wine-bugs June 2021

wine-bugs@winehq.org

1 participants
5070 discussions

[Bug 46936] New: cannot upgrade to wine-devel 4.5~bionic ( libfaudio0 dependency missing)
by wine-bugs＠winehq.org 10 Apr '22

10 Apr '22

https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=46936 Bug ID: 46936 Summary: cannot upgrade to wine-devel 4.5~bionic (libfaudio0 dependency missing) Product: Packaging Version: unspecified Hardware: x86 OS: Linux Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: critical Priority: P2 Component: wine-packages Assignee: wine-bugs(a)winehq.org Reporter: a34ypool3voiz(a)t-online.de CC: michael(a)fds-team.de, sebastian(a)fds-team.de Distribution: --- Created attachment 64049 --> https://bugs.winehq.org/attachment.cgi?id=64049 log showing missing libfaudio0 deps I have installed winehq-devel 4.4 on Ubuntu 18.04 amd64. Currently version 4.5 is available, but installation fails. Trying the usual "apt-get update && apt-get upgrade && apt-get dist-upgrade" lists winehq-devel as package that has been kept back. Then I tried the following: sudo apt-get install winehq-devel wine-devel wine-devel-amd64 wine-devel-i386 -f Now two unmet dependencies are listed, which cause the failure: libfaudio0 and libfaudio0:i386. Those packages do not exist in the repository. -- Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.

2 39

[Bug 50251] New: Wrong public key from the repo prevents installation.
by WineHQ Bugzilla 10 Apr '22

10 Apr '22

https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=50251 Bug ID: 50251 Summary: Wrong public key from the repo prevents installation. Product: Packaging Version: unspecified Hardware: x86-64 OS: Linux Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: critical Priority: P2 Component: wine-packages Assignee: wine-bugs(a)winehq.org Reporter: kristijan.zic(a)gmail.com CC: dimesio(a)earthlink.net Distribution: --- Distro: Ubuntu 20.04 Followed instructions for Focal Fossa here: https://wiki.winehq.org/Ubuntu Got this error: Err:10 https://dl.winehq.org/wine-builds/ubuntu focal InRelease The following signatures couldn't be verified because the public key is not available: NO_PUBKEY 76F1A20FF987672F Reading package lists... Done W: GPG error: https://dl.winehq.org/wine-builds/ubuntu focal InRelease: The following signatures couldn't be verified because the public key is not available: NO_PUBKEY 76F1A20FF987672F E: The repository 'https://dl.winehq.org/wine-builds/ubuntu focal InRelease' is not signed. N: Updating from such a repository can't be done securely, and is therefore disabled by default. N: See apt-secure(8) manpage for repository creation and user configuration details. -- Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.

1 5

[Bug 50891] New: Fedora 33 repository missing wine-*-common x86_64 packages
by WineHQ Bugzilla 10 Apr '22

10 Apr '22

https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=50891 Bug ID: 50891 Summary: Fedora 33 repository missing wine-*-common x86_64 packages Product: Packaging Version: unspecified Hardware: x86-64 OS: Linux Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: critical Priority: P2 Component: wine-packages Assignee: wine-bugs(a)winehq.org Reporter: blacknova(a)tut.by CC: dimesio(a)earthlink.net Distribution: --- After recent update of Fedora repository, all x64_64 versions of wine-*-common packages are missing. DNF upgrade command complain on broken dependencies: Problem 1: cannot install the best update candidate for package wine-staging64-1:6.4-1.1.x86_64 - nothing provides wine-staging-common = 1:6.5-1.2 needed by wine-staging64-1:6.5-1.2.x86_64 Problem 2: package winehq-staging-1:6.5-1.2.x86_64 requires wine-staging64 = 1:6.5-1.2, but none of the providers can be installed - cannot install the best update candidate for package winehq-staging-1:6.4-1.1.x86_64 - nothing provides wine-staging-common = 1:6.5-1.2 needed by wine-staging64-1:6.5-1.2.x86_64 Problem 3: problem with installed package wine-staging64-1:6.4-1.1.x86_64 - package wine-staging64-1:6.4-1.1.x86_64 requires wine-staging-common = 1:6.4-1.1, but none of the providers can be installed - cannot install both wine-staging-common-1:6.5-2.1.i686 and wine-staging-common-1:6.4-1.1.i686 - cannot install the best update candidate for package wine-staging-common-1:6.4-1.1.i686 - nothing provides wine-staging-common = 1:6.5-1.2 needed by wine-staging64-1:6.5-1.2.x86_64 -- Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.

