wine-devel September 2015

wine-devel@winehq.org

73 participants
180 discussions

Start a nNew thread

Re: [1/4] user32: Add test case for basic {Begin, , End}DeferWindowPos() (try 2)
by Marvin 02 Sep '15

02 Sep '15

1 0

Re: [PATCH 2/2] ole32: Catch crashes in stub object destructors when destroying stub manager.
by Marvin 02 Sep '15

02 Sep '15

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 https://testbot.winehq.org/JobDetails.pl?Key=16468 Your paranoid android. === w8 (32 bit marshal) === marshal.c:3390: Test failed: info->cbSize was 629240687 instead of 48 marshal.c:3391: Test failed: info->dwServerPid was 0x5ac instead of 0xfc4 marshal.c:3407: Test failed: info->cbSize was 629240687 instead of 48 marshal.c:3408: Test failed: info->dwServerPid was 0x5ac instead of 0xfc4 marshal.c:3445: Test failed: info->cbSize was 629240687 instead of 48 marshal.c:3446: Test failed: info->dwServerPid was 0x5ac instead of 0xfc4 marshal.c:3463: Test failed: info->cbSize was 629240687 instead of 48 marshal.c:3464: Test failed: info->dwServerPid was 0x5ac instead of 0xfc4 marshal.c:3427: Test failed: info->cbSize was 629240687 instead of 48 marshal.c:3428: Test failed: info->dwServerPid was 0x5ac instead of 0xfc4 marshal.c:3390: Test failed: info->cbSize was 629240687 instead of 48 marshal.c:3391: Test failed: info->dwServerPid was 0x5ac instead of 0xfc4 marshal.c:3407: Test failed: info->cbSize was 629240687 instead of 48 marshal.c:3408: Test failed: info->dwServerPid was 0x5ac instead of 0xfc4 marshal.c:3445: Test failed: info->cbSize was 629240687 instead of 48 marshal.c:3446: Test failed: info->dwServerPid was 0x5ac instead of 0xfc4 marshal.c:3463: Test failed: info->cbSize was 629240687 instead of 48 marshal.c:3464: Test failed: info->dwServerPid was 0x5ac instead of 0xfc4 marshal.c:3427: Test failed: info->cbSize was 629240687 instead of 48 marshal.c:3428: Test failed: info->dwServerPid was 0x5ac instead of 0xfc4 marshal.c:3390: Test failed: info->cbSize was 629240687 instead of 48 marshal.c:3391: Test failed: info->dwServerPid was 0x5ac instead of 0xfc4 marshal.c:3407: Test failed: info->cbSize was 629240687 instead of 48 marshal.c:3408: Test failed: info->dwServerPid was 0x5ac instead of 0xfc4 marshal.c:3445: Test failed: info->cbSize was 629240687 instead of 48 marshal.c:3446: Test failed: info->dwServerPid was 0x5ac instead of 0xfc4 marshal.c:3463: Test failed: info->cbSize was 629240687 instead of 48 marshal.c:3464: Test failed: info->dwServerPid was 0x5ac instead of 0xfc4 marshal.c:3427: Test failed: info->cbSize was 629240687 instead of 48 marshal.c:3428: Test failed: info->dwServerPid was 0x5ac instead of 0xfc4

1 0

Re: [PATCH 1/2] ole32: Quote executable name in CreateProcess call.
by Marvin 02 Sep '15

