February 2010 - Wine-Devel - list.winehq.org

Re: [2/2] wordpad: Number of preview pages to show when unzoomed is persistent.

by James Mckenzie

>Either one or two pages may be shown in print preview when zoomed out. >This value is stored in the registry in native wordpad, and preserved >while opening and closing the print preview. Zooming in will only show one >page, but the pages shown value must be saved because it will return to the >preview pages shown value after unzooming completely. If two pages should >be shown when there is only one page of text, then a second blank page is >shown. Dylan: The Windows version of Wordpad also stores the last font values (name/point sized) used in the Registry as well. Is this needed/desired with the Wine version? Thank you. James McKenzie

Feb. 24, 2010

Using assert() in wine dll code

by Paul Chitescu

Hi! Recently I've run into excessive use of assertions in some code after a regression was caused by one of my commits. A parameter that came from the application was "validated" this way. The code in question is in quartz.dll but there are asserts in many other places, a short grep in the dlls directory found 1387 of them... I suggest we carefully evaluate asserts from wine dll code. Only locally computed conditions should trigger an assertion failure (in case we have coding errors). Parameters received from function calls should either return an error (and possibly a WARN or ERR message) or segfault if Windows does the same (so a handler would potentially catch the proper exception). Would this qualify as a task or tasklet? Paul Chitescu

Feb. 24, 2010

Re: ntdll/tests: Add more tests for registry symlinks.

by Paul Vriens

Hi Alexandre, This one made my Vista (Ultimate SP2) box starting to crash (the box itself not just the test). Another Vista Ultimate SP2 system doesn't show this issue. Both boxes are VMware guests btw though on different hosts. The attached patch shows the culprit but I'm not sure if the preceding NtOpenKey block should be skipped as well. We can just "if (0)" this whole block but we will never be sure how many systems were affected. Does the fact that one of my boxes crashes warrant the skipping of this particular test? -- Cheers, Paul.

Feb. 24, 2010

Re: user32: DeleteDC() should allow to delete a DC returned by GetDC(). Take 2.

by Alexandre Julliard

Dmitry Timoshkov <dmitry(a)codeweavers.com> writes: > The test passes under XP SP3. > --- > dlls/gdi32/dc.c | 2 +- > dlls/gdi32/tests/dc.c | 107 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- > dlls/user32/painting.c | 2 +- > 3 files changed, 108 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) You still need to test window DCEs (CS_OWNDC). -- Alexandre Julliard julliard(a)winehq.org

Feb. 24, 2010

Re: user32: Use whole window rectangle for UpdateLayeredWindow

by Alexandre Julliard

Nikolay Sivov <nsivov(a)codeweavers.com> writes: > @@ -3398,14 +3398,14 @@ BOOL WINAPI UpdateLayeredWindowIndirect( HWND hwnd, const UPDATELAYEREDWINDOWINF > > if (info->hdcSrc) > { > - HDC hdc = GetDCEx( hwnd, 0, DCX_CACHE ); > + HDC hdc = GetWindowDC( hwnd ); > > if (hdc) > { > int x = 0, y = 0; > RECT rect; > > - GetClientRect( hwnd, &rect ); > + GetWindowRect( hwnd, &rect ); > if (info->pptSrc) > { > x = info->pptSrc->x; > @@ -3415,8 +3415,8 @@ BOOL WINAPI UpdateLayeredWindowIndirect( HWND hwnd, const UPDATELAYEREDWINDOWINF > if (!info->prcDirty || (info->prcDirty && IntersectRect(&rect, &rect, info->prcDirty))) > { > TRACE( "copying window %p pos %d,%d\n", hwnd, x, y ); > - BitBlt( hdc, rect.left, rect.top, rect.right, rect.bottom, > - info->hdcSrc, rect.left + x, rect.top + y, SRCCOPY ); > + BitBlt( hdc, 0, 0, rect.right - rect.left, rect.bottom - rect.top, > + info->hdcSrc, x, y, SRCCOPY ); Shouldn't you map prcDirty to window coordinates before intersecting? -- Alexandre Julliard julliard(a)winehq.org

