- wine-devel - winehq.org

Keyboard events and Direct Draw
by Alan Chandler 18 Feb '01

18 Feb '01

Actually this is NOW the third attempt the other attempts were yesterday. Apologies to everyone if they have already seen the following. I posted it several hours ago, but I would have expected it to have bounced back to me from the list by now, but it hasn't... ... and I also wanted to add, that I have been desperately trying to find a way to put a breakpoint on any events coming from the keyboard to try and track where they go - but nothing. I cannot find any evidence of any keyboard events being received within wine at all. With --debugmsg traces on channels "key", "keyboard" or "event", I can find nothing registered as I press a key. Perhaps more problematic since its also using the keyboard, but winedbg is not breaking on a breakpoint set on X11DRV_KEYBOARD_HandleEvent The following ... I am trying to understand the behaviour of wine when running Grand Prix Legends (a racing car simulator) - called GPL below. I posted here last week, and since then some updates have occurred to wine that improve things. Namely the colours now all come out correct. However, I am still trying to find out why key presses don't get fed into the program. This has the unfortunate affect, that once you have told the program to exit, you have to wait several minutes for the credits to scroll by since in the program under Windows, hitting return is the only way to kill these off. This is made worse by the fact that the DirectDraw window created by the program forceses itself on top of all the others so that whilst is there most ofther windows are fully or partially obscured (on any virtual desktop). This makes further debugging extremely difficuly. I am pretty sure the program (GPL) is not trying to use direct input for the keyboard, which implies it is expecting keypress messages on its winproc queue. However I don't know which one. With use of --debugmsg I think it creates one window, and then uses a Direct Draw call SetCooperativeLevel to set this window to full screen and exclusive mode. This window is then made active. Inside wine, dlls/ddraw/dsurface/user.c - there is a routine called when a direct draw surface is to be created. Last week Gavriel State suggested that I look at the #define OWN_WINDOW and comment it out. I tried that, and if I do, the game produces no output. However, when this #define is defined I do get the proper output (I have set the game and wine to only assume a 640x480 screen so its a window created in the upper left of my screen). Mouse events are captured properly, but keyboard events do not seem to be. Instead they seem to be directed at the underlying window from which wine was started (or if running winedbg the debug window). Looking at the code within the dsurface/user.c file, it appears to me that keyboard events received are passed to the orginal DirectDraw window. Therefore I don't understand why its not working. I guess the question I am asking is what are the differences between windows and wine here - I have very little knowledge of windows or x windows operation (other than what a learned about windows 5 years ago by reading manuals - but never actually writing code) so forgive me - and what could GPL doing to actually get keypresses. Some thoughts a) There is a call in the trace "CreateDesktopWindow" a little before the other windows calls. Is this Wine or GPL creating this window b) When I run the game under Windows you can ALT-TAB between two tasks. Maybe this other task has a dummy window taking keypresses and that somehow wine is not emulating windows behaviour correctly when automatically linking keypresses to the DirectDraw window Any comments? Alan alan(a)chandlerfamily.org.uk http://www.chandler.u-net.com

1 0

Re: CRITICAL_SECTION alignment
by Ulrich Weigand 18 Feb '01

18 Feb '01

Josh DuBois wrote: > Just as Ulrich suggested, the typedef of the CRITICAL_SECTION struct > was inside a #pragma pack(1) block. On the ppc, this made > CRITICAL_SECTIONs always (or very often) get put on 2-byte boundaries. Aha! ;-) I'd suggest we should try and use pack() as sparingly as possible, e.g. by surrounding only single struct definitions with it. Those large #pragma pack() blocks can be really confusing ... > I didn't expect #pragma pack() to affect the alignment of types - I just > thought it would cause structures to take up the minimum required amount > of room. Seems it makes both members within a structure _and_ separate > structures get tightly packed. Or so I gather. This is really the same thing. The alignment requirement of a structure is the maximum (well, least common multiple) of the alignment requirements of all its member. #pragma pack(1) says that for all subsequent struct definitions, every member's alignment requirement is artificially set to 1. Hence, the struct's alignment requirement is also 1 ... Bye, Ulrich -- Dr. Ulrich Weigand weigand(a)informatik.uni-erlangen.de

1 0

winehq mailserver troubles
by Ove Kaaven 18 Feb '01

18 Feb '01

Looks like mail to winehq was refused since yesterday because 30 sendmail processes was hung trying to deliver mail to some guy at ameritech.net (timed out connections etc), and since this was a limit in sendmail, it refused further incoming connections, and the secondary mailserver at corel didn't want winehq mails, so all incoming mails have been bounced by it... you'll probably all need to resend any bounced mails, I think. But it seems the hanging sendmail processes are already building up again. Let's see... should I disable the culprit's subscription, or try to compile a newer sendmail (if available), or maybe install some other MTA software, like exim? Hmm...