02 Sep '15

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 https://testbot.winehq.org/JobDetails.pl?Key=16467 Your paranoid android. === w8 (32 bit marshal) === marshal.c:3315: Test failed: info->cbSize was 629240687 instead of 48 marshal.c:3316: Test failed: info->dwServerPid was 0x920 instead of 0xfd4 marshal.c:3332: Test failed: info->cbSize was 629240687 instead of 48 marshal.c:3333: Test failed: info->dwServerPid was 0x920 instead of 0xfd4 marshal.c:3370: Test failed: info->cbSize was 629240687 instead of 48 marshal.c:3371: Test failed: info->dwServerPid was 0x920 instead of 0xfd4 marshal.c:3388: Test failed: info->cbSize was 629240687 instead of 48 marshal.c:3389: Test failed: info->dwServerPid was 0x920 instead of 0xfd4 marshal.c:3352: Test failed: info->cbSize was 629240687 instead of 48 marshal.c:3353: Test failed: info->dwServerPid was 0x920 instead of 0xfd4 marshal.c:3315: Test failed: info->cbSize was 629240687 instead of 48 marshal.c:3316: Test failed: info->dwServerPid was 0x920 instead of 0xfd4 marshal.c:3332: Test failed: info->cbSize was 629240687 instead of 48 marshal.c:3333: Test failed: info->dwServerPid was 0x920 instead of 0xfd4 marshal.c:3370: Test failed: info->cbSize was 629240687 instead of 48 marshal.c:3371: Test failed: info->dwServerPid was 0x920 instead of 0xfd4 marshal.c:3388: Test failed: info->cbSize was 629240687 instead of 48 marshal.c:3389: Test failed: info->dwServerPid was 0x920 instead of 0xfd4 marshal.c:3352: Test failed: info->cbSize was 629240687 instead of 48 marshal.c:3353: Test failed: info->dwServerPid was 0x920 instead of 0xfd4 marshal.c:3315: Test failed: info->cbSize was 629240687 instead of 48 marshal.c:3316: Test failed: info->dwServerPid was 0x920 instead of 0xfd4 marshal.c:3332: Test failed: info->cbSize was 629240687 instead of 48 marshal.c:3333: Test failed: info->dwServerPid was 0x920 instead of 0xfd4 marshal.c:3370: Test failed: info->cbSize was 629240687 instead of 48 marshal.c:3371: Test failed: info->dwServerPid was 0x920 instead of 0xfd4 marshal.c:3388: Test failed: info->cbSize was 629240687 instead of 48 marshal.c:3389: Test failed: info->dwServerPid was 0x920 instead of 0xfd4 marshal.c:3352: Test failed: info->cbSize was 629240687 instead of 48 marshal.c:3353: Test failed: info->dwServerPid was 0x920 instead of 0xfd4

1 0

Re: wineps.drv: Add glyph names for PostScript Format 1 glyphs.
by Nikolay Sivov 02 Sep '15

02 Sep '15

On 01.09.2015 19:21, Erich E. Hoover wrote: > + /* These PostScript Format 1 glyph names are stored by glyph index, do not reorder them. */ > + const char *glyph_table[] = { > + ".notdef", > + ".null", > + "nonmarkingreturn", > + "space", I don't think it can work like that for anything except .notdef. If I understand it correctly one of wineps.drv tasks is to generate Type1/Type42 font description from currently selected font, including converting outline data and metrics to proper format, and that selected font could be anything scalable. get_glyph_name() operates on glyph index, and ttf/otf formats are free to map codepoints to any index, so mapping you implemented will only work in case when currently selected font has 'post' table in Format 1. So if you really need adobe glyph name you have to use unicode-value-to-name lookup based on [1] probably (comes under Apache 2.0 license, no idea if it's usable in Wine). But even that won't always work I think, because we have to support ETO_GLYPH_INDEX case too where you have indices as input. [1] https://github.com/adobe-type-tools/agl-aglfn/blob/master/glyphlist.txt

3 3

Re: [2/13]hidclass.sys: Add Plug-and-play and AddDevice
by Alexandre Julliard 02 Sep '15

02 Sep '15

Aric Stewart <aric(a)codeweavers.com> writes: > @@ -57,9 +57,18 @@ typedef struct _minidriver > HID_MINIDRIVER_REGISTRATION minidriver; > > PDRIVER_UNLOAD DriverUnload; > + > + void *AddDevice; Please use the correct callback type and remove the corresponding casts. -- Alexandre Julliard julliard(a)winehq.org

1 0

Re: oleaut32: Implement CreateTypeLib
by Nikolay Sivov 02 Sep '15

02 Sep '15

This is wrong as CreateTypeLib() is supposed to create SLTG typelib. For https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8780 preferred way is to fix vbscript/jscript so you don't have to switch to native. In any case you don't need separate QI call.

1 0

Re: user32: Hide horizontal Listbox scroll bar if no horizontal extent is set. (try 2)
by Joachim Priesner 01 Sep '15

