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

Re: gameux: Add declaration of IGameExplorer2 interface

by Vincent Povirk

I think you want to leave the configure change out of this patch. 2010/6/1 Mariusz Pluciński <vshader(a)gmail.com>: > --- > configure | 1 + > configure.ac | 1 + > include/gameux.idl | 16 ++++++++++++++++ > 3 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) > > > > > > >

June 1, 2010

Re: [PATCH 4/4] winecfg: Cosmetic improvements to the about panel

by Joel Holdsworth

On Tue, 2010-06-01 at 20:05 +0200, Alexandre Julliard wrote: > Joel Holdsworth <joel(a)airwebreathe.org.uk> writes: > > > Are PNG icons supported? It didn't look like they were when I checked. > > Also, sizes larger than 255px, are only partially supported in the > > format. So any app, including wine would have legitimate reasons to > > reject such a file. > > png icons are not supported but uncompressed ones should work > fine. If it really doesn't work you can always use a bitmap. > Are you sure? I really do think using PNGs is preferable. The PNG is 22.8kB, whereas a BMP would be 237.2kB - over 10x larger! If I use a BMP, it will make the winecfg executable bloat up 25%. By contrast importing GDI+ or WIC seems to me like a small price to pay.

June 1, 2010

Re: AppDB 64 bit flag?

by Danila Sentiabov

On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 17:29, Rosanne DiMesio <dimesio(a)earthlink.net>wrote: > > 32 and 64 bit should be listed as separate versions of the app. > > This should be clearly stated in AppDB submission forms using big red capital letters to be effective. -- Best regards, Danila Sentiabov aka dsent

June 1, 2010

Re: [PATCH 4/4] winecfg: Cosmetic improvements to the about panel

by Alexandre Julliard

Joel Holdsworth <joel(a)airwebreathe.org.uk> writes: > Are PNG icons supported? It didn't look like they were when I checked. > Also, sizes larger than 255px, are only partially supported in the > format. So any app, including wine would have legitimate reasons to > reject such a file. png icons are not supported but uncompressed ones should work fine. If it really doesn't work you can always use a bitmap. -- Alexandre Julliard julliard(a)winehq.org

June 1, 2010

Re: [PATCH 4/4] winecfg: Cosmetic improvements to the about panel

by Joel Holdsworth

Are PNG icons supported? It didn't look like they were when I checked. Also, sizes larger than 255px, are only partially supported in the format. So any app, including wine would have legitimate reasons to reject such a file. On Tue, 2010-06-01 at 11:38 +0200, Alexandre Julliard wrote: > Joel Holdsworth <joel(a)airwebreathe.org.uk> writes: > > > +GpImage* LoadPNGResourceW(HINSTANCE hInst, LPCWSTR lpName) > > +{ > > You should be able to use an icon for this, there shouldn't be any need > to involve gdiplus. >

June 1, 2010

Re: kernel32 nls file codepage conversion

by Alexandre Julliard

Frédéric Delanoy <frederic.delanoy(a)gmail.com> writes: > In fact I was also fixing a spelling error (Arménian -> Arménien) and just > wondered > whether I could also convert it into UTF8 (M.Stefaniuc seemed to be OK with > that). > > Or maybe it's safer to just fix the typo without converting character > encoding at the same time? Yes, that's preferable. These files are more than translations, they are data that many apps rely upon, so we need to be more conservative than with plain rc files. Converting to utf-8 should wait until after 1.2. -- Alexandre Julliard julliard(a)winehq.org

June 1, 2010

Re: [PATCH] shlwapi: Implement SHGetIniStringW

by testbot＠testbot.winehq.org

Hi, While running your changed tests on Windows, I think I found new failures. Being a bot and all I'm not very good at pattern recognition, so I might be wrong, but could you please double-check? Full results can be found at http://testbot.winehq.org/JobDetails.pl?Key=2417 Your paranoid android. === W2KPROSP4 (32 bit ordinal) === ordinal.c:601: Test failed: GetShellSecurityDescriptor should fail ordinal.c:624: Test failed: returned value is not valid SD No test summary line found === W7PRO (32 bit ordinal) === ordinal.c:1773: Test failed: got 26 ordinal.c:1780: Test failed: got 11 ordinal.c:1816: Test failed: got 11 ordinal.c:1823: Test failed: got 26 ordinal.c:1831: Test failed: got 26 ordinal.c:1839: Test failed: got 37, length 38 ordinal.c:1850: Test failed: got 40 ordinal.c:1861: Test failed: got 21 === W7PROX64 (32 bit ordinal) === ordinal.c:1780: Test failed: got 11 ordinal.c:1816: Test failed: got 11 ordinal.c:1861: Test failed: got 19 ordinal.c:1872: Test failed: got 22 === W7PROX64 (64 bit ordinal) === ordinal.c:1767: Test failed: got 10 ordinal.c:1788: Test failed: got 7 ordinal.c:1801: Test failed: got 10 ordinal.c:1809: Test failed: got 10 ordinal.c:1839: Test failed: got 32, length 33 ordinal.c:1850: Test failed: got 35 ordinal.c:1861: Test failed: got 19 ordinal.c:1872: Test failed: got 22

June 1, 2010

Re: kernel32 nls file codepage conversion

by Frédéric Delanoy

2010/6/1 Alexandre Julliard <julliard(a)winehq.org> > Frédéric Delanoy <frederic.delanoy(a)gmail.com> writes: > > > Autogenerated? From which source/using which mechanism? > > Actually it's not generated. Still, I'd suggest to leave it alone unless > there are things that need to be changed in there. > > -- > Alexandre Julliard <julliard(a)winehq.org> > In fact I was also fixing a spelling error (Arménian -> Arménien) and just wondered whether I could also convert it into UTF8 (M.Stefaniuc seemed to be OK with that). Or maybe it's safer to just fix the typo without converting character encoding at the same time? Frédéric

June 1, 2010

Re: kernel32 nls file codepage conversion

by Alexandre Julliard

Frédéric Delanoy <frederic.delanoy(a)gmail.com> writes: > Autogenerated? From which source/using which mechanism? Actually it's not generated. Still, I'd suggest to leave it alone unless there are things that need to be changed in there. -- Alexandre Julliard julliard(a)winehq.org

June 1, 2010

Re: kernel32 nls file codepage conversion

by Dmitry Timoshkov

Frédéric Delanoy <frederic.delanoy(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Autogenerated? From which source/using which mechanism? Have a look at the file history. > If this is the case, shouldn't there be a comment in the file header that > says so? Not necessarily. These data represent what Windows has, there is nothing to change there. -- Dmitry.

June 1, 2010