1 9

[Bug 51354] New: WRC 7 needs ID3DUserDefinedAnnotation interface
by WineHQ Bugzilla 10 Apr '22

10 Apr '22

https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=51354 Bug ID: 51354 Summary: WRC 7 needs ID3DUserDefinedAnnotation interface Product: Wine Version: 6.11 Hardware: x86-64 OS: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: directx-d3d Assignee: wine-bugs(a)winehq.org Reporter: andrey.goosev(a)gmail.com Distribution: --- Shows WRC 7 window and immediately closes. 0110:trace:d3d11:d3d11_device_context_QueryInterface iface 00000000001E31E8, iid {b2daad8b-03d4-4dbf-95eb-32ab4b63d0ab}, out 00000000026DA770. 0110:warn:d3d11:d3d11_device_context_QueryInterface {b2daad8b-03d4-4dbf-95eb-32ab4b63d0ab} not implemented, returning E_NOINTERFACE. wine-6.11-158-g542175ab104 -- Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.

1 7

[Bug 46615] New: PC Building Simulator doesn't render fonts
by wine-bugs＠winehq.org 10 Apr '22

10 Apr '22

https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=46615 Bug ID: 46615 Summary: PC Building Simulator doesn't render fonts Product: Wine Version: 4.1 Hardware: x86 OS: Linux Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: -unknown Assignee: wine-bugs(a)winehq.org Reporter: luca.finizio.mgbx(a)hotmail.it Distribution: Mint I tried to play PC Building Simulator v9.3.4 but it's impossible to play the game because fonts are not rendered. I attached my console output (there are also errors). -- Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.

2 5

[Bug 44950] New: err:ntdll: RtlpWaitForCriticalSection. Supreme Commander FA
by wine-bugs＠winehq.org 10 Apr '22

10 Apr '22

https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=44950 Bug ID: 44950 Summary: err:ntdll:RtlpWaitForCriticalSection. Supreme Commander FA Product: Wine Version: 3.5 Hardware: x86-64 OS: Linux Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: ntdll Assignee: wine-bugs(a)winehq.org Reporter: james.ytedmonds(a)gmail.com Distribution: --- This bug has affected Supreme Commander: Forged Alliance since pre-2.21. I have found this bug to affect multiple machines with clean wine prefixes. At some point during gameplay, the game will either stop entirely or the window for it will close. The terminal reads: " 007f:fixme:faultrep:ReportFault 0x153ece4 0x0 stub 0110:err:ntdll:RtlpWaitForCriticalSection section 0xfeec00 "?" wait timed out in thread 0110, blocked by 007f, retrying (60 sec) " The only option after this point is to kill the applications. I have found several things that seem to make the bug more likely: *Playing on large maps (definite correlation) *Using 6+ players (less certain) *High graphics settings (might affect timing of bug, but AFAIK cannot cause it) I have tried to override the "ntdll.dll" with one from real windows, but I believe wine at this time does not support overriding this DLL. The bug is easy to reproduce, on a large map (i.e. "Betrayal Ocean") it can occur within 5-10 minutes. I can get any details and logs needed, but I will need to be told how to get them (I am not experienced with debugging) -- Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.

2 12

[Bug 48847] New: dotnet471: often gets a critical section timeout
by WineHQ Bugzilla 10 Apr '22

10 Apr '22

https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=48847 Bug ID: 48847 Summary: dotnet471: often gets a critical section timeout Product: Wine Version: 5.5 Hardware: x86 OS: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: -unknown Assignee: wine-bugs(a)winehq.org Reporter: austinenglish(a)gmail.com Distribution: --- Created attachment 66764 --> https://bugs.winehq.org/attachment.cgi?id=66764 bt all I've been seeing this when running winetricks-test, for dotnet46* and dotnet471. This info is for dotnet471. austin@laptop ~ $ grep 'wait timed out' /tmp/out.txt | sort -u 0048:err:ntdll:RtlpWaitForCriticalSection section 0x7bd2c220 "loader.c: loader_section" wait timed out in thread 0048, blocked by 006e, retrying (60 sec) 006e:err:ntdll:RtlpWaitForCriticalSection section 0x110060 "heap.c: main process heap section" wait timed out in thread 006e, blocked by 0174, retrying (60 sec) 00ad:err:ntdll:RtlpWaitForCriticalSection section 0x7bd2c220 "loader.c: loader_section" wait timed out in thread 00ad, blocked by 006e, retrying (60 sec) 00bb:err:ntdll:RtlpWaitForCriticalSection section 0x110060 "heap.c: main process heap section" wait timed out in thread 00bb, blocked by 0174, retrying (60 sec) 00e2:err:ntdll:RtlpWaitForCriticalSection section 0x7bd2c220 "loader.c: loader_section" wait timed out in thread 00e2, blocked by 006e, retrying (60 sec) 0114:err:ntdll:RtlpWaitForCriticalSection section 0x110060 "heap.c: main process heap section" wait timed out in thread 0114, blocked by 0174, retrying (60 sec) 0166:err:ntdll:RtlpWaitForCriticalSection section 0x7bd2c220 "loader.c: loader_section" wait timed out in thread 0166, blocked by 006e, retrying (60 sec) 0169:err:ntdll:RtlpWaitForCriticalSection section 0x7bd2c220 "loader.c: loader_section" wait timed out in thread 0169, blocked by 006e, retrying (60 sec) 016c:err:ntdll:RtlpWaitForCriticalSection section 0x110060 "heap.c: main process heap section" wait timed out in thread 016c, blocked by 0174, retrying (60 sec) 0193:err:ntdll:RtlpWaitForCriticalSection section 0x7bd2c220 "loader.c: loader_section" wait timed out in thread 0193, blocked by 006e, retrying (60 sec) winedbg bt all is attached. -- Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.