01 Sep '15

Hi, I was wondering about the status of this patch I sent over a month ago. Anything I can do to improve it and get it reviewed? Joachim Am Samstag, 25. Juli 2015 schrieb Joachim Priesner: > According to https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms997541.aspx , a > horizontal scroll bar is shown iff the WS_HSCROLL style is set and > > a) the LBS_MULTICOLUMN style is set and there are too many items or > b) the LBS_MULTICOLUMN style is not set and a horizontal extent is > specified. > > Before this patch, the default scroll info min=0, max=100 would be set > even if no horizontal extent was specified. This led to WS_HSCROLL > list boxes that were less than 100 pixels wide to erroneously have > a horizontal scroll bar. > > Try 2 because I noted a minor formatting error in the first iteration of the patch. > --- > dlls/user32/listbox.c | 20 ++++++++- > dlls/user32/tests/listbox.c | 103 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > 2 files changed, 122 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/dlls/user32/listbox.c b/dlls/user32/listbox.c > index 2902ac9..f4d890b 100644 > --- a/dlls/user32/listbox.c > +++ b/dlls/user32/listbox.c > @@ -265,7 +265,7 @@ static void LISTBOX_UpdateScroll( LB_DESCR *descr ) > if (descr->style & WS_VSCROLL) > SetScrollInfo( descr->self, SB_VERT, &info, TRUE ); > > - if (descr->style & WS_HSCROLL) > + if ((descr->style & WS_HSCROLL) && descr->horz_extent) > { > info.nPos = descr->horz_pos; > info.nPage = descr->width; > @@ -274,6 +274,20 @@ static void LISTBOX_UpdateScroll( LB_DESCR *descr ) > info.fMask |= SIF_DISABLENOSCROLL; > SetScrollInfo( descr->self, SB_HORZ, &info, TRUE ); > } > + else > + { > + if (descr->style & LBS_DISABLENOSCROLL) > + { > + info.nMin = 0; > + info.nMax = 0; > + info.fMask = SIF_RANGE | SIF_DISABLENOSCROLL; > + SetScrollInfo( descr->self, SB_HORZ, &info, TRUE ); > + } > + else > + { > + ShowScrollBar( descr->self, SB_HORZ, FALSE ); > + } > + } > } > } > > @@ -1248,6 +1262,8 @@ static LRESULT LISTBOX_SetHorizontalExtent( LB_DESCR *descr, INT extent ) > info.nMin = 0; > info.nMax = descr->horz_extent ? descr->horz_extent - 1 : 0; > info.fMask = SIF_RANGE; > + if (descr->style & LBS_DISABLENOSCROLL) > + info.fMask |= SIF_DISABLENOSCROLL; > SetScrollInfo( descr->self, SB_HORZ, &info, TRUE ); > } > if (descr->horz_pos > extent - descr->width) > @@ -2537,6 +2553,8 @@ static BOOL LISTBOX_Create( HWND hwnd, LPHEADCOMBO lphc ) > } > } > > + LISTBOX_UpdateScroll(descr); > + > TRACE("owner: %p, style: %08x, width: %d, height: %d\n", descr->owner, descr->style, descr->width, descr->height); > return TRUE; > } > diff --git a/dlls/user32/tests/listbox.c b/dlls/user32/tests/listbox.c > index 79d18e7..9380457 100644 > --- a/dlls/user32/tests/listbox.c > +++ b/dlls/user32/tests/listbox.c > @@ -1665,7 +1665,10 @@ static void test_extents(void) > ok(br == TRUE, "GetScrollInfo failed\n"); > ok(sinfo.nMin == 0, "got wrong min: %u\n", sinfo.nMin); > ok(sinfo.nMax == 100, "got wrong max: %u\n", sinfo.nMax); > + ok((GetWindowLongA(listbox, GWL_STYLE) & WS_HSCROLL) == 0, > + "List box should not have a horizontal scroll bar\n"); > > + /* horizontal extent < width */ > SendMessageA(listbox, LB_SETHORIZONTALEXTENT, 64, 0); > > res = SendMessageA(listbox, LB_GETHORIZONTALEXTENT, 0, 0); > @@ -1677,6 +1680,23 @@ static void test_extents(void) > ok(br == TRUE, "GetScrollInfo failed\n"); > ok(sinfo.nMin == 0, "got wrong min: %u\n", sinfo.nMin); > ok(sinfo.nMax == 100, "got wrong max: %u\n", sinfo.nMax); > + ok((GetWindowLongA(listbox, GWL_STYLE) & WS_HSCROLL) == 0, > + "List box should not have a horizontal scroll bar\n"); > + > + /* horizontal extent > width */ > + SendMessageA(listbox, LB_SETHORIZONTALEXTENT, 184, 0); > + > + res = SendMessageA(listbox, LB_GETHORIZONTALEXTENT, 0, 0); > + ok(res == 184, "Got wrong horizontal extent: %u\n", res); > + > + sinfo.cbSize = sizeof(sinfo); > + sinfo.fMask = SIF_RANGE; > + br = GetScrollInfo(listbox, SB_HORZ, &sinfo); > + ok(br == TRUE, "GetScrollInfo failed\n"); > + ok(sinfo.nMin == 0, "got wrong min: %u\n", sinfo.nMin); > + ok(sinfo.nMax == 100, "got wrong max: %u\n", sinfo.nMax); > + ok((GetWindowLongA(listbox, GWL_STYLE) & WS_HSCROLL) == 0, > + "List box should not have a horizontal scroll bar\n"); > > DestroyWindow(listbox); > > @@ -1692,7 +1712,71 @@ static void