http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=18639
Summary: .NET 3.0 WPF needs NtSecureConnectPort stub Product: Wine Version: 1.1.22 Platform: Other OS/Version: other Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: ntdll AssignedTo: wine-bugs@winehq.org ReportedBy: focht@gmx.net
Hello,
another one, rotting on harddisk half a year now (since first .NET 3.0 voyage) - before it gets lost.
--- snip --- $ wine ./Viewer.exe fixme:ole:CoGetContextToken stub fixme:shell:URL_ParseUrl failed to parse L"PresentationFramework" fixme:shell:URL_ParseUrl failed to parse L"WindowsBase" fixme:shell:URL_ParseUrl failed to parse L"System" fixme:shell:URL_ParseUrl failed to parse L"PresentationCore" fixme:advapi:RegisterTraceGuidsW 0x6307f2 (nil) 0x32dfc4 1 0x32dfa0 (null) (null) 0x32dfa8 fixme:shell:URL_ParseUrl failed to parse L"Viewer.resources" fixme:shell:URL_ParseUrl failed to parse L"Viewer.resources" fixme:shell:URL_ParseUrl failed to parse L"Engine" fixme:shell:URL_ParseUrl failed to parse L"msvcm90" fixme:shell:URL_ParseUrl failed to parse L"Cube" fixme:advapi:RegisterTraceGuidsW 0x532dc234 (nil) 0x53218780 27 0x32d050 (null) (null) 0x53355f40 fixme:seh:RtlCaptureStackBackTrace (2, 3, 0x533546cc, (nil)) stub! wine: Call from 0x7bc3c616 to unimplemented function ntdll.dll.NtSecureConnectPort, aborting fixme:shell:URL_ParseUrl failed to parse L"PresentationFramework.resources" fixme:advapi:CheckTokenMembership (0x1c4 0x174c50 0x32d5f8) stub! fixme:imm:ImmDisableIME (-1): stub fixme:thread:NtQueryInformationThread Cannot get kerneltime or usertime of other threads fixme:thread:NtQueryInformationThread info class 9 not supported yet fixme:thread:NtQueryInformationThread info class 9 not supported yet fixme:thread:NtQueryInformationThread info class 9 not supported yet fixme:advapi:RegisterEventSourceW ((null),L".NET Runtime 2.0 Error Reporting"): stub fixme:advapi:ReportEventW (0xcafe4242,0x0001,0x0000,0x00001388,(nil),0x000b,0x00000102,0x3009a1b4,0x7ed505c4): stub err:eventlog:ReportEventW L"clr20r3" err:eventlog:ReportEventW L"viewer.exe" err:eventlog:ReportEventW L"1.0.0.0" err:eventlog:ReportEventW L"473fefa6" err:eventlog:ReportEventW L"presentationframework" err:eventlog:ReportEventW L"3.0.0.0" err:eventlog:ReportEventW L"45398c20" err:eventlog:ReportEventW L"6496" err:eventlog:ReportEventW L"be" err:eventlog:ReportEventW L"system.windows.markup.xamlparse" err:eventlog:ReportEventW L"NIL" fixme:advapi:DeregisterEventSource (0xcafe4242) stub fixme:thread:NtQueryInformationThread info class 9 not supported yet fixme:thread:NtQueryInformationThread info class 9 not supported yet fixme:thread:NtQueryInformationThread info class 9 not supported yet
Unhandled Exception: System.Windows.Markup.XamlParseException: Cannot create instance of 'MainWindow' defined in assembly 'Viewer, Version=1.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=963dca5fb49a45ad'. Exception has been thrown by the target of an invocation. Error in markup file 'MainWindow.xaml'. ---> System.Reflection.TargetInvocationException: Exception has been thrown by the target of an invocation. ---> System.TypeInitializationException: The type initializer for 'System.Windows.Window' threw an exception. ---> System.TypeInitializationException: The type initializer for 'System.Windows.FrameworkElement' threw an exception. ---> System.TypeInitializationException: The type initializer for 'System.Windows.Documents.TextElement' threw an exception. ---> System.TypeInitializationException: The type initializer for 'System.Windows.Media.FontFamily' threw an exception. ---> System.Runtime.InteropServices.SEHException: External component has thrown an exception. at