May 2014 - Wine-Devel - list.winehq.org

Re: Japanese translation updates (try 4) for 1.7.19.

by Akihiro Sagawa

On Wed, 21 May 2014 12:09:30 -0400 (EDT), Toshiaki Hirose wrote: > From 16832fa3d12785db591144f2005f953dd8937b9f Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > Message-Id: <16832fa3d12785db591144f2005f953dd8937b9f.1400688520.git.t_hirose(a)aol.com> > From: Toshiaki Hirose <t_hirose(a)aol.com> > Date: Thu, 22 May 2014 01:08:29 +0900 > Subject: [PATCH] Japanese translation updates(try4) for 1.7.19 > > --- > po/ja.po | 159 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------------------------------- > 1 file changed, 65 insertions(+), 94 deletions(-) Looks good to me. Akihiro Sagawa

May 22, 2014

Re: Fix for PlgBlt, the XFORM matrix was calculated incorrectly

by Alexander Almaleh

Hi, Michael On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 4:56 AM, Michael Mc Donnell <michael(a)mcdonnell.dk>wrote: > The easiest way to get your patches accepted, in my experience, is to > write an automated test. That way it is easier for everyone to verify that > your patch is doing the right thing. We will be able to run it on the Wine > Testbot and see it working. > OK, I'll try to write a unit test. I found this tutorial - https://www.winehq.org/docs/winedev-guide/testing, is it the correct thing to read? > You might be able to get your patch in without the automated test, but I > think you need to explain clearly what was wrong with the old code and what > you are doing instead. A few more simplified examples that test other cases > in your bug report might also help. > The trouble is I don't quite remember the exact steps I took 5 years ago to come up with the new formula. However, I do remember I came up to it by solving a system of linear equations. Since XFORM matrix is applied to each point, I took 3-4 measurements of how points are transformed by PlgBlt, and then used that to make equations of the type applyXFORM(xSrc) = xDest. By solving the equations for the XFORM matrix, I came up with the correct formula I need to get the XFORM matrix from the input variables. I used an online linear equation solver, so there's no human error. I'll try to recreate the steps, maybe it'll be easier to just explain them. I'll look into making automated tests, too.

May 22, 2014

Re: Fix for PlgBlt, the XFORM matrix was calculated incorrectly

by Michael Mc Donnell

Hi Alexander On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 1:39 PM, Alexander Almaleh <sashoalm(a)gmail.com> wrote: > I had tried to submit a patch for that 5 years ago, but couldn't figure out > how to make a patch/test it, and eventually gave up and forgot about it. But > recently I remembered about it, and now I want to try again. The easiest way to get your patches accepted, in my experience, is to write an automated test. That way it is easier for everyone to verify that your patch is doing the right thing. We will be able to run it on the Wine Testbot and see it working. It might be difficult in your case though. Wine does usually not include big test files so you would probably have to write some code that draws a test image. The test image needs to be easy to verify in code if it has been transformed correctly. You might be able to draw a filled rectangle in one hdc and a filled parallelogram in another. Transform the filled rectangle using PlgBlt and then compare it to the parallelogram. I have not thought it all the way through so it might not work :-) It seems like there are no automated bitblt tests in the wine source tree. The first step would be to add a file bitblt.c in /dlls/gdi32/tests/ and then add it to the Makefile.in file in that directory. My first commit to Wine [1] added a new test file brsfolder.c to shell32. You might be able to get your patch in without the automated test, but I think you need to explain clearly what was wrong with the old code and what you are doing instead. A few more simplified examples that test other cases in your bug report might also help. Best of luck, Michael Mc Donnell [1] http://source.winehq.org/git/wine.git/?a=commit;h=5c715b46f4312a2e76aa14499…

May 22, 2014

Re: Debugging wine with winedbg

by Alexander Almaleh

Hm, I just tried setting a breakpoint at RegOpenKeyExW, and it worked, the list command showed the correct code when the breakpoint was hit. Also, I noticed that it shows the file/line number when I set a breakpoint on RegOpenKeyExW, but not for BitBlt. Why would that be? Wine-dbg>break RegOpenKeyExW Breakpoint 2 at 0x7eb73920 RegOpenKeyExW [/home/sashoalm/Workspace/wine/wine-git/dlls/advapi32/registry.c:461] in advapi32 Wine-dbg>break BitBlt fixme:dbghelp_dwarf:dwarf2_parse_subprogram Unhandled Tag type 0x1 at ctx(0x32bfec,L"gdi32<elf>"), for debug_info(abbrev:0x15f2148,symt:0x175a660) Breakpoint 1 at 0x7ebcac00 BitBlt in gdi32

May 21, 2014

Vacations

by Alexandre Julliard

Folks, I'll be away for the next two weeks, though I may still push some commits if I can get decent Internet. I'm also going to skip next week's release, so 1.7.20 should happen on June 13. -- Alexandre Julliard julliard(a)winehq.org

