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

Re: git send-email (Was: Re: [PATCH 1/2] winmm: Trivial code simplifications and fixes.)

by Henri Verbeet

On 29 July 2011 16:38, Michael Stefaniuc <mstefani(a)redhat.com> wrote: > If you're new to (Wine) development or you do a lot of janitorial work I > would actually recommend to *avoid* git send-email. See it as an > opportunity to look again at your patch when you manually submit it. I think that's orthogonal. I certainly look patches over one last time after generating them with format-patch, before actually sending them with send-email. (And yes, it helps.) If you happen to already have a setup that works well for you, sure, keep using that. However, if you don't, I'd argue that it's well worth the time (also for the people trying to review the patches) to just learn how git send-email works. *Especially* for new contributors it just avoids stuff like wrapping, wrong character sets, wrong mime types, forgetting to attach the actual patch, sending to the wrong list, messing up the numbering, etc. (And of course common sense still applies. I.e., try with --dry-run, try sending some patches to yourself first to see what the various options actually do, etc.) > Like a last line of defense to spare you from embarrassment. Git is > powerful and it is kinda cool that you can efficiently submit the 7th > version of a 20 patch series on the same day! But that doesn't means it > is a great idea to actually do it; you'll only get yourself graylisted > by Alexandre. > Similar to above, I don't think this has much to do with what you're using to send the patches.

July 29, 2011

git send-email (Was: Re: [PATCH 1/2] winmm: Trivial code simplifications and fixes.)

by Michael Stefaniuc

Henri Verbeet wrote: > On 29 July 2011 09:46, <Joerg-Cyril.Hoehle(a)t-systems.com> wrote: >> these fixes all trivial errors I mentioned recently but one, plus a few ones I discovered since then. >> > These need to be separate patches, of course. I'd also encourage > everyone to just use git send-email for sending patches. As always a categorical "It depends!". git send-email is not for everybody. If you're new to (Wine) development or you do a lot of janitorial work I would actually recommend to *avoid* git send-email. See it as an opportunity to look again at your patch when you manually submit it. Like a last line of defense to spare you from embarrassment. Git is powerful and it is kinda cool that you can efficiently submit the 7th version of a 20 patch series on the same day! But that doesn't means it is a great idea to actually do it; you'll only get yourself graylisted by Alexandre. bye michael P.S.: "You" refers to the interested reader and not to Henri.

July 29, 2011

Re: patch for dlls/gdi32/dib.c: fixes crash

by Wolfgang Walter

Am Donnerstag, 28. Juli 2011 schrieb Huw Davies: > On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 04:14:56PM +0200, Wolfgang Walter wrote: > > I think that > > > > bitmapinfo_from_user_bitmapinfo() > > > > is the real culprit. I think colors gets to big (> 256) and therefore the > > size for the memcpy. > > Hopefully http://source.winehq.org/patches/data/77076 should fix this. Yes, it does. Thanks. -- Wolfgang Walter Studentenwerk München Anstalt des öffentlichen Rechts

July 29, 2011

Re: [PATCH 1/2] winmm: Trivial code simplifications and fixes.

by Henri Verbeet

On 29 July 2011 09:46, <Joerg-Cyril.Hoehle(a)t-systems.com> wrote: > these fixes all trivial errors I mentioned recently but one, plus a few ones I discovered since then. > These need to be separate patches, of course. I'd also encourage everyone to just use git send-email for sending patches.

July 29, 2011

Re: [PATCH 2/8] ntdll: rework the handling of server ioctls a little bit to avoid a crash with later patches

by Alexandre Julliard

Bernhard Loos <bernhardloos(a)googlemail.com> writes: > On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 7:46 PM, Alexandre Julliard <julliard(a)winehq.org> wrote: >> Bernhard Loos <bernhardloos(a)googlemail.com> writes: >> >>> @@ -1273,10 +1282,16 @@ static NTSTATUS server_ioctl_file( HANDLE handle, HANDLE event, >>> >>> if (wait_handle) >>> { >>> - NtWaitForSingleObject( wait_handle, (options & FILE_SYNCHRONOUS_IO_ALERT), NULL ); >>> - status = io->u.Status; >>> + status = NtWaitForSingleObject( wait_handle, (options & FILE_SYNCHRONOUS_IO_ALERT), NULL ); >>> + if (status == STATUS_USER_APC) >>> + { >>> + async->interrupted = TRUE; >>> + status = STATUS_CANCELLED; /* not really, the ioctl completes and event and the handle >>> + itself get signaled */ >>> + } >> >> This looks wrong. You can't claim it was cancelled if it's still >> running. >> >> -- >> Alexandre Julliard >> julliard(a)winehq.org >> > > I'm not really sure, what to do at this point. I can't exactly return > ERROR_SUCCESS because the operation is not completed yet. At best, I > can reenter the wait, but this will break in places, where the caller > depends on DeviceIoControl returning in case of a scheduled user apc. If the operation is supposed to be cancelled, then it should be cancelled properly. This probably needs to be done server-side. -- Alexandre Julliard julliard(a)winehq.org

July 29, 2011

Re: [5/7] cmd/tests: Add FOR /D tests

by Frédéric Delanoy

2011/7/28 Alexandre Julliard <julliard(a)winehq.org>: > Frédéric Delanoy <frederic.delanoy(a)gmail.com> writes: > >> --- >> programs/cmd/tests/test_builtins.cmd | 6 ++++++ >> programs/cmd/tests/test_builtins.cmd.exp | 11 +++++++++++ >> 2 files changed, 17 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) > > It fails here: > > ../../../tools/runtest -q -P wine -M cmd.exe -T ../../.. -p cmd.exe_test.exe.so batch.c && touch batch.ok > batch.c:239: Test succeeded inside todo block: unexpected char 0x0 position -1 in line 225 (got 'baz', wanted 'baz') > make: *** [batch.ok] Error 1 After some investigation, it seems windows expands file wildcards according to directory order, and not alphanumeric order. To get a consistent output order, we would need to pipe the "for" output into sort, but "sort" is not currently implemented. Frédéric

July 29, 2011

Re: [PATCH] shell32: Disable WOW64 redirection when converting pidls to UNIX paths. (try 2, resend)

by Paul Vriens

On 07/29/2011 01:29 AM, Octavian Voicu wrote: > + else > + win_skip("Not on WOW64, skipping test.\n"); Why a win_skip()? Isn't a normal skip() more appropriate? -- Cheers, Paul.

July 29, 2011

Re: ancient email messages being sent, or at least archived, again?

by Austin English

On Jul 28, 2011 10:50 PM, "Dan Kegel" <dank(a)kegel.com> wrote: > > What's with messages like > http://www.winehq.org/pipermail/wine-bugs/2011-July/285020.html ? > I was doing Bugzilla maintenance and cleared the unsent email queue. -Austin

July 29, 2011

ancient email messages being sent, or at least archived, again?

by Dan Kegel

What's with messages like http://www.winehq.org/pipermail/wine-bugs/2011-July/285020.html ?

July 29, 2011

Re: Nvidia GeForce GTX560 Ti detection fix

by Henri Verbeet

On 28 July 2011 22:46, <gwen(a)derpymail.com> wrote: > This patch fixes the problem that a GeForce GTX560 Ti GPU is not being > detected in current build. (http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=27924) > The change itself looks reasonable enough, though I don't have the hardware to verify the strings. Please use git to generate patches though, and include proper author information. See also http://wiki.winehq.org/SubmittingPatches.

July 28, 2011