http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=4821
Austin English <austinenglish(a)gmail.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|RESOLVED |CLOSED
--- Comment #8 from Austin English <austinenglish(a)gmail.com> 2007-08-18 19:35:36 ---
Closing fixed.
--
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=4821
Austin English <austinenglish(a)gmail.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution| |FIXED
--- Comment #7 from Austin English <austinenglish(a)gmail.com> 2007-08-18 19:35:18 ---
Works fine using OSS and ALSA in wine 0.9.43. Resolving fixed. Please reopen if
the bug is still present.
--
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=5330
Louis Lenders <xerox_xerox2000(a)yahoo.co.uk> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |xerox_xerox2000(a)yahoo.co.uk
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution| |FIXED
--- Comment #8 from Louis Lenders <xerox_xerox2000(a)yahoo.co.uk> 2007-08-18 17:37:56 ---
As per comment #5, i can confirm the app starts fine. Resolving fixed
--
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9192
Dan Kegel <dank(a)kegel.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |dank(a)kegel.com
--- Comment #17 from Dan Kegel <dank(a)kegel.com> 2007-08-18 17:25:07 ---
This was supposed to be fixed by
http://www.winehq.org/pipermail/wine-cvs/2007-August/035242.html
but that patch forgot to first create the directory
c:\windows\winsxs\manifests
so you'll see the line
warn:file:CreateFileW Unable to create file
L"c:\\windows\\winsxs\\manifests\\x86_microsoft.windows.common-controls_6595b64144ccf1df_6.0.0.0_none_deadbeef.manifest"
(status c000003a)
in the log.
I just sent in a patch to add the missing mkdir:
http://winehq.org/pipermail/wine-patches/2007-August/042900.html
For this to work you'll have to first do
rm -rf ~/.wine
because it only triggers when running wineprefixcreate.
Alternately you could probably register comctl32.dll again.
--
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=4821
Jan Zerebecki <jan.wine(a)zerebecki.de> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Keywords| |Abandoned?
--- Comment #6 from Jan Zerebecki <jan.wine(a)zerebecki.de> 2007-08-18 16:36:45 ---
Is the original report of the segmentation fault still a problem?
--
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=4445
--- Comment #14 from Jan Zerebecki <jan.wine(a)zerebecki.de> 2007-08-18 16:30:30 ---
Krister Bäckman, Joshua Baergen and/or anyone who had this problem with alsa:
Please retest with current or later git or the next release ( will be 0.9.44 ).
If that didn't fix it alone, it may also be useful to test if this still
happens with the next kernel release ( will be 2.6.23 , though there exist CFS
patches for .22 but they probably don't have a few further fixes which went
into .23 ) as it has a new CPU scheduler (other scheduler talk in this bug is
about the IO scheduler, for the IO scheduler cfq is still the best choice,
which is the default in current kernels).
--
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8446
Damjan Jovanovic <damjan.jov(a)gmail.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |damjan.jov(a)gmail.com
--
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3997
Freyr Gunnar Ólafsson <gnarlin(a)utopia.is> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |gnarlin(a)utopia.is
--- Comment #31 from Freyr Gunnar Ólafsson <gnarlin(a)utopia.is> 2007-08-18 15:13:36 ---
*** Bug 9268 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.
Thank you Damjan,
just now I am running the regrssion test here, I will let you know what
happened.
Sorry for the blocker rating, but for my application (WPP) it really was a
blocker since it didn't start anymore and I have to downgrade to 0.9.32 every
time my Fedora yum upgrades to the latest wine version, which is not working
anymore for me.
Best regards
Aurel
---
http://dj8rz.de.vu
On Samstag, 18. August 2007, you wrote:
> http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9356
>
>
> Damjan Jovanovic <damjan.jov(a)gmail.com> changed:
>
> What |Removed |Added
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
>- CC| |damjan.jov(a)gmail.com Severity|blocker
> |normal
>
>
>
>
> --- Comment #1 from Damjan Jovanovic <damjan.jov(a)gmail.com> 2007-08-18
> 08:59:43 --- It's not clear from the logs what changed to break it, and
> sadly serial port problems cannot be reproduced without hardware. Can you
> please regression test wine (http://wiki.winehq.org/RegressionTesting)?
>
> By the way, bugs with blocker rating don't get fixed any sooner than the
> others
>
> :-). Rather vote for the bug?