2 1

Perl/Wine extension for perusal
by John F Sturtz 17 Feb '01

17 Feb '01

Greetings. I work for CodeWeavers here in St Paul. Awhile back, I was set to the task of working on winetest, a Wine application which provided a flex/bison-based parser for a little scripting language from which Wine API functions could be called. The idea was that one could write test scripts which would call Wine API functions and examine the results, and the scripts could be used for regression testing of Wine. The scripting language began life with a rather Perl-ish syntax, and as functionality got added, it got more so. Eventually (about the time I had implemented a pack function, and wanted an unpack), I decided to see if I could write a Perl extension that provided a gateway for calling Wine API functions. That way, scripts for regression testing could be written directly in Perl instead. I have an initial version done. The practical upshot is that from a Perl script (after going through the proper incantations), you can write something like this: $atom = kernel32->GlobalAddAtomA("bark"); and the script will call the Wine GlobalAddAtomA() function, passing the string "bark", and return the result in $atom, which can then be examined to determine if it's what it should be. At Alexandre's suggestion, I've tossed a tarball of the stuff out on wine.codeweavers.com at ftp://wine.codeweavers.com/pub/other/perlwine.tar.gz for anyone who's interested in having a look (just download the tarball, untar/ungzip it, and look at the README to get started). In particular, I'm curious as to: 1) Whether it works for anyone who tries it 2) Whether there's anyone who is both a serious Perl guru and a serious Windows guru (I am marginally the former and nowhere near the latter) who might like to take a stab at getting the extension to work under Windows Perl. 3) Whether any make guru would want to take a stab at writing a real makefile for the package (as opposed to the hack make ksh script I've done) as well as any other comments. Any input is appreciated. Thanks. John Sturtz jsturtz(a)codeweavers.com

3 2

Re: Perl/Wine extension for perusal
by Alan Gonzalez 17 Feb '01

17 Feb '01

I believe this will work out of the box on cygwin for windows using the perl 5.6.1 that is bundled with it. No need for ActiveState. Alan > 2) Whether there's anyone who is both a serious Perl > guru and a serious Windows guru (I am marginally > the former and nowhere near the latter) who might > like to take a stab at getting the extension to > work under Windows Perl. __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35 a year! http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/

1 0

Re: Speeding up wineserver syncronization objects with shared memory
by Mike McCormack 17 Feb '01

17 Feb '01

Hi, There are some other issues with wineserver that we should consider at the same time as speed of mutexes. Things that come to mind are: * VirtualAlloc/Virtual Protect on other processes memory * inefficiency of async i/o and file i/o in general * lack of interprocess messaging an difficulty of implementing it efficiently with wineserver's architecture The more i think about it, the more i believe that we do need to add *something* into the kernel to improve the efficiency and flexability of the wineserver. Mike ------------------------------------------ mailto:Mike_McCormack@looksmart.com.au ph +82 16 430 0425 __________________________________________________________________ Get your own free web email at http://www.looksmart.com.au LookSmart Australia

1 0

winelib and active-X dll´s
by christian richter 16 Feb '01

16 Feb '01

hello, has anyone an idea how I can use Functions from Active-X dll´s in my C-programm? those dll´s seem to export com-objects or classes, and i do not know how to use those classes... is it possible ? how `?

1 0

Re: VerQueryValue[A|W]
by François Jacques 16 Feb '01

16 Feb '01

James, Where's HEAP_strudupAtoW called from? For all OLE/COM DLLs, strings should be internally stored as OLECHAR* (wchar_t*) strings. I remember it wasn't the case with typelib.c when I started playing with it. A side-effect of that is that we had to HEAP_strdupAtoW / HEAP_strdupWtoA all over the place in that file - making ASCII-based stored strings more expensive than OLECHAR*-based strings (yeah yeah we're still converting back to ASCII strings a lot, but that's for tracing - not run-time) For all OLE/COM DLLs, I would internally store the strings as OLECHAR* strings (or BSTR, as you wish...) wherever it makes sense to do it, e.g. most places. Cheers, Francois -----Message d'origine----- De : James Hatheway <james(a)macadamian.com> À : amohr(a)codeweavers.com <amohr(a)codeweavers.com> Cc : WineHQ Devel <wine-devel(a)winehq.com> Date : 15 février, 2001 10:44 Objet : Re: VerQueryValue[A|W] >> > To convert an ASCII string to Unicode, you can use the >> > function HEAP_strdupAtoW, as in: >> Wrong ;-) > >Yeah, I know, Huw already set me straight on that. ^_^ > > >> HEAP_str* is deprecated (the header file says so). >> Use MultiByteToWideChar() or WideCharToMultiByte() instead. > >I'll admit I wrote the email when my brain wasn't quite >working (by def'n anytime after 1am), thought to >myself "what is that API again?", did a quick search in >WINE, said to myself "oh HEAP_strdupAtoW" >sent a quick email and went to bed. :) That teaches me to >send email without thinking. > >But that gets me to my point. HEAP_strdupAtoW is used in >this capacity 78 times in the WINE source tree (WtoA another >182 times). We should probably change it sometime, since a >lot of people who are writing new code are sure to use >the current code base as an example of "how to do things". > >Out of curiosity, why are we killing these macros? They >seem quite convenient. If it is because they aren't in >standard windows headers, can't we put them somewhere >in include/wine? > > >-James > >-- >James Hatheway >Software Designer - Macadamian Technologies, Inc. >james(a)macadamian.com ~ http://www.macadamian.com > > "Man könnte froh sein, wenn die Luft so rein wäre wie das Bier" > "One could be happy if the air were as pure as the beer" > > > >