NtSecureConnectPort(Void** , _UNICODE_STRING* , _SECURITY_QUALITY_OF_SERVICE* , _PORT_VIEW* , Void* , _REMOTE_PORT_VIEW* , UInt32* , Void* , UInt32* ) at MS.Internal.FontCache.LPCServices.TryConnectToLPCPort(String portName, Void* rawExpectedSid, Byte[] connectBuffer, Int32& errorCode) at MS.Internal.FontCache.LPCServices.TryConnectToLPCPort(String portName, Sid expectedSid, Byte[] connectBuffer, Int32& errorCode) at MS.Internal.FontCache.LPCProtocol.TryConnectToServer(Int32 timeout, Int32& errorCode) at MS.Internal.FontCache.IPCCacheManager.GetServerSectionName(Int32 timeout, Int32& errorCode) at MS.Internal.FontCache.CacheManager.GetServerCache() at MS.Internal.FontCache.CacheManager.Lookup(IFontCacheElement e) at System.Windows.Media.FontFamily.PreCreateDefaultFamilyCollection() at System.Windows.Media.FontFamily..cctor() ... at Viewer.App.Main() wine: Unhandled exception 0xe0434f4d at address 0x7b844f6c (thread 003e), starting debugger... Unhandled exception: 0xe0434f4d in 32-bit code (0x7b844fef). --- snip ---
A simple stub returning STATUS_NOT_IMPLEMENTED is enough.
Regards
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=18639
Adys adys.wh+winehqdotorg@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |adys.wh+winehqdotorg@gmail. | |com
--- Comment #1 from Adys adys.wh+winehqdotorg@gmail.com 2009-06-01 03:06:43 --- (In reply to comment #0)
Hello,
another one, rotting on harddisk half a year now (since first .NET 3.0 voyage)
- before it gets lost.
--- snip --- A simple stub returning STATUS_NOT_IMPLEMENTED is enough.
Regards
A patch was sent, try this: http://www.winehq.org/pipermail/wine-patches/attachments/20090601/b54dc441/a...
Don't paste backtraces in the future, attach them.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=18639
--- Comment #2 from Anastasius Focht focht@gmx.net 2009-06-01 04:25:00 --- Hello,
--- quote --- Don't paste backtraces in the future, attach them. --- quote ---
You must to be new ... search bugzilla and you will find hundreds of bugs containing my snippets ;-)
I do this on purpose - this is part of my development (documentation) process. Selected backtraces and source snippets are part of report/analysis - they are to show/prove something that has been written verbatim.
I want search engines to index the full text of message body including backtraces - this wouldn't happen with attachments.
Besides documentation this also serves another important purpose: Using a few keywords in search engine targeting my backtrace snippets contained within bug comments I can actually identify duplicate bugs very quickly because I know what to search for.
If you don't understand this please leave me alone and refrain from teaching me how to use bugzilla. Thanks.
Regards
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=18639
--- Comment #3 from Adys adys.wh+winehqdotorg@gmail.com 2009-06-01 04:29:15 --- (In reply to comment #2)
Hello,
--- quote --- Don't paste backtraces in the future, attach them. --- quote ---
You must to be new ... search bugzilla and you will find hundreds of bugs containing my snippets ;-)
I do this on purpose - this is part of my development (documentation) process. Selected backtraces and source snippets are part of report/analysis - they are to show/prove something that has been written verbatim.
I want search engines to index the full text of message body including backtraces - this wouldn't happen with attachments.
Besides documentation this also serves another important purpose: Using a few keywords in search engine targeting my backtrace snippets contained within bug comments I can actually identify duplicate bugs very quickly because I know what to search for.
If you don't understand this please leave me alone and refrain from teaching me how to use bugzilla. Thanks.
