February 2011 - Wine-Devel - list.winehq.org

Re: Slides for Wine talk at Scale tomorrow

by André Hentschel

Am 26.02.2011 01:22, schrieb Dan Kegel: > Anyone going to be at Scale in Los Angeles this weekend? > I'll be giving a talk there tomorrow afternoon, showing > off how well Wine works and demonstrating how to > use and extend winetricks. Draft slides are up > at http://kegel.com/wine/scale9x/ > > I still have time to tweak them, so if you have suggestions > > ... I'd love to hear them, but i'm far away and even don't know what the scale9x is. Slides look great, but the example of installing Firefox is not choosen so good. (Don't get me wrong, i love to run nightly firefox builds in Wine, even the 64-bit version) I think that makes it look like you need Wine to run Firefox on Linux, or that Open Source Apps run better in Wine than others. Then "contribute your change to winetricks.org" at winetricks.org is no easy contribute button or something, further i also can't see a way for a normal developer to send a patch on that site. Remaining Problems: Performance, that sounds very general.. .net, at least mention mono :) -- Best Regards, André Hentschel

Feb. 26, 2011

Re: kernel32/tests: remove win9x hacks (try 2)

by James McKenzie

On 2/24/11 4:50 AM, Alexandre Julliard wrote: > Damjan Jovanovic<damjan.jov(a)gmail.com> writes: > >> What's the first Git version of Wine on which Win9x tests started >> being removed? Is it 226c44097b26dcb547d533cb1690f60182d1728e or >> b7c18d104b2d68a2a07574f01bb306df3fc138d2? It might still be useful to >> cross-compile tests on the version before that one and sporadically >> run them against future versions of Wine. > You are missing the point. The win9x support makes the tests less > strict, by allowing additional behaviors, and that only when running on > Windows. Running them on Wine is pointless since these code paths are > never executed. In this context, I will state that you are correct. My patch was to remove a test based on the getversion() code and actually test if a called UNICODE function exists. It was not to add any additional test case results specific to Windows9x/ME (and from the testing I did, there was no difference on a live Windows98SE system vice a live WindowsXP system.) Adding broken() calls just to make a test pass on Windows9x should be discouraged. Creating specific tests for Windows9x/ME is better, but at this point in time not needed. We need to move forward with incorporating more of the API/ABI at the current running level. If someone wants to dedicate to completing an old and very undocumented functions, this should not be discouraged, but rather encouraged to work on the current project. However, if Wine has specific functionality to support Windows9x/ME based programs the tests should ensure that we don't break it when trying to add (for instance) Windows7 functionality. As to adding functions to emulate Windows9x/ME functions, that should only be done to clear a bug report and not as a priority. Some programs will now not run with Windows7 due to changes in the API/ABI. James McKenzie

Feb. 26, 2011

Re: Slides for Wine talk at Scale tomorrow

by Dan Kegel

On Fri, Feb 25, 2011 at 4:22 PM, Dan Kegel <dank(a)kegel.com> wrote: > Anyone going to be at Scale in Los Angeles this weekend? > I'll be giving a talk there tomorrow afternoon, showing > off how well Wine works and demonstrating how to > use and extend winetricks. Draft slides are up > at http://kegel.com/wine/scale9x/ > > I still have time to tweak them, so if you have suggestions ... I'd love to hear them. (whoops, itchy send finger) - Dan

Feb. 26, 2011

Slides for Wine talk at Scale tomorrow

by Dan Kegel

Anyone going to be at Scale in Los Angeles this weekend? I'll be giving a talk there tomorrow afternoon, showing off how well Wine works and demonstrating how to use and extend winetricks. Draft slides are up at http://kegel.com/wine/scale9x/ I still have time to tweak them, so if you have suggestions

Feb. 26, 2011

Re: gdi32/tests: remove win9x hacks

by Marvin

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=9519 Your paranoid android. === WVISTAADM (32 bit icm) === Failure running script in VM: The specified guest user must be logged in interactively to perform this operation

Feb. 25, 2011

Re: crypt32/tests: remove win9x hacks

by Marvin

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=9515 Your paranoid android. === WNT4WSSP6 (32 bit store) === store.c:962: Test failed: Expected 1 certificates, got 2 store.c:1761: Test failed: Expected CRYPT_E_ASN1_BADTAG, got 80093005

Feb. 25, 2011

Re: Dynamic OpenSSL import library

by Juan Lang

Hi Tim, > Before going to the effort of completing the library, and porting it back to > the Wine tree, I thought I'd reach out first to see if it's even something > that's of interest? If it is, great, we can complete the library and submit > some patches for review, but if the concept isn't of interest then we'll > just continue using it internally. I believe we're not interested. Thanks for offering. Long term, our intent is to avoid loading OpenSSL, especially in wininet/winhttp. wininet and winhttp should use schannel rather than loading OpenSSL directly. Thanks, --Juan

Feb. 25, 2011

Re: Dynamic OpenSSL import library

by Henri Verbeet

On 25 February 2011 17:56, Tim Burrell <tim.burrell(a)transgaming.com> wrote: > Anyone have thoughts / questions? > I'm not sure how relevant the problem this solves is to Wine, it's strikes me as something that's mainly interesting for people distributing non-distro binaries.

Feb. 25, 2011

Re: kernel32/tests: remove win9x hacks (try 2)

by Alexandre Julliard

Saulius Krasuckas <saulius2(a)ar.fi.lt> writes: > Thanks. Do you mean something like integrating OpenWatcom C compiler > optionally into dlls/*/tests? > > And then running 16-bit part of winetest on Win3.1? WinXP seems to be > broken in my case. While Win98 seems OK. No, winetest would run on XP. If your app doesn't work on XP then it's unlikely to work on Wine. We are *not* going to replicate the Win95 16-bit architecture. > What is best in your opinion to do for those still interested in win9x's > 32-bit behaviour? The only alternative coming to my mind is forking > winetest. Sure, go ahead and create a git tree from the stable branch, and maintain the Win9x tests in there, if that's your idea of fun. -- Alexandre Julliard julliard(a)winehq.org

Feb. 25, 2011

Re: gdi32: first look for a printer driver name in the registry (try 6)

by André Hentschel

Hi, Now you entirely remove the ini-stuff, why? and why do you use a OR (||) for the registry function? -- Best Regards, André Hentschel

Feb. 25, 2011