2 1

Re: GetPixel bug!!!
by Ove Kaaven 16 Feb '01

16 Feb '01

On Fri, 16 Feb 2001, François Gouget wrote: > I just wanted to avoid copying the pixmap back into the DIB for the > GetPixel case since obviously it has not been modified. That's what > commit is here for of course. OTOH the subtleties of lossy are a bit > lost on me. AFAICS it's always set to false so I'll just do the same. The "lossy" is only meant for extreme optimization cases - "lossy" suppresses the copying entirely, and is only meant to be useful when some operation would completely overwrite/obliterate everything on the DIB surface anyway, for example, a SRCCOPY blit that'd cover the entire destination DIB. In such cases, it'd just be a waste to do a copy only to have all of the copied data overwritten, it would be more efficient to not copy anything then. But such optimization checks isn't being done yet. I think the reason GetPixel/PutPixel hasn't done DIB updates yet is because it's wasteful to copy the entire DIB graphic back and forth for a single pixel, when it should really be easy to add code that could access the DIB data directly... just that nobody did that yet. We're going to need a proper DIB (aka FB) graphics engine someday...

1 0

RE: Header file legal issues (was Re: process.h patch)
by Patrik Stridvall 16 Feb '01

16 Feb '01

> > I think you have missunderstood what the judges meant. > > > > The fact the computer programs are functional doesn't take away > > their copyrightabillity. But copyright only protects the creative > > expression and then the form of these expressisions are dictated > > by external factors such as in the courts words "compatibility > > requirements and industry demands" they are not creative expression > > and thus not copyrightable. > > > > It almost sounded to me as if they were saying that it was purely > functional. But then again I didn't read it really > carefully. The correct > representation is that they are creative but then yield a > function. The > creative part (the source code) should be copyrightable, but > the actual > functionality should not be, and it should be perfectly legal > to duplicate > the functionality of a piece of code so long as you do not > actually verbatim > copy the copyrighted source code. Exactly. > Protecting the functionality would be an issue for patents and not > copyrights. And with the exception of things like the RSA > patent, software > patents for the most part have not been working. Of course, IIRC the > RSA patent is not actually a software patent but a patent on > a hardware > implementation of the algorithm. Note quite, patents do not protect functiality, they protect a specific way to achieve a certain functionality. For example, you could, providing software patents are valid, patent a specific algoritm that sorts list, but you can't patent all algoritms that have the same functionallity, is this cases that sorts list. Patents are for promoting progress by finding new and better way of achieving some specific functionality. The functionallity (end result) is itself it an idea and not protectable. > > Not that fact that the court said "functional" and not > > "is not a creative expression" is AFAICS largely irrelevant. > > > > But I think I can see what you are after, I you have an "optimal" > > compiler every computer program that are functionally equivivalent > > will be reduced to the same binary form. However that doesn't rob > > the source code from copyright, just the binary form. > > > > Binaries should only be copyrightable in the sense that doing > a verbatim > copy (e.g. copy file.exe newfile.exe) should be protected, Careful, we definitely don't want copyright law to mean that. There have been some strange cases involving whether the representation of the program in memory is a copy. While running an application obviously falls under fair use, such a view might be unfortunate since it like the DMCA will lead to logical contradictions which will enable scrupelus persons to use the confusion in legal arguments. IMHO the only sane definition of copy in the meaning of copyright is something is a copy (or a potential copy) if it is made with the intent to distribute. With potential copy I mean for example offering a protected work for download on a website or on Napster or where ever. All other defintion will lead to logical contradictions AFAICS. For example, if I look at protected work, have a copy been made in my eyes? If I have a camera attached to say my glasses that broadcast everything I see on a website will I be a copyright infringer if I look at a protected work. Without having intent as condition you can nail anybody for copyright infringement. > but if the > compiler happens to generate an exact copy, then so be it. Yes, but two works that are the same or similar by coincidence have never been considered copyright infringment. What I meant is that if the representation is optimal it will be purely functional and thus not protectable at all since copyright doesn't protected that. However since optimal compilers doesn't exist, this distinction is rather meaningless, the binary will always retain some of protected creative expression and thus be protectable as a whole.