1 19

[Bug 50629] New: Old links on https://www.winehq.org/forums
by WineHQ Bugzilla 09 Apr '22

09 Apr '22

https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=50629 Bug ID: 50629 Summary: Old links on https://www.winehq.org/forums Product: WineHQ.org Version: unspecified Hardware: x86-64 OS: Linux Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: www-unknown Assignee: wine-bugs(a)winehq.org Reporter: jkfloris(a)dds.nl Distribution: --- Two old links on https://www.winehq.org/forums 1. "Users might also want to visit the Wine area at Linux Forums" has a link to http://www.linuxforums.org/forum/wine/ linuxforums.org is offline since May 2020 2. The wine-tests-results(a)winehq.org mailing list isn't used. -- Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.

1 2

[Bug 39379] New: test.winehq.org: Show a specific test history for a machine or platform
by wine-bugs＠winehq.org 09 Apr '22

09 Apr '22

https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=39379 Bug ID: 39379 Summary: test.winehq.org: Show a specific test history for a machine or platform Product: WineHQ.org Version: unspecified Hardware: x86 OS: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: www-unknown Assignee: wine-bugs(a)winehq.org Reporter: fgouget(a)codeweavers.com Distribution: --- Currently it's possible to see at a glance how specific test fared across Wine commits and *all platforms*. For instance: https://test.winehq.org/data/tests/advapi32:service.html But if a platform has multiple test machines, one where the test has always failed and another where it has just started failing, one cannot see when the failures started on the above page. So it would be nice to have a similar page on a per-platform basis; or one with all the reports where that test failed regardless of platform. -- Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.

2 4

[Bug 48164] New: test.winehq.org should provide an efficient way to detect new failures
by WineHQ Bugzilla 09 Apr '22