test_extents(void) > ok(br == TRUE, "GetScrollInfo failed\n"); > ok(sinfo.nMin == 0, "got wrong min: %u\n", sinfo.nMin); > ok(sinfo.nMax == 100, "got wrong max: %u\n", sinfo.nMax); > + ok((GetWindowLongA(listbox, GWL_STYLE) & WS_HSCROLL) == 0, > + "List box should not have a horizontal scroll bar\n"); > + > + /* horizontal extent < width */ > + SendMessageA(listbox, LB_SETHORIZONTALEXTENT, 64, 0); > + > + res = SendMessageA(listbox, LB_GETHORIZONTALEXTENT, 0, 0); > + ok(res == 64, "Got wrong horizontal extent: %u\n", res); > + > + sinfo.cbSize = sizeof(sinfo); > + sinfo.fMask = SIF_RANGE; > + br = GetScrollInfo(listbox, SB_HORZ, &sinfo); > + ok(br == TRUE, "GetScrollInfo failed\n"); > + ok(sinfo.nMin == 0, "got wrong min: %u\n", sinfo.nMin); > + ok(sinfo.nMax == 63, "got wrong max: %u\n", sinfo.nMax); > + ok((GetWindowLongA(listbox, GWL_STYLE) & WS_HSCROLL) == 0, > + "List box should not have a horizontal scroll bar\n"); > + > + /* horizontal extent > width */ > + SendMessageA(listbox, LB_SETHORIZONTALEXTENT, 184, 0); > + > + res = SendMessageA(listbox, LB_GETHORIZONTALEXTENT, 0, 0); > + ok(res == 184, "Got wrong horizontal extent: %u\n", res); > + > + sinfo.cbSize = sizeof(sinfo); > + sinfo.fMask = SIF_RANGE; > + br = GetScrollInfo(listbox, SB_HORZ, &sinfo); > + ok(br == TRUE, "GetScrollInfo failed\n"); > + ok(sinfo.nMin == 0, "got wrong min: %u\n", sinfo.nMin); > + ok(sinfo.nMax == 183, "got wrong max: %u\n", sinfo.nMax); > + ok((GetWindowLongA(listbox, GWL_STYLE) & WS_HSCROLL) != 0, > + "List box should have a horizontal scroll bar\n"); > + > + SendMessageA(listbox, LB_SETHORIZONTALEXTENT, 0, 0); > > + res = SendMessageA(listbox, LB_GETHORIZONTALEXTENT, 0, 0); > + ok(res == 0, "Got wrong horizontal extent: %u\n", res); > + > + sinfo.cbSize = sizeof(sinfo); > + sinfo.fMask = SIF_RANGE; > + br = GetScrollInfo(listbox, SB_HORZ, &sinfo); > + ok(br == TRUE, "GetScrollInfo failed\n"); > + ok(sinfo.nMin == 0, "got wrong min: %u\n", sinfo.nMin); > + ok(sinfo.nMax == 0, "got wrong max: %u\n", sinfo.nMax); > + ok((GetWindowLongA(listbox, GWL_STYLE) & WS_HSCROLL) == 0, > + "List box should not have a horizontal scroll bar\n"); > + > + DestroyWindow(listbox); > + > + > + listbox = create_listbox(WS_CHILD | WS_VISIBLE | WS_HSCROLL | LBS_DISABLENOSCROLL, parent); > + > + res = SendMessageA(listbox, LB_GETHORIZONTALEXTENT, 0, 0); > + ok(res == 0, "Got wrong initial horizontal extent: %u\n", res); > + > + sinfo.cbSize = sizeof(sinfo); > + sinfo.fMask = SIF_RANGE; > + br = GetScrollInfo(listbox, SB_HORZ, &sinfo); > + ok(br == TRUE, "GetScrollInfo failed\n"); > + ok(sinfo.nMin == 0, "got wrong min: %u\n", sinfo.nMin); > + ok(sinfo.nMax == 0, "got wrong max: %u\n", sinfo.nMax); > + ok((GetWindowLongA(listbox, GWL_STYLE) & WS_HSCROLL) != 0, > + "List box should have a horizontal scroll bar\n"); > + > + /* horizontal extent < width */ > SendMessageA(listbox, LB_SETHORIZONTALEXTENT, 64, 0); > > res = SendMessageA(listbox, LB_GETHORIZONTALEXTENT, 0, 0); > @@ -1704,6 +1788,23 @@ static void test_extents(void) > ok(br == TRUE, "GetScrollInfo failed\n"); > ok(sinfo.nMin == 0, "got wrong min: %u\n", sinfo.nMin); > ok(sinfo.nMax == 63, "got wrong max: %u\n", sinfo.nMax); > + ok((GetWindowLongA(listbox, GWL_STYLE) & WS_HSCROLL) != 0, > + "List box should have a horizontal scroll bar\n"); > + > + /* horizontal extent > width */ > + SendMessageA(listbox, LB_SETHORIZONTALEXTENT, 184, 0); > + > + res = SendMessageA(listbox, LB_GETHORIZONTALEXTENT, 0, 0); > + ok(res == 184, "Got wrong horizontal extent: %u\n", res); > + > + sinfo.cbSize = sizeof(sinfo); > + sinfo.fMask = SIF_RANGE; > + br = GetScrollInfo(listbox, SB_HORZ, &sinfo); > + ok(br == TRUE, "GetScrollInfo failed\n"); > + ok(sinfo.nMin == 0, "got wrong min: %u\n", sinfo.nMin); > + ok(sinfo.nMax == 183, "got wrong max: %u\n", sinfo.nMax); > + ok((GetWindowLongA(listbox, GWL_STYLE) & WS_HSCROLL) != 0, > + "List box should have a horizontal scroll bar\n"); > > SendMessageA(listbox, LB_SETHORIZONTALEXTENT, 0, 0); > > @@ -1716,6 +1817,8 @@ static void test_extents(void) > ok(br == TRUE, "GetScrollInfo failed\n"); > ok(sinfo.nMin == 0, "got wrong min: %u\n", sinfo.nMin); > ok(sinfo.nMax == 0, "got wrong max: %u\n", sinfo.nMax); > + ok((GetWindowLongA(listbox, GWL_STYLE) & WS_HSCROLL) != 0, > + "List box should have a horizontal scroll bar\n"); > > DestroyWindow(listbox); > >

