- Wine-Devel - list.winehq.org

Re: dlls/msvcrt: msvcrt-popen-1.1
by Joerg Mayer Nov. 1, 2002

Nov. 1, 2002

On Fri, Nov 01, 2002 at 03:16:58PM +0200, Jaco Greeff wrote: > +/* FIXME: Don't know what this value should be, 10 seems enough as > + * the maximum number of simultaneous _popen'ed processes > + */ > #define POPEN_MAX_FILES 10 ... > +INT POPEN_getOpenFileSlotPos(VOID) > +{ > + INT i = 0; > + for (i = 0; i < POPEN_MAX_FILES; i++) > + { > + if (!POPEN_Files[i].fProcess) > + { > + POPEN_Files[i].fProcess = (MSVCRT_FILE *)POPEN_FILE_IN_USE; > + return i; > + } > + } Please output an ERR here to ask people to report that POPEN_MAX_FILES needs to be increased. > + return -1;

2 1

RE: Wine 0.8 TODO v0.1
by Patrik Stridvall Nov. 1, 2002

Nov. 1, 2002

> Oh, one other thing that would be nice, while I think of > it... is there > any reason (now we are GPL'ed) that we cannot incorperate cabextract > (http://www.kyz.uklinux.net/cabextract.php3) into Wine? Because we are not GPL:ed. We are LGPL:ed. Application that go under programs/ might as an exception go under GPL. However in the case of cabextract we need substantial parts of it to implement functions like SetupIterateCabinet in SETUPAPI.DLL so only the LGPL or less restrictive is acceptable. However the author(s) of cabextract might agree to release the parts we need under the LGPL. Perhaps it better if he release it all under the GPL since we might want to implement the CAB SDK tools like cabarc.exe that is supposed to do almost exactly what cabextract does (and possibly more) AFAICS. What don't you ask him? > Currently we shell out to it as an external program, Do we? Hmm. OK, it seems we do in dlls/urlmon/umon.c. Ugly. That code should probably call SetupIterateCabinet instead. Of course that function is not implemented yet. See above. > in order to run > Microsoft's setup APIs ecetra. This is really annoying for > new users, as > unless they look closely at pages of logs... theres no real indication > that's why installation of a Microsoft program failed. True.

1 0

Tucows top-100 applications :)
by Carlos Lozano Nov. 1, 2002

Nov. 1, 2002

Hello, It is today top 100 tucows list. I think that it shouldn't be the better wine top 100 list, some entries should be removed, and some new added. (For example some cdrecord program). Regards, Carlos. -- ___ _ \ | / Infraestructuras | . |._ _ _| | ___ ___ ___ http://www.andago.com | || ' |/ . |<_> |/ . |/ . \__ GNU/Linux |_|_||_|_|\___|<___|\_. |\___/ _ \ __|\ \ / Carlos A. Lozano <___'/ | \ -_) __/\__ \ > < -_) [ carlos.lozano(a)andago.com ]\___|_| ____/ _/\_\___| [ calb(a)epsxe.com ] http://www.epsxe.com

2 1

What is a leap second
by György 'Nog' Jeney Nov. 1, 2002

Nov. 1, 2002

While I was looking through dlls/ntdll/time.c I came across the following two comments: "FIXME: Compute the number of leap second corrections here" and "FIXME: get the GMT offset here" What do these mean? nog.

4 9

Status of libwine MFC and msvcrt compilation
by Uwe Bonnes Nov. 1, 2002

Nov. 1, 2002

Hallo, what is the status of winelib compilation of MFC and msvcrt? Thanks -- Uwe Bonnes bon(a)elektron.ikp.physik.tu-darmstadt.de Institut fuer Kernphysik Schlossgartenstrasse 9 64289 Darmstadt --------- Tel. 06151 162516 -------- Fax. 06151 164321 ----------