Regards
Attachments are indexed just fine if you make sure the mime type is plain text. There is a big "STOP" sign when you create a bug, with next to it a warning about this. Also see bug 11115.
Nethertheless, this is not the right place for arguing.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=18639
--- Comment #4 from Anastasius Focht focht@gmx.net 2009-06-01 04:55:50 --- Hello,
--- snip --- Attachments are indexed just fine if you make sure the mime type is plain text. --- snip ---
I'm not talking about the advanced search part of Bugzilla itself which allows to search within attachments. I talked about public search engines and mailing list indexers. If Bugzilla db dies one day for whatever reason or another attachment-cleaning round in Bugzilla is done, my work/history will be still searchable.
And yes, I'm more comfortable with public search engines which are actually faster than Bugzillas own. I get the bug message bodies immediately presented rather than Bugzillas list of possible bugs/"candidates" which needs another round of work through, skimming the whole comment history of a bug until I really found the information I needed.
--- snip --- There is a big "STOP" sign when you create a bug, with next to it a warning about this. Also see bug 11115. --- snip ---
I know that. This is to stop users from posting _useless_ backtraces. Well, you are free to ban me from winehq/bugzilla if you don't like that.
Regards
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=18639
--- Comment #5 from Adys adys.wh+winehqdotorg@gmail.com 2009-06-01 05:05:18 --- (In reply to comment #4)
I was talking about public search engines as well (decent ones, anyway).
If you have anything else to say please take it to my private email or wine-devel.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=18639
Ben Klein shacklein@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |shacklein@gmail.com
--- Comment #6 from Ben Klein shacklein@gmail.com 2009-06-01 06:56:35 --- OK, that's a mess of unrelated output. Important line is: wine: Call from 0x7bc3c616 to unimplemented function ntdll.dll.NtSecureConnectPort, aborting
^^ That one line is really all that is required for a stub request (which goes in the bug description/comments). Full stderr output can go in an attachment if you *really* feel the need to include it on bugzilla.
Is the app downloadable or is it reproducable with other .NET 3.0 apps that are downloadable? It'd be nice to know if just a stub is enough for the app to work or if it needs some implementation.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=18639
--- Comment #7 from Anastasius Focht focht@gmx.net 2009-06-01 07:45:47 --- Hello,
--- quote --- OK, that's a mess of unrelated output. Important line is: wine: Call from 0x7bc3c616 to unimplemented function ntdll.dll.NtSecureConnectPort, aborting
^^ That one line is really all that is required for a stub request (which goes in the bug description/comments). Full stderr output can go in an attachment if you *really* feel the need to include it on bugzilla. --- quote ---
If you insist, yes, the backtrace could be cut down further some lines but I was lazy that time. Actually I wanted the managed .NET runtime callstack to be part of the posted snippet for my own reasons. And ... that was not full stderr output, sometimes I place "..." to indicate left out parts in between.
--- quote --- Is the app downloadable or is it reproducable with other .NET 3.0 apps that are downloadable? --- quote ---
The bug is buried within .NET 3.x Framework itself and can be triggered with most .NET 3.x GUI apps. Except for Louis' hack with Windows install+Installrite (which I don't support) there is quite an amount of work required (~10 patches) to come to his point and that are not easy ones. So who would bother with "reproduce"? The work was already done quite some time ago, Louis and I tested this with our own stubs.
--- quote --- It'd be nice to know if just a stub is enough for the app to work or if it needs some implementation. --- quote ---
What part of:
--- quote --- A simple stub returning STATUS_NOT_IMPLEMENTED is enough. --- quote ---
don't you understand? There is no need to explain all things in detail because few people would understand the technical reasoning/implications.
Again: There is no need to group together to argue with me because the backtrace was a bit too verbose. Just leave me alone with my bugs!
Regards
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=18639
Austin English austinenglish@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Keywords| |dotnet, download Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever Confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #8 from Austin English austinenglish@gmail.com 2009-06-01 10:53:45 --- (In reply to comment #3)
Attachments are indexed just fine if you make sure the mime type is plain text. There is a big "STOP" sign when you create a bug, with next to it a warning about this. Also see bug 11115.