Feb. 24, 2010

Re: user32: Windows allows to delete a busy DC, add a test case.

by Alexandre Julliard

Dmitry Timoshkov <dmitry(a)codeweavers.com> writes: > The test passes under XP SP3. > > --- > dlls/gdi32/tests/dc.c | 43 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- > dlls/user32/painting.c | 17 ++++------------- > 2 files changed, 46 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-) You'd want to verify this with class and windows DCs too before removing the check. -- Alexandre Julliard julliard(a)winehq.org

Feb. 24, 2010

Re: [PATCH] ole32: ignore HighPart in the Seek method HGLOBAL streams. [try 2]

by Reece Dunn

On 24 February 2010 11:41, Alexandre Julliard <julliard(a)winehq.org> wrote: > Reece Dunn <msclrhd(a)googlemail.com> writes: > >> On 24 February 2010 11:06, Alexandre Julliard <julliard(a)winehq.org> wrote: >>> It may be the simplest, but the right way is to add such a test and >>> figure out the appropriate behavior. >> >> Will do -- that was next on my things to do. >> >> Do I need to do that first before this change, or after it? > > Before, since otherwise you are removing code that may still be needed. I have run some tests on XP and Win7: Seek 0xFFFFFFFF: hr=80030019, High=00000000, Low=00000000 Seek 0x80000000: hr=80030019, High=00000000, Low=00000000 Seek 0x7FFFFFFF: hr=00000000, High=00000000, Low=7fffffff Seek 0x00000009: hr=00000000, High=00000000, Low=80000008 Seek 0x7FFFFFFF: hr=00000000, High=00000000, Low=00000007 So it looks like Windows: 1/ does not accept a LowPart that is greater than 0x7FFFFFFF; 2/ does not check for integer overflow. I will clean these up and write them as proper tests for ole32:hglobalstream and then fix the todo blocks to implement the correct behaviour later on today. Thanks, - Reece

Feb. 24, 2010

Re: tests: WINETEST_STRICT=1 disables broken().

by Alexandre Julliard

<Joerg-Cyril.Hoehle(a)t-systems.com> writes: > It would be valuable if, from time to time, WTB on test.winehq > would run the XP/7/Vista tests with WINETEST_STRICT to assess how > close Wine really is to native behaviour. > > I'm not 100% satisfied with WINETEST_STRICT. Beside > WINETEST_INTERACTIVE, I'm wondering whether it is time to > turn WINETEST_DEBUG into a bit field. Then Greg, our > WTB hero, would not need to update the web GUI every > time a new env variable is proposed. Then everybody could > easily submit WTB jobs in either strict or normal mode. You can do the same thing by changing WINETEST_PLATFORM, no need for a separate variable. -- Alexandre Julliard julliard(a)winehq.org

Feb. 24, 2010

Re: [PATCH] ole32: ignore HighPart in the Seek method HGLOBAL streams. [try 2]

by Alexandre Julliard

Reece Dunn <msclrhd(a)googlemail.com> writes: > On 24 February 2010 11:06, Alexandre Julliard <julliard(a)winehq.org> wrote: >> It may be the simplest, but the right way is to add such a test and >> figure out the appropriate behavior. > > Will do -- that was next on my things to do. > > Do I need to do that first before this change, or after it? Before, since otherwise you are removing code that may still be needed. -- Alexandre Julliard julliard(a)winehq.org

Feb. 24, 2010

Re: [PATCH] ole32: ignore HighPart in the Seek method HGLOBAL streams. [try 2]

by Reece Dunn

On 24 February 2010 11:06, Alexandre Julliard <julliard(a)winehq.org> wrote: > Reece Dunn <msclrhd(a)googlemail.com> writes: > >> NOTE: A check for integer overflow would be `position.low + move.low < >> position.low`, but there are no current tests to say if integer >> overflow is handled (and how it is handled) here in the tests. >> Therefore, the simplest implementation is just to remove the previous >> check. > > It may be the simplest, but the right way is to add such a test and > figure out the appropriate behavior. Will do -- that was next on my things to do. Do I need to do that first before this change, or after it? - Reece

Feb. 24, 2010