- Wine-Devel - list.winehq.org

Re: DSTRICT: commdlg
by Dimitrie O. Paun Oct. 26, 2002

Oct. 26, 2002

On October 26, 2002 11:14 am, Matthew Davison wrote: > - bRet = DialogBoxIndirectParam16( hInst, lfs->hDlgTmpl16, lpofn->hwndOwner, > + bRet = DialogBoxIndirectParam16( (HINSTANCE16)LOWORD(hInst), lfs->hDlgTmpl16, lpofn->hwndOwner, And here we should have a HINSTANCE_16 macro... -- Dimi.

1 0

Re: DSTRICT: commdlg
by Dimitrie O. Paun Oct. 26, 2002

Oct. 26, 2002

On October 26, 2002 11:14 am, Matthew Davison wrote: > - FillRect(hDC, &lpp->old3angle, GetClassLongA( hwnd, GCL_HBRBACKGROUND)); > + FillRect((HDC)hDC, &lpp->old3angle, (HBRUSH)GetClassLongA( hwnd, GCL_HBRBACKGROUND)); This is not right. At that point, hDC should be a HDC, if it's not, you have to modify the code around it. Such casting should happen in the WindowProc, all functions should work with the proper type. Alexandre, please do not apply the patch in this form: it silence warnings, and it makes it very difficult to properly correct the code in the future. -- Dimi.

1 0

Re: interrupts in when in NT version
by Zsolt Rizsanyi Oct. 26, 2002

Oct. 26, 2002

I have forgotten to cc this discussion to wine-devel. But who is interested can catch up from this mail. On Saturday 26 October 2002 14:07, Eric Pouech wrote: > > > > Could somebody answer/test if calling interrupt int 0x01 is allowed > > > > from a win32 program in WinNT environment? I would pretty like to > > > > know that! > > > > > > I don't think it is > > > > Should I write then a patch, which would deny calling of int 0x01 from > > win32 code when winver is NT? > > Would that be applied? > > the rule of thumb is: if there's a program which depends on this to be > implemented, then yes patch will be applied > otherwise, leave it as it is Tough all safedisc programs depend on this, I have decided not to make an official patch. The reason is that additional info is needed for a proper fix. Safedisc depends on that EXCEPTION_ACCESS_VIOLATION is returned on an int 0x01 call. But it should be checked what exceptions are raised on different windows versions when int 0x01 is called. And maybe the same should be done with other interrupts. It would be good if somebody could make that test program. Else I will keep the non proper fix. > > > it was allowed on Win9x, and is used in this context IIRC as a ring 3 > > > to ring 0 transition code (how to create a cheap call gate) > > > > How good it would be if I could understand what you are speaking about :( > > But could you explain what a call gate is? > > If it is too long, then dont bother tough... > > I'll try to make it short > context: > - i386 have 4 levels of privilege => ring 3 (less privilege) up to ring > 0 > - certain operations are only allowed at ring 0 (or 1) > - user code runs in ring 3 > - kernel code runs in ring 0 (to be exact, NT had been designed to have > kernel in ring 0, and device drivers in ring 1, but this has been > altered - some drivers run in ring 0 too) > - you can always call into a less priviledged level (ring 0 => ring 3 > for example) > - the other way around requires what is known as call gates (ring 0 for > example defines the "entry points" in some way) > - most of the interrupt handlers run in ring 0 > > what the safedisc code was doing was: > 0/ code is running in ring 3 > 1/ install an interrupt handler for division by zero (IIRC) > 2/ trigger the division > 3/ have the interrupt handler called, but this is done in ring 0, even > if the code has been loaded from a user space program. here, in the > interrupt handler, you can do any ring 0 operation you want > > that's why I called it a cheap call gate (no real call gate has been > installed, and the code run in ring 0 isn't decided by the kernel but > the app) > > NT doesn't allow this to run. step 1 is not allowed (only the kernel can > decide to change an interrupt handler, which makes lots of sense) Thanks for the detailed explanation. And for completeness I will include here the explanation of Laurent Pinchart why a safedisc program calls int 0x01 : > - the last attempt to detect a debugger uses int 0x01 (enter SMM/ICE mode), > which checks if an external hardware emulator is connected to the > processor. I haven't been able to understand what the code is supposed to > do. Regards Zsolt