Nethertheless, this is not the right place for arguing.
Anastasius knows what he is doing, so please, allow him to file his bugs as he pleases.
If another user wants to post backtraces with very careful analysis after hours of debugging, I won't complain.
If they post a backtrace rather take an extra 3 seconds, redirect to a file and attach it, then please instruct them otherwise.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=18639
Dan Kegel dank@kegel.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |dank@kegel.com
--- Comment #9 from Dan Kegel dank@kegel.com 2009-06-01 19:00:46 --- Adys, Anastasius deserves a lot of slack, as he is extremely good at pointing out where Wine goes wrong. His posts are always useful and sufficiently concise. Please treat him nicely :-)
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=18639
--- Comment #10 from Adys adys.wh+winehqdotorg@gmail.com 2009-06-01 19:14:54 --- (In reply to comment #9)
Adys, Anastasius deserves a lot of slack, as he is extremely good at pointing out where Wine goes wrong. His posts are always useful and sufficiently concise. Please treat him nicely :-)
I wasn't being aggressive! I just think long backtraces make comments hard to read; bugzilla's interface is kind of a mess, there's really no need to make it worse. I'm sorry if it did come off as aggressive.
Anyhow...
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=18639
--- Comment #11 from Dan Kegel dank@kegel.com 2009-06-01 19:19:45 --- With other people, you'd be right to complain about long backtraces.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=18639
--- Comment #12 from Ben Klein shacklein@gmail.com 2009-06-01 20:51:11 --- (In reply to comment #11)
With other people, you'd be right to complain about long backtraces.
Anastasius should not be exempt from etiquette or policy because of his reputation. He used the objection at what is *in reality* an unnecessarily long post as a platform to boast his reputation. The objection is valid - we don't want long backtraces or logs in the bug *description*. The description should only be information relevant to describe the bug (in this case the "unimplemented function" line and possibly the .NET backtrace).
I'm not trying to be aggressive either, but Anastasius has chosen to take the objection as a personal attack.
(In reply to comment #7)
--- quote --- It'd be nice to know if just a stub is enough for the app to work or if it needs some implementation. --- quote ---
What part of:
--- quote --- A simple stub returning STATUS_NOT_IMPLEMENTED is enough. --- quote ---
don't you understand?
The bit that didn't say "enough to make the application work, since it doesn't actually use this feature".
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=18639
--- Comment #13 from Dan Kegel dank@kegel.com 2009-06-01 22:08:12 --- The goal of restricting the posting of logs is to raise the signal to noise ratio. Anastasius' posts are *extraordinarily* signal-rich. He generally doesn't post until he understands an issue. And that makes his posts worth pawing through any amount of logs. Any criticism of his posts that doesn't take that into account is flawed.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=18639
Anastasius Focht focht@gmx.net changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution| |FIXED
--- Comment #14 from Anastasius Focht focht@gmx.net 2009-06-02 10:52:20 --- Hello,
thanks, fixed by commit e8696ca02e69f29621e10e9c9c7722f0aab30869
Regards
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=18639
Alexandre Julliard julliard@winehq.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|RESOLVED |CLOSED
--- Comment #15 from Alexandre Julliard julliard@winehq.org 2009-06-05 12:47:08 --- Closing bugs fixed in 1.1.23.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=18639
Anastasius Focht focht@gmx.net changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Fixed by SHA1| |e8696ca02e69f29621e10e9c9c7 | |722f0aab30869
--- Comment #16 from Anastasius Focht focht@gmx.net 2011-10-11 15:24:08 CDT --- Hello,
filling/correcting fields ...
Regards
https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=18639
Anastasius Focht focht@gmx.net changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hardware|Other |x86 OS|other |Linux URL| |https://web.archive.org/web | |/20081112055516/http://www. | |valil.com/winfx/RTM/Chess/A | |PP/Valil.Chess.WinFX.bin.zi | |p
-
wine-bugs＠winehq.org -
WineHQ Bugzilla