2 1

Versions & mass-appeal
by Dimitrie O. Paun Nov. 1, 2002

Nov. 1, 2002

People, I think everybody here agrees that Wine's biggest problem is the lack of developers. No developers, slow progress, no users, back to no developers. We are in this vicious circle for a while, spinning our wheels like crazy. We've achieved great progress lately, but I hope we all agree that Wine is a vast project that can succeed only with a mass appeal similar to the fueling the development of the Linux Kernel. Why are we in this position? For reasons I will not go into right now, it seems painfully obvious to me that we are suffering from a severe case of Bad Public Image (tm). Whenever I talk to people not intimately familiar with Wine, about our beloved project, I am _always_ treated with the same reaction: a surprised "Really, it works? Hmmm, I thought it was only running Freecell...". Translation: people consider Wine a huge hack that can run (by some strange happenings) some apps, sometimes. It is viewed as unreliable, "freak of nature sideshow"; something (maybe) cool to talk about, but utterly useless. THIS IS OUR PROBLEM. The lack of users follows trivially. We know the above opinion is not true. *I* get constantly amazed by how much progress we've made. Something must be done, and I think there is something to be done. How do we change this state of affairs? Well, people need major events to reevaluate their opinions. Being major, they are by definition few, and so we don't have too many chances. For Wine, these events are the upcoming x.y releases. What I'm trying to say is that we have to prepare properly for them. Here's my concrete proposal for releases: 0.8.x : Wine is usable, we don't guarantee binary compatibility 0.9.x : Wine is usable, and we kinda guarantee binary compatibility 1.0.x : Wine is quite usable, we guarantee binary compatibility I'll define these things more precisely later, but before that, let me explain why we should introduce the 0.8.x series: -- a chance to attract more users into the fold -- Wine is approaching that stage fast -- it's a logical, interim step to 0.9 -- will help us focus Whatever the reason, it's a _logical_ step that we must go through in our journey to 0.9, and from a user's perspective, it makes sense to make it public. There's no point in robbing us of the userbase for a abstract techy goal of binary compatibility. That's the next stage. Criteria for these releases: 0.8.0 -- Wine runs several popular apps well (we're close) -- Web site is updated (e.g. Who's Who, etc) -- Existing docs are up-to-date -- Utilities are close to final form (winebuild, etc.) 0.9.0 -- DLL separation complete -- Server protocol complete 1.0.0 -- Major bugs squashed -- Flawless UI -- Complete docs I'll leave it at that. Comments, flames? -- Dimi.

18 45

Getting actively involved in the Wine project
by Thomas Wickline Nov. 1, 2002

Nov. 1, 2002

From the page: ----- PR manager Currently we almost have no Public Relationship management at all. This should change for the better. Currently almost the only form of PR is "preaching to the choir", since we're having articles on online IT sites (by far most are Linux only !). We should have much more coverage on traditional Windowsish sites and, most importantly, in dead-tree newspapers, to enlighten the general public also known as The Great Unwashed Masses ! ----- Wine users , CodeWeavers & WineX customers could do Previews/Demo's at there local lug meetings as well.. This is what I did a couple months back and it was a huge success there were Windows users at the meeting to see Linux and Win app's being run on Linux ... Also it gives Linux users a look at wine as well. So I suggest that we try to encourage wine users to volinteer to show Wine at there local user groups/Installfest/Computer shows and so on. This is not a PR manager but it is PR...... Tom