May 21, 2014

Debugging wine with winedbg

by Alexander Almaleh

I'm trying to debug Wine, and I want to step into the BitBlt function using winedbg. I've set a breakpoint at BitBlt, and it is being hit, however, when I list the source code, it points somewhere completely differently in the source. I have no idea why that is. Does it mean that Wine is not setup correctly for debugging? I cloned Wine from Git a few days ago, and I've used "./tools/wineinstall" to compile and install it. This is an excerpt of the debugging session. sashoalm(a)aspire:~$ winedbg /tmp/xformtest.exe WineDbg starting on pid 0022 start_process () at /home/sashoalm/Workspace/wine/wine-git/dlls/kernel32/process.c:1097 0x7b86235f start_process+0x5f [/home/sashoalm/Workspace/wine/wine-git/dlls/kernel32/process.c:1097] in kernel32: movl %edi,0x4(%esp) 1097 return call_process_entry( peb, entry ); Wine-dbg>break BitBlt fixme:dbghelp_dwarf:dwarf2_parse_subprogram Unhandled Tag type 0x1 at ctx(0x32bfec,L"gdi32<elf>"), for debug_info(abbrev:0x15f2148,symt:0x175a660) Breakpoint 1 at 0x7ebcac00 BitBlt in gdi32 Wine-dbg>cont Stopped on breakpoint 1 at 0x7ebcac00 BitBlt in gdi32 Wine-dbg>list 1097 return call_process_entry( peb, entry ); 1098 } 1099 1100 1101 /*********************************************************************** 1102 * set_process_name 1103 * 1104 * Change the process name in the ps output. 1105 */ 1106 static void set_process_name( int argc, char *argv[] ) 1107 { Wine-dbg>n copy_bitmap () at /home/sashoalm/Workspace/wine/wine-git/dlls/user32/cursoricon.c:382 382 DeleteDC( dst );

May 21, 2014

Re: Fix for PlgBlt, the XFORM matrix was calculated incorrectly

by Alexander Almaleh

Done! Bug submitted at http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=36504. On Wed, May 21, 2014 at 4:12 PM, Bruno Jesus <00cpxxx(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 1:39 PM, Alexander Almaleh <sashoalm(a)gmail.com> > wrote: > > I had tried to submit a patch for that 5 years ago, but couldn't figure > out > > how to make a patch/test it, and eventually gave up and forgot about it. > But > > recently I remembered about it, and now I want to try again. > > > > So, this time I've prepared a test that can prove that the previous > > implementation does not calculate the XFORM matrix correctly, and that my > > patch will fix it. > > > > The test is a VC6 project, you can find it at > > > https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B9PGUhmmnsm1S2VvZzc3WmhBY3c/edit?usp=shari… > . > > The test is a demo of PlgBlt that I found on CodeProject. You can compare > > how it works on XP and on Wine. For testing, I directly inserted the > > original Wine implementation of PlgBlt, as well as my patched version, > into > > the VC6 project, and tested on that. This is because there seems to be an > > additional problem with MaskBlt, which I'll try tackling next. > > > > I can confirm your code works in XP. I think the first thing to do is > to create a bug to take care of the issue. >

May 21, 2014

Re: [PATCH] add function iphlpapi/CreateSortedAddressPairs, FreeMibTable

by Akira Nakagawa

Thank you. (2014年05月21日 21:07), Bruno Jesus wrote: > This patch is just a hack, I'll send a correct stub later. > > On Wed, May 21, 2014 at 8:10 AM, Akira Nakagawa <matyapiro31(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >

May 21, 2014

Re: [patch]japanese translation updates for 1.7.19.

by Akihiro Sagawa

On Tue, 20 May 2014 13:38:12 -0400 (EDT), Toshiaki Hirose wrote: > po/ja.po | 159 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------------------------------- > 1 file changed, 65 insertions(+), 94 deletions(-) Hi, Hirose-san, I just figure out two points. Following msgid line introduces unnecessary changes. > #: oleacc.rc:97 > -#, fuzzy > -#| msgid "Normal" > msgctxt "object state" > -msgid "normal" > -msgstr "標準" > +msgid "normal" > +msgstr "normal" This change might be unintentional because other oleacc resources aren't translated yet. If you adopt this translation, please remove redundant "(&R)". > #: oleacc.rc:104 > -#, fuzzy > -#| msgid "&Read Only" > msgctxt "object state" > msgid "read only" > msgstr "読み取り専用(&R)" Otherwise looks fairly good. Regards, Akihiro Sagawa

May 21, 2014

Re: Fix for PlgBlt, the XFORM matrix was calculated incorrectly

by Bruno Jesus

On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 1:39 PM, Alexander Almaleh <sashoalm(a)gmail.com> wrote: > I had tried to submit a patch for that 5 years ago, but couldn't figure out > how to make a patch/test it, and eventually gave up and forgot about it. But > recently I remembered about it, and now I want to try again. > > So, this time I've prepared a test that can prove that the previous > implementation does not calculate the XFORM matrix correctly, and that my > patch will fix it. > > The test is a VC6 project, you can find it at > https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B9PGUhmmnsm1S2VvZzc3WmhBY3c/edit?usp=shari…. > The test is a demo of PlgBlt that I found on CodeProject. You can compare > how it works on XP and on Wine. For testing, I directly inserted the > original Wine implementation of PlgBlt, as well as my patched version, into > the VC6 project, and tested on that. This is because there seems to be an > additional problem with MaskBlt, which I'll try tackling next. > I can confirm your code works in XP. I think the first thing to do is to create a bug to take care of the issue.

May 21, 2014