September 2009 - Wine-Devel

Re: [PATCH 2/7] dpwsockx: Implementation of SPInit

by Henri Verbeet

2009/9/1 Ismael Barros <razielmine(a)gmail.com>: > +typedef struct tagDPSP_MSG_HEADER > +{ > + DWORD size; /* size & 0x000FFFFF, token & 0xFFF00000 */ > + SOCKADDR_IN SockAddr; > +} DPSP_MSG_HEADER, *LPDPSP_MSG_HEADER; > +typedef const DPSP_MSG_HEADER* LPCDPSP_MSG_HEADER; > + It seems you're sending this over the network, so you should make sure it's correctly packed, and take the byte order into account.

Sept. 1, 2009

Re: [PATCH 1/7] dpwsockx: Stub implementation

by Henri Verbeet

2009/9/1 Ismael Barros <razielmine(a)gmail.com>: > --- > dlls/dpwsockx/Makefile.in | 2 +- > dlls/dpwsockx/dpwsockx_main.c | 164 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- > 2 files changed, 163 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > This patch seems to assume the application will never pass NULL for "data", is that safe to assume? If applications aren't allowed to pass NULL it's ok to crash, although it might make your life simpler if it isn't inside a TRACE/FIXME.

Sept. 1, 2009

Re: [PATCH 4/4] openal32: Add thunks for EFX functions

by Henri Verbeet

I suppose 32-bit reads are atomic on x86, provided the variable is aligned correctly, but shouldn't access to CurrentCtx technically be synchronized?

Sept. 1, 2009

Re: shlwapi: Implement stubs for missing functions required by IE6

by Dmitry Timoshkov

"Owen Rudge" <orudge(a)codeweavers.com> wrote: > +HRESULT WINAPI IUnknown_UIActivateIO(IUnknown *lpUnknown, BOOL fActivate, LPMSG lpMsg) > +HRESULT WINAPI SHCreatePropertyBagOnRegKey (HKEY hKey, LPCWSTR pszSubKey, > + DWORD grfMode, REFIID riid, void **ppv) > +HRESULT WINAPI SHGetViewStatePropertyBag(LPCITEMIDLIST pidl, LPWSTR lpszBagName, > +INT WINAPI SHFormatDateTimeW(const FILETIME UNALIGNED *fileTime, DWORD *flags, > +INT WINAPI SHFormatDateTimeA(const FILETIME UNALIGNED *fileTime, DWORD *flags, It's better to send separate patches for each of the APIs and avoid hungarian notation as much as possible -- Dmitry.

Sept. 1, 2009

Re: programs/clock: Corrected a small lexical error in the italian translation (Corrected)

by James McKenzie

Riccardo Loti wrote: > Il Sun, 30 Aug 2009 15:23:40 -0700, James McKenzie ha scritto: > > >> Riccardo Loti wrote: >> >>> Il Sat, 29 Aug 2009 11:56:46 -0700, James Mckenzie ha scritto: >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>>> Fixed a small typing error in the italian translation of clock.exe in >>>>> the property menu label (Properietà -> Proprietà). Compiled and >>>>> tested correctly on Ubuntu 9.04 64bit. >>>>> >>>>> (My first patch I send, so please be kind for any error, I'll be >>>>> happy to correct it if pointed to, thanks) >>>>> >>>>> P.S.: For some reason the previous mail attachment showed up empty in >>>>> the archives list, even if sent mail is correct, and using >>>>> Thunderbird I prefer not to paste it int he message body. Sorry for >>>>> double sending. >>>>> >>>>> >>>> Riccardo: >>>> >>>> Please look at the processed mail message before sending to make sure >>>> that your patch is an attachment and not bound in-line. Thunderbird >>>> likes to do this to text attachments, so you might want to change the >>>> extension to .patch or .diff so Thunderbird will not do this. >>>> >>>> I did not have this problem with using git when git was configured per >>>> the GitWine page on the Wiki. >>>> >>>> James McKenzie >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> I will check, anyway I'll probably just configure git properly and send >>> mail from git send-email. >>> Anyway, about this patch itself, is it correct? I just have to wait for >>> it to be accepted or refused now? >>> >>> >> Using git-send is preferred to copy/paste. Thunderbird seems to >> cooperate with it once you have git setup properly. >> >> And the patch looks good. >> >> Alexandre is the one who approves/denies any patch for the Wine code >> base. >> >> James McKenzie >> > > I Couldn't have asked for more precise informations. ;) > > That was actually all I needed to know, I suppose I'll just wait... and > dedicate to other bug in the meanwhile. > Congratulations on your first accepted patch. You are ahead of me, but I'm working on a bug that was reported a long time ago. James McKenzie

Sept. 1, 2009

Re: [PATCH] [WineDbg]: fix backend prototypes for PowerPC and Alpha

by Austin English

On Mon, Aug 31, 2009 at 3:02 PM, Eric Pouech<eric.pouech(a)orange.fr> wrote: > > > > A+ > --- > > programs/winedbg/be_alpha.c | 8 ++++---- > programs/winedbg/be_ppc.c | 8 ++++---- > 2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-) > > > diff --git a/programs/winedbg/be_alpha.c b/programs/winedbg/be_alpha.c > index aeeb79a..5f40f71 100644 > --- a/programs/winedbg/be_alpha.c > +++ b/programs/winedbg/be_alpha.c > @@ -60,25 +60,25 @@ static const struct dbg_internal_var* be_alpha_init_registers(CONTEXT* ctx) > return be_alpha_ctx; > } > > -static unsigned be_alpha_is_step_over_insn(void* insn) > +static unsigned be_alpha_is_step_over_insn(const void* insn) > { > dbg_printf("not done\n"); > return FALSE; > } > > -static unsigned be_alpha_is_function_return(void* insn) > +static unsigned be_alpha_is_function_return(const void* insn) > { > dbg_printf("not done\n"); > return FALSE; > } > > -static unsigned be_alpha_is_break_insn(void* insn) > +static unsigned be_alpha_is_break_insn(const void* insn) > { > dbg_printf("not done\n"); > return FALSE; > } > > -static unsigned be_alpha_is_func_call(void* insn, void** insn_callee) > +static unsigned be_alpha_is_func_call(const void* insn, void** insn_callee) > { > return FALSE; > } > diff --git a/programs/winedbg/be_ppc.c b/programs/winedbg/be_ppc.c > index 2e8826e..c2bc431 100644 > --- a/programs/winedbg/be_ppc.c > +++ b/programs/winedbg/be_ppc.c > @@ -73,25 +73,25 @@ static const struct dbg_internal_var* be_ppc_init_registers(CONTEXT* ctx) > return be_ppc_ctx; > } > > -static unsigned be_ppc_is_step_over_insn(void* insn) > +static unsigned be_ppc_is_step_over_insn(const void* insn) > { > dbg_printf("not done\n"); > return FALSE; > } > > -static unsigned be_ppc_is_function_return(void* insn) > +static unsigned be_ppc_is_function_return(const void* insn) > { > dbg_printf("not done\n"); > return FALSE; > } > > -static unsigned be_ppc_is_break_insn(void* insn) > +static unsigned be_ppc_is_break_insn(const void* insn) > { > dbg_printf("not done\n"); > return FALSE; > } These all work fine on PPC. > -static unsigned be_ppc_is_func_call(void* insn, void** insn_callee) > +static unsigned be_ppc_is_func_call(const void* insn, void** insn_callee) > { > return FALSE; > } Still got a warning here. -- -Austin

Sept. 1, 2009