1 0

RE: Header file legal issues (was Re: process.h patch)
by Patrik Stridvall 16 Feb '01

16 Feb '01

> > The court in that case said: > > > > Computer programs pose unique problems for the > application of the > > "idea/expression distinction" that determines the > extent of copyright > > protection. To the extent that there are many possible ways of > > accomplishing a given task or fulfilling a particular > market demand, > > the programmer's choice of program structure and design > may be highly > > creative and idiosyncratic. However, computer programs > are, in essence, > > utilitarian articles -- articles that accomplish tasks. > As such, they > > contain many logical, structural, and visual display > elements that are > > dictated by external factors such as compatibility requirements > > and industry demands... In some circumstances, even the > exact set of > > commands used by the programmer is deemed functional rather than > > creative for the purposes of copyright. When specific > instructions, > > even though previously copyrighted, are the only and > essential means > > of accomplishing a given task, their later use by > another will not > > amount to infringement. > > > > Hmm, I am not so sure I like all of that. Program code > serves two purposes. For one > thing it is functional, and for another (and actually for the > most part) it has a > human readable structure. I think you have missunderstood what the judges meant. The fact the computer programs are functional doesn't take away their copyrightabillity. But copyright only protects the creative expression and then the form of these expressisions are dictated by external factors such as in the courts words "compatibility requirements and industry demands" they are not creative expression and thus not copyrightable. Not that fact that the court said "functional" and not "is not a creative expression" is AFAICS largely irrelevant. But I think I can see what you are after, I you have an "optimal" compiler every computer program that are functionally equivivalent will be reduced to the same binary form. However that doesn't rob the source code from copyright, just the binary form. Anyway, regardless of whether optimal compilers possible, it still doesn't make copyright of computer programs meaningless, since you really want to be able to change the computer program and an optimal representation of it is not very easy to change. :-) So the creative expression of the source code is really useful and thus promotes progress, so it really should be and indeed is protectable.

2 1

RE: Turkish Keybard
by Nerijus Baliunas 16 Feb '01

16 Feb '01

> Adding a turkish keyboard layout. > > -aric Why do you use 28591? Shouldn't it be 28599?

1 0

Re: msvcrt/c++
by Alexandre Julliard 15 Feb '01

15 Feb '01

Jon Griffiths <tntjpgriff(a)tsnxt.co.uk> writes: > This is a resubmit of the previous patch. It now manages to do the > setjmp/longjmp stuff 90% in C rather than asm. It also implements setjmp3 > which is needed for programs compiled with VC++ v4.0+, and it should fix the > compilation problem reported on cemw. You should _really_ use register functions instead of inline assembly. Then you can do setjmp/longjmp 100% in C. -- Alexandre Julliard julliard(a)winehq.com

2 2

Re: Speeding up wineserver syncronization objects with shared memory
by Alexandre Julliard 15 Feb '01

15 Feb '01

Gavriel State <gav(a)transgaming.com> writes: > Definitely a drawback, I agree. But the shared memory area could be relatively > high in the address space, so that a stray pointer is much more likely to run > into unmapped memory and segfault before overwriting crucial data. This is only one failure case, but there are many others; for instance stack corruption that causes the app to jump somewhere inside ReleaseMutex, which will then happily modify the right address in the wrong way. > The only way we're going to be able to get both speed and safety though is > to have some kernel support. While that's beyond the scope of what I'd like > to accomplish in the short term, I think that it's something worth thinking > about more. While the solution proposed by David Howells may be overkill, I'm > not sure that simply changing the communication mechanism as you suggested > (http://www.winehq.com/News/2000-37.html#0) will speed things up enough - > we'll still have the context switch overhead. The main problem is the TLB flush due to switching address spaces; but I don't see any way to avoid this if we want memory protection (which we definitely do). The only way to know if we can make it fast enough is to implement it and benchmark it... > At least in the case of mutexes, I believe that all we need to do is > make sure that the count field is always modified through interlocked > increment/decrement/etc including the wineserver. I think you underestimate the complexity of getting this right. For instance, how do you determine the address of the count field from the mutex handle, keeping in mind that handles can be manipulated from other threads or even other processes (cf. DuplicateHandle)? How do you cope with a thread dying in the middle of an operation? Of course you can ignore all these special cases, and it will even work most of the time. But it's clearly not a viable general solution... -- Alexandre Julliard julliard(a)winehq.com

