Windows is pointless for me and I do not really speak assembler)

Aug. 6, 2007