wine-devel July 2010

wine-devel@winehq.org

114 participants
459 discussions

The Bugzilla Project is interested in hearing about your feedback
by Frédéric Buclin 27 Jul '10

27 Jul '10

Hello dear Bugzilla maintainers and administrators, I am Frédéric "LpSolit" Buclin, the QA lead and one of the two assistant project leads for the Bugzilla project. You are receiving this email because you have already been contacted by Max Kanat-Alexander (mkanat) some time ago when he did a survey about Bugzilla, or because you have been CC'ed to two notable security bugs in 2009, from where I took your email addresses. A few days ago, core Bugzilla developers were talking about relaxing a security policy, and we couldn't come to an agreement because some of us disagree to relax this policy, while some others are fine with this change. We realized that the lack of agreement was because we didn't have enough data from real Bugzilla installations, and that having feedback from maintainers and administrators of large and popular Bugzilla installations was important in this process. Now you probably see why you are getting this email, aren't you? :) The proposed idea is to create a new mailing-list, containing mostly maintainers and administrators of main and popular Bugzilla installations, to discuss security policy changes and major UI changes. This mailing-list should be low-traffic (I don't expect more than 2-4 threads per year). To be clear, we are not going to talk about technical aspects of Bugzilla; important back-end changes being already discussed in developers(a)bugzilla.org. Also, we are not going to talk about minor UI changes, those changes being discussed with the UI lead. The goal of this mailing-list is only to get feedback from you, to know how a security policy change or a major UI change would affect your installation and your users, based on your work flow and based on your own management. So this is a good opportunity to let us know how you would be affected by such or such change. So in order to create the mailing-list, I need to know who would be willing to be in this list and give us their feedback. There will be a way to unsubscribe, in case you are no longer interested to participate. Your feedback is important to us! Please let me know if you are interested or not (with a short reminder about which Bugzilla installation you maintain, to make sure I'm up-to-date), so that we can add you to this new mailing-list. The first topic will be about the security policy change I talked earlier. Best regards, Frédéric Buclin

1 0

Re: [PATCH 02/11] d3d10: Implement D3D10CreateBlob().
by Henri Verbeet 27 Jul '10

27 Jul '10

2010/7/26 Rico Schüller <kgbricola(a)web.de>: > + IUnknown_Release((IUnknown *)object); Since you'll probably resend this anyway based on Matteo's comment, I think just HeapFree() should do just as well. Also, I don't have a recent enough DX SDK to check at the moment, but if d3dcommon.h is generated by IDL, it will mostly likely have proper COM macros for ID3D10Blob as well.

2 1

Re: [2/2] shlwapi/ordinal: Partially implement SHGetShellKey
by testbot＠testbot.winehq.org 27 Jul '10

27 Jul '10

Hi, While running your changed tests on Windows, I think I found new failures. Being a bot and all I'm not very good at pattern recognition, so I might be wrong, but could you please double-check? Full results can be found at http://testbot.winehq.org/JobDetails.pl?Key=3965 Your paranoid android. === W2KPROSP4 (32 bit ordinal) === ordinal.c:609: Test failed: GetShellSecurityDescriptor should fail ordinal.c:1964: Test failed: got 0x00393939, expected 0x00000080. Key {2AD91900-A873-11cf-9A80-00AA00C16E65} ordinal.c:1964: Test failed: got 0x00393939, expected 0x00000121. Key {DB8DC413-C0AA-11D0-9545-080009B1C2F3} === WVISTAADM (32 bit ordinal) === No test summary line found === W7PRO (32 bit ordinal) === ordinal.c:1782: Test failed: got 26 ordinal.c:1832: Test failed: got 26 ordinal.c:1840: Test failed: got 26 ordinal.c:1848: Test failed: got 37, length 38 ordinal.c:1859: Test failed: got 40 === W7PROX64 (64 bit ordinal) === ordinal.c:1776: Test failed: got 10 ordinal.c:1797: Test failed: got 7 ordinal.c:1810: Test failed: got 10 ordinal.c:1818: Test failed: got 10 ordinal.c:1848: Test failed: got 33, length 34 ordinal.c:1859: Test failed: got 36 ordinal.c:1870: Test failed: got 20 ordinal.c:1881: Test failed: got 23

1 0

Re: [1/2] shlwapi/tests: Skip on invalid security descriptor to avoid exception
by testbot＠testbot.winehq.org 27 Jul '10

27 Jul '10

Hi, While running your changed tests on Windows, I think I found new failures. Being a bot and all I'm not very good at pattern recognition, so I might be wrong, but could you please double-check? Full results can be found at http://testbot.winehq.org/JobDetails.pl?Key=3964 Your paranoid android. === W2KPROSP4 (32 bit ordinal) === ordinal.c:607: Test failed: GetShellSecurityDescriptor should fail ordinal.c:1962: Test failed: got 0x00393939, expected 0x00000080. Key {2AD91900-A873-11cf-9A80-00AA00C16E65} ordinal.c:1962: Test failed: got 0x00393939, expected 0x00000121. Key {DB8DC413-C0AA-11D0-9545-080009B1C2F3} === WVISTAADM (32 bit ordinal) === No test summary line found === W7PRO (32 bit ordinal) === ordinal.c:1780: Test failed: got 26 ordinal.c:1830: Test failed: got 26 ordinal.c:1838: Test failed: got 26 ordinal.c:1846: Test failed: got 37, length 38 ordinal.c:1857: Test failed: got 40 === W7PROX64 (64 bit ordinal) === ordinal.c:1774: Test failed: got 10 ordinal.c:1795: Test failed: got 7 ordinal.c:1808: Test failed: got 10 ordinal.c:1816: Test failed: got 10 ordinal.c:1846: Test failed: got 33, length 34 ordinal.c:1857: Test failed: got 36 ordinal.c:1868: Test failed: got 20 ordinal.c:1879: Test failed: got 23