1 0

Re: Speeding up wineserver syncronization objects with shared memory
by Alexandre Julliard 15 Feb '01

15 Feb '01

Gavriel State <gav(a)transgaming.com> writes: > After some more thinking, Ove and I have come up with a mechanism that should eliminate > most of the wineserver overhead for mutexes and semaphores, without the need to resort > to a kernel module. We're probably going to give this a try over the next few days, so > any feedback will be very much appreciated. I don't see how you are going to make this work reliably. A basic design principle of the server is that no matter what a client process does, it cannot break either the server or other clients; given the number of bugs Windows apps contain, I feel this is very important. As soon as you introduce a shared memory area, you need the collaboration of all clients to ensure the stability of the whole system, since any client can corrupt system data structures. This is very bad. Also since the server is single-threaded its data structures don't need to be protected; but as soon as you manipulate them from multiple threads you need locking mechanisms, which will probably cost a lot in performance too. -- Alexandre Julliard julliard(a)winehq.com

2 1

Re: dlls/ntdll/debugtools.c patch
by Alexandre Julliard 15 Feb '01

15 Feb '01

Chris Morgan <cmorgan(a)wpi.edu> writes: > Resubmit of this patch. Alexander, is this patch ok? Looks good, but I wonder if we shouldn't add an assert() instead. People are not supposed to use the debug interface to print out huge strings, and printing partial lines messes up the output in multi-threaded programs. -- Alexandre Julliard julliard(a)winehq.com

1 0

RE: Documentation fixes
by Patrik Stridvall 15 Feb '01

15 Feb '01

> Patrik Stridvall <ps(a)leissner.se> writes: > > > More readable to a human, perhaps. > > Uh, yes, the source code is meant to be read by humans. winapi_check > is a nice tool but it doesn't justify making the code less readable; Sure but grouping all the variants together doesn't nessary make it less readable to human. It entirely depends on how diffrent the variants are. If for example one variant is an optimized i386 assembler variant and the other is a pure C variant it might be more sensible to group them together, in order to more make people making changes remember to change the other variant. In this case, I personally didn't find either way preferable so I did what was best for winapi_check. > instead it should be fixed to understand the existing constructs That is a quite complicated in this case. > (or > at least don't complain about them). OK. I can easily make it ignore multiple definitions. I will do that.

1 0

Re: Documentation fixes
by Alexandre Julliard 15 Feb '01

15 Feb '01

Patrik Stridvall <ps(a)leissner.se> writes: > More readable to a human, perhaps. Uh, yes, the source code is meant to be read by humans. winapi_check is a nice tool but it doesn't justify making the code less readable; instead it should be fixed to understand the existing constructs (or at least don't complain about them). -- Alexandre Julliard julliard(a)winehq.com

1 0

Re: howto use dll´s in C
by christian richter 15 Feb '01

15 Feb '01

Thanks, specmaker could use the dll, but i tried specmaker with severall dll´s and there were only four functions: unload_class, registerServer unregisterServer or something like that, i heared this is because of the COM,ActiveX nature of the dll´s ... can i use those classes in C ??? how,is it maybe possible with corba ? -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: Jon Griffiths [mailto:tntjpgriff@tsnxt.co.uk] Gesendet: Mittwoch, 14. Februar 2001 14:45 An: christian richter; 'wine-devel(a)winehq.com' Betreff: Re: howto use dll´s in C Hi, If you have the wine sources, or browse them from www.winehq.com, checkout tools/specmaker/README. Also see the Winelib developer guide for details on Winelib in general. Note that if all you want is the string routines, thats a lot of overhead for a few routines. You might find they are available in source form from somewhere else. Cheers, Jon -- "Don't wait for the seas to part, or messiahs to come, Dont you sit around and waste this chance ..." -Live tntjpgriff(a)tsnxt.co.uk , jon_p_griffiths(a)yahoo.com

2 1

Speeding up wineserver syncronization objects with shared memory
by Gavriel State 15 Feb '01

