- Wine-Devel - list.winehq.org

Re: Microsoft's version of "WINE"
by Srdjan Matovina -- Customer Engineering Jan. 23, 2002

Jan. 23, 2002

They use MainWin from MainSoft Inc. See http://www.mainsoft.com >To: wine-devel(a)winehq.com >From: "Sander Wichers" <wichers(a)usa.net> >Subject: Microsoft's version of "WINE" >X-Priority: 3 >X-MSMail-Priority: Normal >X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4807.1700 >X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4807.1700 >X-BeenThere: wine-devel(a)winehq.com >X-Mailman-Version: 2.0 >List-Help: <mailto:wine-devel-request(a)winehq.com?subject=help> >List-Post: <mailto:wine-devel(a)winehq.com> >List-Subscribe: <http://www.winehq.com/mailman/listinfo/wine-devel>, <mailto:wine-devel-request(a)winehq.com?subject=subscribe> >List-Id: Wine Developer's List <wine-devel.winehq.com> >List-Unsubscribe: <http://www.winehq.com/mailman/listinfo/wine-devel>, <mailto:wine-devel-request(a)winehq.com?subject=unsubscribe> >List-Archive: <http://www.winehq.com/hypermail/wine-devel/> >Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2002 16:20:35 +0100 > >Hi, > >Maybe you guys already seen this, and it's old news for you... but i'll post >this anyway in case you didn't know. It can be a good thing to learn from. > >I do not own a SUN or a HP-UX system. But I was just interested how >microsoft implemented IE 4 / IE 5 on HP-UX and SUN. So I extracted their >installation files to disk. It seems that microsoft made their own version >of wine. It's amazing that they didn't modified IE to run on unix. Instead >they made the choice to emulate all the windows functionality. And compile >IE on that. Microsoft is ready to run their applications on linux. They have >a complete "system" libary full of ported functionality to SUN and HP-UX... >all the libaries are there, libkernel32.so etc.... It's also nice to see how >they seperated the resources from the binaries. and let the kernel deal with >these resource files. > >Has any one of you looked into these system libaries? Is this information >relevant to anyone? > >bye, > >Sander Wichers > > > > > > ==== Srdjan Matovina Sun Microsystems Inc. SunPS Integration Services/ Americas Customer Engineering srdjan.matovina(a)sun.com Ph.(905) 415-2883 Fax.(905) 477-0217

2 1

Privaleged instruction
by Nog Jan. 23, 2002

Jan. 23, 2002

Hi, Just for the fun of it I tried to run the dos installer of Mechwarrior 2: Mercenaries. It didn't get too far as the installer crashed on an unhandeled Privileged instruction. According to winedbg the instruction is 0x0002:0x10000 push %cs. To see what the opcode of this instruction might be, I added a trace to the INSTR_EmulateInstruction. Looking at the trace I found that the instruction it was having to emulate was 0x00 which looks very wrong to me. But just to check I simply made that function return true if the instruction was 0x00 but this only seemed to make things worse, the exception still occured but the debugger didn't launch. What I would like to know is, is push %cs realy a Privileged instruction (which I think it might be)? Looking into why INSTR_EmulateInstruction doesn't get the right pointer, the offset looked too big to me. Shouldn't it roll over to the next segment after 0xffff? The problem with the way that it is now is that the following macro, which converts the segment offset pair to linear addresses cuts off the upper bits, which looks correct. #define PTR_REAL_TO_LIN(seg,off) \ ((void*)(((unsigned int)(seg) << 4) + LOWORD(off))) What I want to know is why the offset is so high? nog.

2 1

RE: runtest: new option -M for testing current module as builtin
by Patrik Stridvall Jan. 23, 2002

Jan. 23, 2002

> On Wed, 23 Jan 2002, Patrik Stridvall wrote: > [...] > > BEGIN { > > require wine; > > &wine::module_native("wininet"); > > &wine::module_builtin("imm32", "msacm32"); > > } > > I am not sure any test should require the native version > of any dll. > > We cannot ship native dlls with Wine for obvious reasons, so requiring > the native dll would force Wine developpers to have a Windows > partition > installation around, and one configured for use in the tests. > Otherwise > they would not be able to run the tests, would they? > > I don't think that's good. Of course it shouldn't require it. It should simply skip parts of the test if the native version is not available. if(&wine::is_native("wininet")) { # Do native wininet tests } > Choosing to use a native dll is more up to the developper > to debug a > test. And then modifying the configuration file, as we usually do to > debug applications, should be simple and familiar enough. > > But maybe I misunderstood something. Well it allows us to automatically test a non-developer Windows installation directly under Linux without requiring him to reboot. Even developers make find it useful to quickly be able to modify the loadorder without having to modify his configuration. Sometimes what you want to test is quite subtle, like you have a function A in module B that calls function C in module D. Perhaps you want to test the robustness of Wines implementation of function A by testing it both with the native and the builtin version of D. If you have many such tests it would be a lot of unnessary manual work to switch D between native and builtin while testing B as builtin. Then perhaps somebody else have some use I haven't even though of. The main use will be I think to force tests to as the default test the builtin version since if you type "make test" in a directory you really expect to test the files in THAT directory, not the native version even if your ~/.wine/config specifies that.

