March 2012 - Wine-Devel - list.winehq.org

Re: mshtml: Set outgoing pass-by-address variable in an error case case within confirm_safety_load.
by Jacek Caban July 18, 2012

July 18, 2012

Hi Gerald, On 03/07/12 23:35, Gerald Pfeifer wrote: > I noticed we return in this case, without initializing this variable. > Visual inspection indicates we do not seem to access the variable in > this error case, but a) better safe than sorry, and b) GCC 4.8 currently > warns about it. > > Not sure URLPOLICY_DISALLOW is the best return value, open for better > alternatives. I generally don't think this patch makes things any better (or worse). If we return an error, the caller should not expect this value to be sane. What's the GCC 4.8 warning? Jacek

2 4

Updating GSoC proposal
by Jacek Caban April 19, 2012

April 19, 2012

Hi all, GSoC is starting this year and, if we want to have good applications, we need to update our proposals. Usually the most attention is directed into adding new ones, while we keep obviously bad (or just bad IMO) proposals on the page. I'm planning to remove following project proposals: Security - implement sandboxing Theming - Implement Wine theming support NTDLL - support performance registry keys Winelib Aware Scons (or cmake) Cleanup Winemenubuilder to support generating Application Bundles on Mac OS X Wine-based application virtualization If someone knows a reason to not remove them, please reply. Cheers, Jacek

2 1

'Pending' patches state
by Dmitry Timoshkov April 10, 2012

April 10, 2012

Hello, http://source.winehq.org/patches has the following legend for the Pending patch status: Pending * The patch is not obviously correct at first glance. Making a more convincing argument, preferably in the form of a test case, may help. * Waiting for feedback from the main developer in that area. It's very confusing, and absolutely not clear what is required from the patch submitter, especially since *there is no any feedback on the patch*. 'Rejected' at least requies some sort of feedback, while 'Pending' doesn't. To me 'Pending' looks like a silent case of 'Reject', but without any obligation to explain why. I find myself on somewhat shaky ground when I see a bunch of my patches in the pending state, especially if they already contain the tests and main developer in the area I'm changing is Alexandre :). Is it possible to get at least some feedback for pending patches? Pretty please? -- Dmitry.

6 13

RFC: KUSER_SHARED_DATA update patch to fix bug 29168
by Joey Yandle April 10, 2012

April 10, 2012

Hi everybody, As originally discovered by Carsten Juttner, Star Wars: The Old Republic uses the time values in KUSER_SHARED_DATA to trigger network send buffers. wine does not currently update these values, so TOR does not make it past an initial server handshake. I'm attaching my current patch which fixes this. It updates the values every 15600000 nanoseconds as does Windows 7, and presumably all Windows versions. The words of the timers are written in the correct order for applications to detect clock tick. It uses a separate thread which does nothing else; a previous attempt at an NtTimer based solution did not work, presumably due to irregularity in the exact callback times. Attempts at setting thread priority were also abandoned after many people were unable to run the code. The patch does not check the return code of nanosleep; I could add code to nanosleep again for the remaining time in the case of an interrupt, but didn't think it was necessary. I could also change it to use clock_nanosleep, which would allow for more absolute timing. Please let me know what you think. cheers, Joey

9 34

Re: wined3d: Added PCI device IDs for AMD Radeon 6750M & 6770M
by Henri Verbeet April 2, 2012

April 2, 2012

On 31 March 2012 21:20, Gaurav Jain <gaurav(a)gauravjain.org> wrote: > CARD_AMD_RADEON_HD6600M = 0x6741, > + CARD_AMD_RADEON_HD6750M = 0x6741, If those are actually supposed to be the same, I don't think there's much of a point in this patch.

2 6

Re: [PATCH] wined3d: When releasing resources, don't perform any other operations on device if it has been released.
by Henri Verbeet April 2, 2012

April 2, 2012

This looks wrong. Is there a legitimate way that this can happen?

2 3

Wine test bot and win16 exe
by Christian Costa April 1, 2012

April 1, 2012

Hi, I wrote a win16 exe test file using open watcom but I cannot submit it to winebot. I fails saying "Unricognized file type". This is a little annoying. Is this a known limitation of wine test bot ? Thanks Christian

2 1

Re: [2/2] gdi32: Simplify font cache. (try 2)
by Alexandre Julliard April 1, 2012

April 1, 2012

Kusanagi Kouichi <slash(a)ac.auone-net.jp> writes: > @@ -1516,23 +1464,8 @@ static void add_face_to_cache(Face *face) > RegSetValueExW(hkey_face, face_full_name_value, 0, REG_SZ, (BYTE*)face->FullName, > (strlenW(face->FullName) + 1) * sizeof(WCHAR)); > > - reg_save_dword(hkey_face, face_index_value, face->face_index); > - reg_save_dword(hkey_face, face_italic_value, (face->ntmFlags & NTM_ITALIC) != 0); > - reg_save_dword(hkey_face, face_bold_value, (face->ntmFlags & NTM_BOLD) != 0); > - reg_save_dword(hkey_face, face_version_value, face->font_version); > - reg_save_dword(hkey_face, face_external_value, face->external); > - > - RegSetValueExW(hkey_face, face_font_sig_value, 0, REG_BINARY, (BYTE*)&face->fs, sizeof(face->fs)); > + RegSetValueExW(hkey_face, face_value, 0, REG_BINARY, (BYTE*)face, sizeof *face); I don't think that's a good idea. There are many things in the structure that don't make sense to have in the registry. Also this won't work on 64-bit. -- Alexandre Julliard julliard(a)winehq.org

2 2

Re: msi: add support for MSIRUNMODE_REBOOTNOW in MsiGetMode
by Hans Leidekker March 31, 2012

March 31, 2012

On Fri, 2012-03-30 at 17:27 -0700, Austin English wrote: > + case MSIRUNMODE_REBOOTNOW: > + r = package->need_reboot; > + break; > + MSIRUNMODE_REBOOTNOW and MSIRUNMODE_REBOOTATEND are not the same thing.

2 1

Re: quartz: update ICOM_THIS_MULTI to follow the new COM standard
by Jacek Caban March 31, 2012

March 31, 2012

On 03/30/12 17:55, Aric Stewart wrote: > diff --git a/dlls/quartz/quartz_private.h b/dlls/quartz/quartz_private.h > index 35cd52b..d2f680c 100644 > --- a/dlls/quartz/quartz_private.h > +++ b/dlls/quartz/quartz_private.h > @@ -38,7 +38,7 @@ > #define BYTES_FROM_MEDIATIME(time) SEC_FROM_MEDIATIME(time) > #define MSEC_FROM_MEDIATIME(time) ((time) / 10000) > > -#define ICOM_THIS_MULTI(impl,field,iface) impl* const This=(impl*)((char*)(iface) - offsetof(impl,field)) > +#define ICOM_THIS_MULTI(impl,field,iface) impl* const This=CONTAINING_RECORD(iface, impl, field) These should disappear once the clean up of affected code is done. Cheers, Jacek

3 5