15 Feb '01

Hi everyone, We've recently been working on getting American McGee's Alice (a visually stunning game, if you haven't seen it before) running well under Wine, and we've run into a serious speed issue with synchronization objects like Mutexes. Currently, Alice runs at about 50% the framerate it gets in Windows with the same graphics driver (NVidia). When we started investigating, it turned out that the reason for this is that it's spending half of it's time in the WineServer. At first we assumed that this was due to the fact that the GL thunks need to grab the X11 lock. We realized that this wasn't necessary for most GL calls if we're using a direct rendering GL implementation, and turned off the locks. There was no effect - because there really wasn't much contention for the x11 lock. After going through a number of similar Wine internal possibilities and getting nowhere, we finally realized that the problem was the app itself. It's grabbing and releasing a mutex of it's own bazillions of times each frame. Since there's nothing much we can do about that we started thinking about the proposed linux kernel module approach. After re-reading the thread and looking over the prototype, I have to concur with Alexandre's judgement - the prototype that exists is trying to do too much work. After some more thinking, Ove and I have come up with a mechanism that should eliminate most of the wineserver overhead for mutexes and semaphores, without the need to resort to a kernel module. We're probably going to give this a try over the next few days, so any feedback will be very much appreciated. Here's what we've been discussing in private email: ============================================================================================ Ove writes: > Gav writes: > > > Alternatively, I wonder if there's some way to speed up synchronization stuff > > through the use of some kind of shared memory area that all wine processes know > > about. The shared memory area could be used to do mutexes with atomic test-and- > > set operations. > > Maybe. But we probably don't want extensive busy waits, so we'd need to > call the wineserver when we need to wait. And the wineserver isn't really > designed to do bus-locked atomic access to such shared areas itself. But > perhaps with some client cooperation... in win32, a mutex is just a > different (and slower) kind of a critical section, anyway (but since it's > handle-based it can work across address spaces). > > If each mutex had a wcount field shared among all clients, we could do... > > ReleaseMutex: > wc = InterlockedDecrement(&wcount) > if wc > 0 > call wineserver's ReleaseMutex > > WaitForSingleObject: > wc = InterlockedIncrement(&wcount) > if wc < 0 > return WAIT_OBJECT_0 > call wineserver's WaitForSingleObject > > which would at least do something about the > ReleaseMutex/WaitForSingleObject pairs in the same thread... That's exactly the kind of thing I was thinking about. We can probably do the same for the CriticalSection semaphores as well. I don't think that we can do anything to speed up Events though. So the next question is: what's the best way to manage the shared area for each mutex/semaphore? We could just expose the wineserver handle table directly in the shared memory area, expanding the handle_entry struct in the server with a DWORD to server as the count field. Theoretically it brings up security concerns, but I don't think that we care that much at this point. ============================================================================================ Thoughts, anyone? -Gav -- Gavriel State, CEO TransGaming Technologies Inc. http://www.transgaming.com gav(a)transgaming.com

1 0

RE: Documentation fixes
by Patrik Stridvall 15 Feb '01

15 Feb '01

> Patrik Stridvall <ps(a)leissner.se> writes: > > > * dlls/winedos/dosvm.c, > > dlls/winedos/module.c: > > - Added documentation > > - Reorganized the no-DOS support. > > I don't think adding a #ifdef around each function is a good > idea. It's much more readable with a single #ifdef around the whole > file IMO. More readable to a human, perhaps. I'm not sure that I agree, but I don't really care much either way. Let me explain why I did it insteed. Currently winapi_check tried to check whether API functions have the correct inline documentation and the future some other application will generate the .spec files from inline documentation and function prototype. In order to be able to easily do this, it is IMHO much better if all the compile time depend variants is groups together in some standardized way in order for the tool to easily understand that variants exist and under what cirumstances they exist. But sure, we could easily add a kludge in both winapi_check and any future tools what just ignore any multiple occurance of an already documented function. It will be more errorprone but since this is quite rare perhaps it will not matter so much. Anyway, I don't really very much, so just say how want it: 1. Some way similar to mine (easily parsable structure) 2. Just kludge over this rare case (ignore multiple) 3. Some other way.

1 0

Re: VerQueryValue[A|W]
by James Hatheway 15 Feb '01

15 Feb '01

> > To convert an ASCII string to Unicode, you can use the > > function HEAP_strdupAtoW, as in: > Wrong ;-) Yeah, I know, Huw already set me straight on that. ^_^ > HEAP_str* is deprecated (the header file says so). > Use MultiByteToWideChar() or WideCharToMultiByte() instead. I'll admit I wrote the email when my brain wasn't quite working (by def'n anytime after 1am), thought to myself "what is that API again?", did a quick search in WINE, said to myself "oh HEAP_strdupAtoW" sent a quick email and went to bed. :) That teaches me to send email without thinking. But that gets me to my point. HEAP_strdupAtoW is used in this capacity 78 times in the WINE source tree (WtoA another 182 times). We should probably change it sometime, since a lot of people who are writing new code are sure to use the current code base as an example of "how to do things". Out of curiosity, why are we killing these macros? They seem quite convenient. If it is because they aren't in standard windows headers, can't we put them somewhere in include/wine? -James -- James Hatheway Software Designer - Macadamian Technologies, Inc. james(a)macadamian.com ~ http://www.macadamian.com "Man könnte froh sein, wenn die Luft so rein wäre wie das Bier" "One could be happy if the air were as pure as the beer"