1 0

Re: [PATCH] Fix performance problem in debug tracing
by Alexandre Julliard 01 Sep '15

01 Sep '15

Daniel Santos <daniel.santos(a)pobox.com> writes: > Currently, if any classes are passed to WINEDEBUG (nb_debug_options > 0) then > the initial lazy-init call to __wine_dbg_get_channel_flags() never sets the > flags in the struct __wine_debug_channel in the object file, resulting in all > 45k trace calls in wine making a function call, running bsearch on > debug_options with string compare, etc. Not really. Only the channel that is actually enabled will make repeated function calls. This is done on purpose so that you can toggle it on and off for a given process from the task manager. -- Alexandre Julliard julliard(a)winehq.org

2 1

Re: [PATCH 3/7] d3d11: Add ID3D11Texture3D interface stub.
by Henri Verbeet 01 Sep '15

01 Sep '15

On 1 September 2015 at 00:27, Józef Kucia <jkucia(a)codeweavers.com> wrote: > + else if (IsEqualGUID(riid, &IID_ID3D10Texture3D) > + || IsEqualGUID(riid, &IID_ID3D10Resource) > + || IsEqualGUID(riid, &IID_ID3D10DeviceChild)) > + { > + IUnknown_AddRef(iface); > + *object = &texture->ID3D10Texture3D_iface; For what it's worth, this works here because the d3d10 and d3d11 interfaces share the reference count, but in general you should AddRef() the actual interface you're returning.

2 2

Re: [PATCH 1/2] vcruntime140: Add the new MSVC 2015 compiler specific DLL.
by Alexandre Julliard 01 Sep '15

01 Sep '15

Martin Storsjo <martin(a)martin.st> writes: > Since MSVC 2015/Windows 10, the C runtime has now been split into two > parts, ucrtbase, which is the generic C runtime which is now considered > a system component, and vcruntimeX which is specific to the compiler > version. > > Even if this DLL only has a fraction of the functions of the full > msvcrt/ucrtbase, it still requires almost all the object files from > msvcrt. It would be better to isolate the corresponding code so that we don't need all the files. -- Alexandre Julliard julliard(a)winehq.org

2 2

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-devel September 2015