1 0

Re: runtest: new option -M for testing current module as builtin
by Francois Gouget Jan. 23, 2002

Jan. 23, 2002

On Wed, 23 Jan 2002, Patrik Stridvall wrote: [...] > BEGIN { > require wine; > &wine::module_native("wininet"); > &wine::module_builtin("imm32", "msacm32"); > } I am not sure any test should require the native version of any dll. We cannot ship native dlls with Wine for obvious reasons, so requiring the native dll would force Wine developpers to have a Windows partition installation around, and one configured for use in the tests. Otherwise they would not be able to run the tests, would they? I don't think that's good. Choosing to use a native dll is more up to the developper to debug a test. And then modifying the configuration file, as we usually do to debug applications, should be simple and familiar enough. But maybe I misunderstood something. -- Francois Gouget fgouget(a)free.fr http://fgouget.free.fr/ May your Tongue stick to the Roof of your Mouth with the Force of a Thousand Caramels.

1 0

Re: wine/windows dialog.c
by Uwe Bonnes Jan. 23, 2002

Jan. 23, 2002

>>>>> "Alexandre" == Alexandre Julliard <julliard(a)winehq.com> writes: Alexandre> ChangeSet ID: 1011730184150795614346862 CVSROOT: Alexandre> /opt/cvs-commit Module name: wine Changes by: Alexandre> julliard(a)wine2. 02/01/22 15:09:44 Alexandre> Modified files: windows : dialog.c Alexandre> Log message: Removed no longer used average width Alexandre> calculation. Well, for the encarta 99 setup this gives the same bad result as before. I have attached a gif of the dialog in question. The manual calculation with the corrections in my resent patch gave better results. Bye -- 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

Microsoft's version of "WINE"
by Sander Wichers Jan. 23, 2002

Jan. 23, 2002

Hi, Maybe you guys already seen this, and it's old news for you... but i'll post this anyway in case you didn't know. It can be a good thing to learn from. I do not own a SUN or a HP-UX system. But I was just interested how microsoft implemented IE 4 / IE 5 on HP-UX and SUN. So I extracted their installation files to disk. It seems that microsoft made their own version of wine. It's amazing that they didn't modified IE to run on unix. Instead they made the choice to emulate all the windows functionality. And compile IE on that. Microsoft is ready to run their applications on linux. They have a complete "system" libary full of ported functionality to SUN and HP-UX... all the libaries are there, libkernel32.so etc.... It's also nice to see how they seperated the resources from the binaries. and let the kernel deal with these resource files. Has any one of you looked into these system libaries? Is this information relevant to anyone? bye, Sander Wichers

1 0

Verbose tests ?
by Sylvain Petreolle Jan. 23, 2002

Jan. 23, 2002

Hi, running programs/winetest/runtest -v -v -v -v -v tests/wine.pl or programs/winetest/runtest -vvvvv only reports : tests/wine.pl: 22 tests executed, 2 marked as todo, 0 failures. Is this the normal behavior or have I made something wrong ? ___________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? -- Une adresse @yahoo.fr gratuite et en français ! Yahoo! Courrier : http://courrier.yahoo.fr

2 1

Open Letter to DOJ re Microsoft Settlement
by Dan Kegel Jan. 22, 2002

Jan. 22, 2002

The proposed settlement in the Microsoft antitrust trial will probably be accepted by the judge unless a lot of people complain soon, even though it lacks any useful enforcement provisions and fails to prohibit many of Microsoft's anticompetitive practices. I've drafted an open letter to the Department of Justice to explain why the proposed settlement should not be accepted; it's at http://www.kegel.com/remedy/letter.html I'd be honored if you would read it, and consider signing it with me, or submitting your own comment to the DOJ. Either way, the federal deadline for public comment is Monday the 28th. For more information, see http://www.kegel.com/remedy/ See also Jeremy White's page http://www.codeweavers.com/~jwhite/tunney.html Sincerely, Dan Kegel

2 2

sparc solaris build
by Srdjan Matovina -- Customer Engineering Jan. 22, 2002

Jan. 22, 2002

Hi, I've built wine-20011226 on sparc with the only one issue left open: The resource compiler wrc core dumps when hit the bitmap (BINRES) part of .rc file. There is an alignment problem inside convert_bitmap() in newstruc.c file. The alignment problem came out from BITMAPINFOHEADER struct. But this was just the beginning! I've commented out body of convert_bitmap() just to see what will happen when run libtest/hello test case. After running wineserver, the libtest/hello core with the same problem: Program terminated by signal BUS (invalid address alignment). This time at different place: RtlSecondsSince1970ToTime from ntdll.so (time.c) struct FILETIME. Obviously I'll have an alignment problem with every structure in general. Is there any guideline for this kind of problem? Thanks Srdjan

2 1

Re: [PATCH] Overlapped recv(), WSARecv()
by Martin Wilck Jan. 22, 2002

Jan. 22, 2002

As you may see from the different email address, I am currently off work - I'll look deeper into your traces next week. Many thanks for generating them, anyway. >From a first glance, it seems that the app doesn't do overlapped recv(). (lpOverlapped & completion_func are always NULL), so there should actually be no difference (well I'm now using recvmsg() instead of recv(), and the overhead for 16 bit Winsock apps is definitely larger, but I cannot see why that should slow everything down that much). Perhaps I screwed up the blocking semantics of non-overlapped IO. Have you generated the traces under exactly the same conditions? Can you explain what exactly you did? Martin

3 7