1 0

Re: New EnumPrinterDataEx
by Alexandre Julliard 15 Feb '01

15 Feb '01

Ian Pilcher <pilcher(a)concentric.net> writes: > In theory, yes. But what about the case of a mistake on my part (or > the part of the person who implemented the underlying call)? We all > do everything possible to produce error-free code, but mistakes *do* > happen. IMHO the likelihood that your macros are going to introduce new bugs is larger than the likelihood that you are ever going to catch a legitimate failure from HeapFree(). Not to mention that there are already WARNs in the heap code that will catch the problem first, so your messages are redundant. Checking for errors is good if you actually handle failures; but if you don't do anything it just obscures the code for no good reason. -- Alexandre Julliard julliard(a)winehq.com

2 1

VersionInfo for built-in DLLs
by Dmitry Timoshkov 15 Feb '01

15 Feb '01

Hello all. This patch adds version information to the built-in GDI32.DLL. Attached test program now able to retrieve and display version information for both 32-bit and 16-bit modules. For instance "about.exe notepad.exe" will show information about 16-bit notepad, "about.exe gdi32.dll" - about built-in gdi32.dll. To do: Add 16-bit version information. Before I'll send it to wine-patches I would like to hear your comments and suggestions.

1 0

Re: VerQueryValue[A|W]
by Alexandre Julliard 15 Feb '01

15 Feb '01

lawson_whitney(a)juno.com writes: > AOL 5.0 does this, so I guess it is allowed by some flavors of windows. > > ChangeLog: > * dlls/version/info.c: > Lawson Whitney <lawson_whitney(a)juno.com> > If VerQueryValueA is called with a PE resource, cast the call > to VerQueryValueW. Shouldn't you convert the lpSubBlock string to Unicode first? -- Alexandre Julliard julliard(a)winehq.com

4 5

RE: Header file legal issues (was Re: process.h patch)
by Patrik Stridvall 15 Feb '01

15 Feb '01

> Patrik Stridvall wrote: > > > > One fly in the legal ointment is that while the headers may not be > > > copyrighable, the shrinkwrap license may still be legal > as a contract. > > > There's a case where a court suggested that someone who > buys a copy > > > of a product that contains a shrinkwrap license agreement > and unwraps > > > it is legally bound to follow it, while the person who > later finds the > > > unwrapped CD 'on the street' with no such license is > allowed to copy > > > the portions that are unprotected by copyright. > > > > If that is so, wouldn't it mean that if you have a pirated > copy of the > > headers > > you can legally copy and distribute parts that are > unprotected by copyright. > > :-) > > > > Oh, the irony of it all. You don't need to use a pirated copy either just borrow a friends computer that has the headers legally installed and copy any part unprotected by copyright. Any "contract" can only bind him. :-)

1 0

RE: Header file legal issues (was Re: process.h patch)
by Patrik Stridvall 15 Feb '01

15 Feb '01

> One fly in the legal ointment is that while the headers may not be > copyrighable, the shrinkwrap license may still be legal as a contract. > There's a case where a court suggested that someone who buys a copy > of a product that contains a shrinkwrap license agreement and unwraps > it is legally bound to follow it, while the person who later finds the > unwrapped CD 'on the street' with no such license is allowed to copy > the portions that are unprotected by copyright. If that is so, wouldn't it mean that if you have a pirated copy of the headers you can legally copy and distribute parts that are unprotected by copyright. :-) Anyway, you don't need to go to such extremes, since the legal status of shrinkwrap licenses in Europe is much more doubtful, just have somebody in Europe do it. I can't see why something posted on wine-patches shouldn't be equal with found on the street, in the meaning that things that is unprotected by copyright can be legally incorperated in the main tree. This is probably true regardless of the legal status of shrinkwrap licenses in Europe, especially since it is IMHO entire reasonable, given existing European cases, to assume that they don't have an legally meaning. > It's unclear where > the anti-trust issue fits in there. I pass, not my area of expertize. :-) > Food for thought, anyhow... Yes.

3 2

Re: process.h patch
by Alexandre Julliard 15 Feb '01

15 Feb '01

Jon Griffiths <tntjpgriff(a)tsnxt.co.uk> writes: > Until we have MS style headers, at least declare msvcrt functions extern "C" > so C++ Winelib programs will link. > > I didn't get any feedback to my headers patch. Alexandre, what do I need > to do to get some headers into CVS? Or is that not the plan? Well, I don't know, I was hoping to get some feedback from the winelib experts out there on whether this is better than the approach with macros suggested by David. -- Alexandre Julliard julliard(a)winehq.com