09 Apr '22

https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=48164 Bug ID: 48164 Summary: test.winehq.org should provide an efficient way to detect new failures Product: WineHQ.org Version: unspecified Hardware: x86 OS: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: www-unknown Assignee: wine-bugs(a)winehq.org Reporter: fgouget(a)codeweavers.com Distribution: --- Problem ------- test.winehq.org does not allow performing the following tasks efficiently: 1. Detecting when a new failure slips past the TestBot. One can detect new failures on the per test unit page when specific columns turn red. But quite often the test unit already has failures so one has to look at the specific number of failures. Furthermore many test units currently have failures so this requires checking 80+ pages individually. 2. Detecting when the results on a VM degrade. After upgrading a machine it's useful to compare it to its previous results. But the results for each date are on separate pages. So again it's necessary to check the per-test-unit result pages. 3. Comparing the results of two machines of different platforms. For instance comparing the results of running Windows 8 to those of Windows 10 on the same hardware. Other things that got asked: 4. Sometimes it would be nice to have only the failures, and not all the lines with skipped tests and todos. 5. In some cases it would also be nice to have pages with only the failures that happen on TesBot VMs since these are usually easier to reproduce. Jeremy's page ------------- Jeremy's test summary page can help with some of that: https://www.winehq.org/~jwhite/latest.html But: * It's not integrated with test.winehq.org which makes it hard to find. * There are only two states: Success and Failed: So it does not help when a test goes from having 2 failures to 4, or when it has a set of systematic failures and a set of intermittent ones. * The failed / success pattern is not per VM which masks some patterns and does not help with point 2. Proposal -------- A modified version of Jeremy's page could be integrated with test.wnehq.org: * It would actually be a pair of 'Failures' pages, one for TestBot VMs and one for all test results. Both would be linked to from the top of the main index page, for instance using the same type of 'prev | next' text links used on the other pages. * Jeremy's result matrix would be extended from three to four dimensions; test units, test results, time, and number/type of failures. * As before the results would be grouped per test unit in alphabetical order. Only the test units having at least one error, recent or not, would be shown. This could again be in the form of an array ('full report' pages on test.winehq.org) or simply test unit titles (TestBot jobDetails page style) with the information about each test unit inside. Clicking on the test unit name would link to its 'test runs' page on test.winehq.org. * For each test unit there would be one line per test result having errors. The first part of the line would have one character per commit for the whole history available on test.winehq.org. That character would indicate if the test failed and more. The second part of the line would be the test result platform and tag. They would be sorted per platform and alphabetically. * Each test result would get a one character code: . Success F Failure C Crash T Timeout m Missing dll (foo=missing or other error code) e Other dll error (foo=load error 1359 and equivalent) _ No test (the test did not exist) ' ' No result (the machine did not run the tests that day) * These codes would be shown using a monospace font so they would form a pattern across time and test results: .....F..F...F..F.mmm Win8 vm1 .....FFFFeFFFFFFeFFF Win8 vm1-ja ...TTCC Win8 vm2-new ......eF...F...F..F. Win10 vm3 * Each character would have a tooltip containing details like the meaning of the letter, the number of failures, or the dll error message. They would also link to the corresponding section of the test report. * In addition to the character the background would be color coded to make patterns more visible. . Green F Green to yellow to red gradient C Dark red T Purple/pink m Cyan e Dark blue _ Light gray ' ' White * The green-yellow-red gradient would be what allows detecting changes in the number of test failures. That gradient must be consistent for all lines of a given test unit's pattern. Furthermore the gradient must not be computed based on the test result's number of failures. That is, if a test unit has either 100 or 101 failures, those must not have nearly indistinguishable colors. Instead the set of all different failure counts for the test unit should be collected. Zero should be added to that set. Then these values should be sorted and a color attributed for each *index*. Then the background color is selected based on the index of that result's failures count. It is expected that each set will be relatively small so that the colors will be reasonably far apart, making it easy to distinguish a shift from 4 to 6 failures even if there are 100 failures from time to time. Also note hat adding zero to the set essentially reserves green for successful results. Implementation feasibility -------------------------- * No changes in dissect. * In gather, generate a new testunits.txt file containing one line per test unit: - The data source would be the per-report summary.txt files. -> These don't indicate when a timeout has occurred so timeouts will appear as F instead which is acceptable for a first implementation. - The first line would contain a star followed by the tags of all the test runs used to build the file: - The other lines would contain the name of the test unit followed by space-separated pairs of result code/failure count and result tag (including the platform). - A line would be put out even if the test unit had no failure. For instance, the commit1 testunit.txt file could contain: * win8_vm1 win8_vm1-ja win8_vm2-new win10_vm3 foo:bar 43 win8_vm1-ja C win8_vm2-new e win10_vm3 foo:bar2 - In the example above win8_vm1 only appears on the first line. This means WineTest was run on that machine but had no failure at all. - If the results for commit2 refer to a win8_vm4 machine, we will know that the reason win8_vm4 does not appear in commit1 file is not because all the tests succeeded, but because WineTest was not run on win8_vm4 for commit1. This means that the result code for win8_vm4 for commit1 should be ' '. not '.' for all test units. - If commit2 has results for the foo:bar3 test unit, then we will know the reason it is not present in the commit1 file is not because all the test runs were successful, but because foo:bar3 did not exist yet. So its result code would be '_', not '.'. * Add a new build-failures script to generate both failures pages. - This script will need to read the testunits.txt file for all the commits. The simplest implementation will be to read all the data into memory before generating the page. This will avoid having to deal with keeping the current test unit synchronized between all of the testunits.txt files when a new test unit has been added. - The combined size of the testunits.txt files is expected to be reasonable, within a factor of 3 of the summary.txt files. For reference, here is some data about the sizes involved: $ du -sh data 21G data $ ls data/*/*/report | wc -l 2299 $ cat data/*/*/report | wc 34,087,987 231,694,407 2,104,860,095 $ cat data/*/*/report | egrep '(: Test failed:|: Test succeeded inside todo block:|done [(]258)|Unhandled exception:)' | wc 567,158 6,275,504 53,202,999 $ cat data/*/summary.txt | wc 186,219 3,046,363 30,596,901 - Having a function to generate the page will allow calling it twice in a row to generate both pages without having to load and parse the testunits.txt files twice. -- Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.

1 5

Jump to page:

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

2001

wine-bugs June 2021