3 3

Re: RFC: msvcrt _popen/_wpopen/_pclose
by chrismorgan＠rcn.com Nov. 1, 2002

Nov. 1, 2002

What is wrong with using wcmd and extending it if necessary? Chris > > From: "Jaco Greeff" <jaco(a)puxedo.org> > Date: 2002/10/31 Thu PM 04:27:43 EST > To: wine-devel(a)winehq.com > Subject: RFC: msvcrt _popen/_wpopen/_pclose > > Hi, > > I want some comments on the possibility of a _popen/_wpopen/_pclose > implementation in Wine. Reference available at: > > http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/vclib/html… > > The open functions basically operate in the same way as the popen function > in Linux, ie. it spawns a process with the command via the command > interpreter. Now, unfortionately we don't have our won cmd.exe available, > but should people really need this functionality it might not be too much to > ask as to copy it from a working Windows installation. > > In my mind, supporting the Win 95/98 command interpreters might be a > nightmare - my gutt feel is that these two rely too much on DOS internals to > be sucessfully launched via Wine. No, I haven't tried it, so I might be > completely wrong. Either way, something like this might be better > implemented via the Win NT/2000/XP cmd.exe. (I'll test my assumptions > tomorrow, I don't have access to the command interpreters tonight.) > > I've hacked (yes, it was quick) a potential implementation of the _popen > family of functions. (Haven't compiled, haven't tested, this is just and RFC > - if it can work, I'll spend some real time on it.) Anyway, here it is, > comments appreciated: > > --[ inline-ish RFC ]---- > > #include "config.h" > #include "wine/port.h" > > #include <stdio.h> > #include <stdlib.h> > #ifdef HAVE_UNISTD_H > # include <unistd.h> > #endif > > #include "winbase.h" > #include "winnls.h" > #include "wine/unicode.h" > #include "msvcrt/stdio.h" > #include "msvcrt/string.h" > > #include "wine/debug.h" > > #define POPEN_FLAG_READ 0x0001 > #define POPEN_FLAG_WRITE 0x0002 > #define POPEN_FLAG_TEXT 0x0004 > #define POPEN_FLAG_BINARY 0x0008 > > inline CHAR *LPCWSTRToLPSTR(const LPCWSTR lpwstrIn, INT nIn) > { > INT nLen = WideCharToMultiByte(CP_ACP, 0, lpwszIn, nIn, NULL, 0, NULL, > NULL); > CHAR *szOut = (CHAR *)malloc((nLen+1)*sizeof(CHAR)); > if (szOut) > { > WideCharToMultiByte(CP_ACP, 0, lpwszIn, nIn, szOut, nLen+1, NULL, NULL); > szOut[nLen] = '\0'; > } > return szOut; > } > > INT POPEN_parseModeFlags(const CHAR *szMode) > { > INT nFlags = 0; > while (szMode && *szMode) > { > switch (*szMode) > { > case 'r': > { > if (nFlags & POPEN_FLAG_WRITE) > WARN(": _popen: Cannot set both read and write open > flags, ignoring read flag\n"); > else > nFlags = nFlags & POPEN_FLAG_READ; > break; > } > case 'w': > { > if (nFlags & POPEN_FLAG_READ) > WARN(": _popen: Cannot set both read and write open > flags, ignoring write flag\n"); > else > nFlags = nFlags & POPEN_FLAG_WRITE; > break; > } > case 'b': > case 't': > { > FIXME(": _popen: %c mode flag not implemented, ignoring\n", > *szMode); > break; > } > default: > { > WARN(": _popen: unknown mode flag %c, ignoring\n", *szMode); > break; > } > } > } > return nFlags; > } > > MSVCRT_FILE *MSVCRT_popen(const CHAR *szCommand, const CHAR *szMode) > { > MSVCRT_FILE *fProcess = NULL; > > if (!szCommand || !szMode) > return NULL; > > INT nFlags = POPEN_parseModeFlags(szMode); > if (!(nFlags & (POPEN_FLAG_READ|POPEN_FLAG_WRITE))) > { > ERR("No open mode flag r or w specified\n"); > return NULL; > } > > /* _popen/_wpopen executes the required command via the command > * processor, either command.com (Win 95/98) or cmd.exe (Win NT/2000/XP). > * Wine does not currently have it's own "cmd.exe" hence we cannot > * really do anything more at this point. However, we try to lauch it > * and hope for the best... > */ > CHAR *szExec = (CHAR *)malloc(strlen("wine -- C:/cmd.exe -C > ")+strlen(szCommand)+1); > if (szExec) > { > sprintf(szExec, "wine -- C:/cmd.exe -C %s", szCommand); > fProcess = popen(szExec, (nFlags & POPEN_FLAG_READ) ? "r" : "w"); > if (!fProcess) > ERR("Execution of C:/cmd.exe via wine failed\n"); > else > WARN("Launch of %s succeeded, no guarentees of success made\n", > debugstr_a(szExec)); > free(szExec); > } > > return fProcess; > } > > MSVCRT_FILE *MSVCRT_wpopen(const WCHAR *wszCommand, const WCHAR *wszMode) > { > MSVCRT_FILE *fProcess = NULL; > > if (!wszCommand || !wszMode) > return NULL; > > CHAR *szCommand = LPCWSTRToLPSTR(wszCommand, strlenW(wszCommand)); > if (szCommand) > { > CHAR *szMode = LPCWSTRToLPSTR(wszMode, strlenW(wszMode)); > if (szMode) > { > fProcess = _popen(szCommand, szMode); > free(szMode); > free(szCommand); > } > free(szCommand); > } > > return fProcess; > } > > int MSVCRT_pclose(MSVCRT_FILE *fProcess) > { > if (!fProcess) > return -1; > return pclose(fProcess); > } > > > >