1 0

Re: [PATCH 01/11] d3d10: Add the ID3D10Blob interface.
by Matteo Bruni 27 Jul '10

27 Jul '10

Hello Rico, from d3d10misc.h of latest DirectX SDK: // ID3D10Blob has been made version-neutral and moved to d3dcommon.h. d3dcommon.h seems to be an idl-generated header. From what I can see up to now, only your first patch is "wrong", the rest just needs to be fixed to include d3dcommon.h where needed. Now, I wrote an ID3D10Blob implementation too, it's almost exactly the same as yours (or, to be fair, both are mostly a copy, paste and replace of D3DXBuffer), but I defined the ID3D10Blob interface as latest SDK while you implemented some more things. My plan at this point is: I'll send in a bit a patch adding d3dcommon.idl with the relevant definitions, then you can rebase and adjust your patches on top of it. Does it sound good? Matteo.

2 5

GetVolumeInformationA: please test this on MS-Windows
by Joerg-Cyril.Hoehle＠t-systems.com 27 Jul '10

27 Jul '10

Hi, Wine's testbot job #3910 at http://testbot.winehq.org/JobDetails.pl?Key=3910 contains one binary downloadable via http://testbot.winehq.org/GetFile.pl?JobKey=3910&StepKey=1 that I'd like people to test esp. on Win9X machines (virtual or real). Please invoke it as wintest.exe volume # or X:\path\to\wintest.exe volume Please start it from *another* drive than C: (where your Windows directory is located) or it will skip the important test: volume.c:406: Tests skipped: Please re-run from another device than C: That's why testbot is not good enough here: its machines only have a single drive, C: Normal output on Win9X will be: volume.c:326: Test failed: info: GetVolumeInformationA did fail, current=C:\winetest, last error 161 volume.c:342: Test failed: GetVolumeInformationA did not fail, last error 161 volume.c:422: Test failed: GetVolumeInformationA failed, root=\\?\C:\, last error=53 volume.c:428: Test failed: GetVolumeInformationA failed, root=\\.\C:\, last error=53 volume.c:434: Test failed: GetVolumeInformationA failed, root=C:\WINDOWS\, last error=161 volume.c:440: Test failed: GetVolumeInformationA failed, root=C:\WINDOWS, last error=161 Normal output on more recent OS: volume.c:326: Test failed: info: GetVolumeInformationA did fail, current=C:\winetest, last error 123 [other skipped tests not mentioned] The test in line 326 always fails in order to show what happens on the current directory. Try it out by starting from different directories. See bugs #23355 and #20887 about GetVolumeInformationA. Thank you very much, Jörg Höhle

3 2

Ukrainian translation of Wine at 100%
by Paul Vriens 27 Jul '10

27 Jul '10

Hi, And Ukrainian is also at a 100% !!! Thanks go to Igor for his efforts in getting us this far. -- Cheers, Paul.

1 0

Re: [2/6] richedit: EN_UPDATE notification is sent on WM_PAINT.
by James Mckenzie 27 Jul '10

27 Jul '10

Dylan: Just a question, I don't see 1/6 in this sequence. Was it submitted earlier? James -----Original Message----- >From: Dylan Smith <dylan.ah.smith(a)gmail.com> >Sent: Jul 26, 2010 5:26 AM >To: wine-patches <wine-patches(a)winehq.org> >Subject: [2/6] richedit: EN_UPDATE notification is sent on WM_PAINT. >

2 2

Re: jscript: Added support for Function.arguments property.
by testbot＠testbot.winehq.org 27 Jul '10

27 Jul '10

3 2

Re: [3/4] shdocvw: Add and use AdviseSinkInerface for IE
by Jacek Caban 27 Jul '10

27 Jul '10

On 7/27/10 1:25 PM, Alexander Nicolaysen Sørnes wrote: > This will be used to change the address bar URL when navigating to new pages + *ppvoid = NULL; + if(IsEqualGUID(&IID_IAdviseSink, riid)) You also need to handle IUnknown. + { + *ppvoid = iface; + AdviseSink_AddRef(iface); Direct call to interface function is not really nice. +typedef struct _AdviseSink { + const IAdviseSinkVtbl *lpAdviseSinkVtbl; + LONG ref; + DocHost* doc_host; +} AdviseSink; Is there any reason to make it a separated struct? Also, you don't need it for URL change notification. We already have better way of doing that in shdocvw. See IPropertyNotifySink related code. Jacek

1 0

← Newer
1
...
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
...
46
Older →

Jump to page:

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-devel July 2010