1 0

Re: shlfileoperation
by Uwe Bonnes Oct. 26, 2002

Oct. 26, 2002

>>>>> "Dietrich" == Dietrich Teickner <Dietrich_Teickner(a)t-online.de> writes: Dietrich> Hi, I am a Odin programmer (wine for os/2). I have in Dietrich> shlfileop 3 FO_ operations full imlemented. It's tested in Dietrich> Odin. Can anyone implement and test this patch in wine ? I Dietrich> have also one test programm, if nessesary. Please send the test program. And please state how to handle your patch with regard to wine-gpl and wine-x11 license. Bye -- Uwe Bonnes bon(a)elektron.ikp.physik.tu-darmstadt.de Institut fuer Kernphysik Schlossgartenstrasse 9 64289 Darmstadt --------- Tel. 06151 162516 -------- Fax. 06151 164321 ----------

1 0

Loading program icon
by Peter Andersson Oct. 26, 2002

Oct. 26, 2002

Hi, How do you read the icon of a windows application? Please tell me how to do it inside wine/windows-environment, and possibly independent of wine/win (the raw way). Can someone give me a hint? //Peter

1 0

Re: Listview Z0 (roll-up patch)
by David D. Hagood Oct. 26, 2002

Oct. 26, 2002

Well, a cvs up -C and rebuild, and things are find here at home. I'll have to see what is up with my machine at work Monday...

1 0

Re: Listview Z0 (roll-up patch)
by David D. Hagood Oct. 25, 2002

Oct. 25, 2002

Dimitrie O. Paun wrote: > > The algorithm has been: start a new series when Alexandre has committed > the previous one. So, for example, because I've started the Z-series > last night, that means that Alexandre already committed the X-series. > So the only outstanding patch not committed to CVS is Z0. I don't see a > need for a roll-up patch ;) > > That helps, but also leaves me with a conundrum - when I do a CVS update on my machine at work, and rebuild wine (make clean, make depend, make, su, wipe wine directories in /usr/local, make install, exit, run Mng4) I get the listview crash on "Along the way". I haven't been updating my machine at home, which had the patches applied, so I thought the patches were not in CVS. I will do a cvs up -C and rebuild here at home, and see what I get.

1 0

Status Report: -DSTRICT
by Michael Stefaniuc Oct. 25, 2002

Oct. 25, 2002

Hello, status reports seems to be pretty popular this day so here is mine regarding compiling wine with -DSTRICT. Below is the amount of warnings we get when removing -DWINE_NO_STRICT: dll real total ------------------------------ commdlg 21 63 gdi 128 273 ntdll 148 178 ole32 16 38 shell32 120 155 user 450 839 winmm/wavemap 7 40 winmm 104 145 winsock 14 42 x11drv 60 79 ------------------------------ total 1068 1852 "real" is the number of warning for which real work is need to be done, the rest up to "total" are warnings of the type "int format, HANDLE arg". And to fix this beasts just grab http://people.redhat.com/mstefani/wine/fixpointerarg.pl and do: cd wine/dlls/$dll_in_work make clean make 2>&1 | fixpointerarg.pl and you should be done. Happy hacking bye michael P.S.: a request from Eric: please let him finish the 32bit - 16bit separation of winmm. After that is yours. -- Michael Stefaniuc Tel.: +49-711-96437-199 System Administration Fax.: +49-711-96437-111 Red Hat GmbH Email: mstefani(a)redhat.com Hauptstaetterstr. 58 http://www.redhat.de/ D-70178 Stuttgart

1 0

Re: DSTRICT: LZexpand
by Michael Stefaniuc Oct. 25, 2002

Oct. 25, 2002

It seems to look good and i'm very happy about it: i almost can't see that stuff anymore. bye michael On Sat, Oct 26, 2002 at 12:05:16AM +0100, Matthew Davison wrote: > This is my first patch to wine so if it is wrong please dont chew me up > anyway, here goes. > > ChangeLog: > Made LZexpand compile with DSTRICT defined. > -- Michael Stefaniuc Tel.: +49-711-96437-199 System Administration Fax.: +49-711-96437-111 Red Hat GmbH Email: mstefani(a)redhat.com Hauptstaetterstr. 58 http://www.redhat.de/ D-70178 Stuttgart

1 0

Re: Listview Z0 (roll-up patch)
by David D. Hagood Oct. 25, 2002

Oct. 25, 2002

For those of us who are a little behind on the patches, would it be possible to get a roll-up patch of all diffs from the CVS MAIN branch? Also, what is the status of CVS vs. the patches - what patches have been applied?

4 5