2 2

So lets say we do it
by Dimitrie O. Paun Nov. 1, 2002

Nov. 1, 2002

That is, Lets assume for the sake of argument that Alexandre likes my 0.8 idea so much, that he releases Wine 0.8 with much fanfare next Monday (so we have a good audience), and the news reaches Slashdot where a message with a link to http://www.winehq.org is posted, in good CmdrTaco fashion... And so, let's see what's going to happen: 1. 90% of /.ers will click on the link, and WineHQ gets Slashdotted! :) 2. People will look for the typical left-side menu: Home About Status Development Download Screenshots *BZZT* We don't have any. 5% will drop off here. 3. Then they'll visually search for the word "Screenshot" *BZZT* We don't have any on front page. 30% will drop off. *I* drop off here when I visit other projects, for crying out loud! So let's assume that by a miracle they'll discover the screenshots: do they make them drool? No, we loose another 15%. Damn, that's tough! Let's see what happens to the rest: 4. Let's download, and try it out Do we have officially sanctioned binaries (at the very least .rpms for RH, and .deb for Debian)? No. *BZZT* We loose another 30%. Again, *I* don't care about stuff that doesn't come as a binary .rpm for my RH system. I used to, not anymore. Fine, some will install what they download. What next? Hm, this Wine thing just sits there, it's not that simple. We need to read some docs. Back to the site. 5. Look at the docs Oh, we have some. We hate to read docs, but Wine is cool, so we swallow the pill. Only to find out it's out of date!!! What a piece of #@$%! *BZZT* Another 10% drop off. Thats 90% drop-off before they really tried it out! The rest 10%, go on. So, what do we do with it? 6. Look for a list of Win-apps that we can run Is there something on the site? No. Blah, too much hassel... *BZZT* Another 5% go. (Don't even mention app-db, it's *way* too complicated!) So the 5% left, install wine, install a Win-app, and play around. Great, it works! They start learning the utilities, etc., but those are in flux, and we change them, and they get PO-ed. Another percent, or two leave the fold... -- Dimi. P.S. A story-like TODO (with embedded rationale) for 0.8.0 :)

10 27

Re: Treeview notifications
by Dustin Navea Nov. 1, 2002

Nov. 1, 2002

--- "Dimitrie O. Paun" <dpaun(a)rogers.com> wrote: > Dustin, Adrian, can you please try this one, and let me > know if it fixes your problems? > > ChangeLog > Fix some treeview notification codes between ANSI/Unicode mode. > Another sidenote... in TREEVIEW_NotifyFormat shouldnt (lParam == NF_REQUERY) be (lParam == NF_QUERY) and change the corresponding line in TREEVIEW_Create since that is the original query? I have already searched throughout the sources and the only place that TREEVIEW_NotifyFormat is called is in treeview.c in TREEVIEW_Create ... -Dustin __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? HotJobs - Search new jobs daily now http://hotjobs.yahoo.com/

2 1