- Wine-Devel - list.winehq.org

Re: Fix in Variant's coerce function
by Alexandre Julliard May 18, 2001

May 18, 2001

Francois Gouget <fgouget(a)free.fr> writes: > It seemed wrong, as did the 32 suffixes, and leaving all the > xxxFromDisp functions commented out. It may be a good idea to actually implement the functions before uncommenting the calls ;-) -- Alexandre Julliard julliard(a)winehq.com

2 1

Re: Question on exposing non-windows functions from dlls...
by Alexandre Julliard May 18, 2001

May 18, 2001

Mike Bond <mbond(a)cox.rr.com> writes: > If you can point me to some way of implementing _exec[lv][ep] using the > standard win32 API I would be more than willing to. Unfortunately that > was one arguable shortcoming of win32 process management in that it did not > have any interface that allowed loading and running an image in-process. You cannot do this with the Win32 API, that's true. And since the native msvcrt is implemented on top of the Win32 API, this means that msvcrt exec functions cannot possibly behave exactly like the Unix ones. What you must do is find out the expected behavior of the msvcrt exec, and implement the same behavior; you should then be able to do this using the Win32 API, since this is how the native one does it. -- Alexandre Julliard julliard(a)winehq.com

1 0

Re: Networking with Mandrake 8.0 and SuSE 7.1
by Steve Fox May 18, 2001

May 18, 2001

Unfortunately I can't really try the 2.4 kernel because Mandrake didn't get the PCMCIA token ring patch in there. I failed miserably to patch it in the last time I tried :( I plan to examine all the patches that Mandrake applies to their 2.2.19 kernel and back out some of them. Steve Fox IBM Linux Technology Center http://www.ibm.com/linux/ltc http://k-lug.com

2 1

Re: Networking with Mandrake 8.0 and SuSE 7.1
by gerard patel May 18, 2001

May 18, 2001

At 10:14 AM 17/05/2001 -0500, you wrote: >I'm running Lotus Notes 5.04a under WINE with one of the January releases >and its been working great for months. However, any release since February >does not seem to do reliable networking on my Mandrake 8.0 system. With the other replies to this post, I'd say that it would be interesting to try to configure your Mandrake system with kernel 2.4 (I suspect that you choosed 2.2 kernel). Gerard

1 0

Re: Networking with Mandrake 8.0 and SuSE 7.1
by Steve Fox May 18, 2001

May 18, 2001

In my case I'm using Mandrake's 2.2.19 kernel, but apparently the straight unpatched 2.2.19 works ok. I guess I'll have to go look through the patches Mandrake applied to the kernel. Thanks for the response. Steve Fox IBM Linux Technology Center http://www.ibm.com/linux/ltc http://k-lug.com

1 0

Re: Networking with Mandrake 8.0 and SuSE 7.1
by r.maurizzi＠gvs.it May 18, 2001

May 18, 2001

> I'm running Lotus Notes 5.04a under WINE with one of the January releases > and its been working great for months. However, any release since February > does not seem to do reliable networking on my Mandrake 8.0 system. (...) > On a related note, another cow-orker who is using Mandrake Cooker > (development distro) and his own compiled kernel does not have this > problem. I am on a token ring network, which I don't think should matter. I had the exact problem with SuSE Linux: starting from Kernel SuSE-2.2.18, wine doesn't work anymore, but if I use a self compiled "stock" kernel, it works again. It's a pity I know little of both Wine and Kernel tcp/ip, and I don't have time to check kernels and diffs... :-( I don't know about Mandrake, but SuSE distributes a tar.gz with all the patches they apply to their kernels. If Mandrake does something similar, I guess a few "apply a part of the patches - compile - test" cycle should help spot the problem(s). If anyone on the list has ideas on tests I could do to gather more info, I'll be glad to help (I still have SuSE stock kernels installed, so I can test differences in behaviours between different versions rather quickly) Ciao, Rob!

2 1

Documentation: lists interfer with the TOC
by Francois Gouget May 17, 2001

May 17, 2001

If you look at the documentation table of contents you'll see things like: Anonymous unions/structs Unicode 21. C library 22. 23. The 21, 22 and 23 are not supposed to be here. What I noticed is that they appear each time I have an orderedlist or an itemizedlist in the section. If I put them in a para instead of directly at the level of the section then I don't get the extra numbers anymore. So should I go through all the doc to make things look like that? <para> <orderedlist> ... </orderedlist> </para> Hmmm, I don't see this problem in the postscript version and DocBook doesn't say that the orderedlist elements must be in a para tag. So it looks like a bug in the HTML generation. Does anyone know how to go fix this? -- Francois Gouget fgouget(a)free.fr http://fgouget.free.fr/ I haven't lost my mind, it's backed up on tape around here somewhere...

2 3

Re: where do I go to find out who needs help
by Andreas Mohr May 17, 2001

May 17, 2001

On Wed, May 09, 2001 at 05:09:20AM -0700, Sean Callahan wrote: > Hi, > I want to do some work for this project who do I mail > Regards, > seanie(a)www.com Well, I'd say that depends on what you're able to do ;-) At the moment I could imagine e.g. the following items: - web server maintenance/update work - improvement of documentation (this badly needs fixing !!) - dlls/shlwapi/reg.c: implementation of user-specific registry stuff (e.g. needed by IE 5) Multiple choice time :-) Andreas Mohr

2 2

Networking with Mandrake 8.0 and SuSE 7.1
by Steve Fox May 17, 2001

May 17, 2001

Repost from wine.users since no reply. Thanks for any help. ------------------------- I'm running Lotus Notes 5.04a under WINE with one of the January releases and its been working great for months. However, any release since February does not seem to do reliable networking on my Mandrake 8.0 system. I can occassionally actually get into my inbox and even open up a message, but I've never been able to read more than one. Some cow-orkers using this same setup on Redhat 7.1 do not have this problem, but others using SuSE 7.1 do too. Does anyone have any ideas why only networking would be affected and only on select distributions? It stumps me because all three mentioned distros use glibc-2.2 and gcc-2.96 (SuSE may use 2.95...not sure). On a related note, another cow-orker who is using Mandrake Cooker (development distro) and his own compiled kernel does not have this problem. I am on a token ring network, which I don't think should matter. -- Steve Fox IBM Linux Technology Center http://oss.software.ibm.com/developerworks/opensource/linux/ http://k-lug.com (Rochester Linux Users Group)

1 0

Re: Patch for a bug in server/select.c
by Alexandre Julliard May 17, 2001

May 17, 2001

Bang Jun-Young <bjy(a)mogua.org> writes: > Suppose that > > ret = poll( pollfd, nb_users, diff ); > > has returned an error bit (either of POLLERR, POLLHUP, or POLLNVAL) > set in pollfd[].revents. Those error codes are defined in positive > numbers in poll.h, so in this case when > > poll_users[i]->ops->poll_event( poll_users[i], pollfd[i].revents ); > > is called, it tries to get an access to an already freed function and > causes a segfault. POLLERR and POLLHUP are legitimate results, and you definitely have to call the function in that case. POLLNVAL is not supposed to happen, unless there is a bug in the fd management. Or does NetBSD set POLLNVAL when the file descriptor is -1? This wouldn't be correct according to the Single Unix spec. -- Alexandre Julliard julliard(a)winehq.com

2 1