6 7

Re: Re: recording sound=?iso-8859-1?Q?=3F?=
by Eric Pouech 15 Feb '01

15 Feb '01

>winmm wave recording is supposed to be supported, at least at the >low-level wave API level. Maybe less so at the MCI level, though, support at the MCI level should be more or less ok... (at least the Macadamiam folks did a great effort there) >and not >supported at all yet in the DirectSound layer. What kind of API does it >use to record these sounds? You don't say what kind of app it is... post the output of runnnig with the -debugmsg +wave,+mciwave,+dsound would help us pinpointing the issue A+ --------------- Eric Pouech (http://perso.wanadoo.fr/eric.pouech/) "The future will be better tomorrow", Vice President Dan Quayle

4 7

Re: Documentation fixes
by Alexandre Julliard 14 Feb '01

14 Feb '01

Patrik Stridvall <ps(a)leissner.se> writes: > * dlls/winedos/dosvm.c, > dlls/winedos/module.c: > - Added documentation > - Reorganized the no-DOS support. I don't think adding a #ifdef around each function is a good idea. It's much more readable with a single #ifdef around the whole file IMO. -- Alexandre Julliard julliard(a)winehq.com

1 0

Some strange exception crash
by Lionel Ulmer 14 Feb '01

14 Feb '01

Hi all, While trying to debug DMute (http://www.mrao.cam.ac.uk/~gg215/dm/), I get the following crash : Call kernel32.674: SetUnhandledExceptionFilter(0042a8a0) ret=0042a898 fs=008f Ret kernel32.674: SetUnhandledExceptionFilter() retval=00000000 ret=0042a898 fs=008f (...) Call kernel32.473: InterlockedDecrement(fffffff4) ret=00438683 fs=008f trace:seh:EXC_RtlRaiseException code=c0000005 flags=0 trace:seh:EXC_CallHandler calling handler at (nil) code=c0000005 flags=0 trace:seh:EXC_RtlRaiseException code=c0000005 flags=0 trace:seh:EXC_CallHandler calling handler at 0x4005ac40 code=c0000005 flags=0 trace:seh:EXC_CallHandler handler returned 2 trace:seh:EXC_CallHandler calling handler at (nil) code=c0000005 flags=10 And it never stops.... It does a segfault when not using --debugmsg +seh. So I am wondering why the exception handler is set to 'NULL' at this point (I am also wondering where that damn application got the 'fffffff4' to use as a 'mutex', but that is another problem :-) ). Anyone has a clue ? Lionel -- Lionel Ulmer - lionel.ulmer(a)free.fr My Advogato Wine diary : http://www.advogato.org/person/bbrox/

1 0

Re: Registry patch
by Alexandre Julliard 14 Feb '01

14 Feb '01

davep <davep(a)cyw.uklinux.net> writes: > > Could you please send me a +reg,+server trace of the offending calls? > > Attached. Thanks; does this fix it? Index: dlls/advapi32/registry.c =================================================================== RCS file: /opt/cvs-commit/wine/dlls/advapi32/registry.c,v retrieving revision 1.20 diff -u -r1.20 registry.c --- dlls/advapi32/registry.c 2001/01/06 01:29:18 1.20 +++ dlls/advapi32/registry.c 2001/02/13 22:11:00 @@ -447,6 +447,7 @@ return ERROR_INVALID_PARAMETER; status = NtQueryKey( hkey, KeyFullInformation, buffer, sizeof(buffer), &total_size ); + if (status && status != STATUS_BUFFER_OVERFLOW) goto done; if (class) { @@ -460,32 +461,30 @@ status = NtQueryKey( hkey, KeyFullInformation, buf_ptr, total_size, &total_size ); } - if (!status) + if (status) goto done; + + if (class_len && (info->ClassLength/sizeof(WCHAR) + 1 > *class_len)) { - if (class_len && (info->ClassLength/sizeof(WCHAR) + 1 > *class_len)) - { - status = STATUS_BUFFER_OVERFLOW; - } - else - { - memcpy( class, buf_ptr + info->ClassOffset, info->ClassLength ); - class[info->ClassLength/sizeof(WCHAR)] = 0; - } + status = STATUS_BUFFER_OVERFLOW; + } + else + { + memcpy( class, buf_ptr + info->ClassOffset, info->ClassLength ); + class[info->ClassLength/sizeof(WCHAR)] = 0; } } + else status = STATUS_SUCCESS; - if (!status || status == STATUS_BUFFER_OVERFLOW) - { - if (class_len) *class_len = info->ClassLength / sizeof(WCHAR); - if (subkeys) *subkeys = info->SubKeys; - if (max_subkey) *max_subkey = info->MaxNameLen; - if (max_class) *max_class = info->MaxClassLen; - if (values) *values = info->Values; - if (max_value) *max_value = info->MaxValueNameLen; - if (max_data) *max_data = info->MaxValueDataLen; - if (modif) *modif = info->LastWriteTime; - } + if (class_len) *class_len = info->ClassLength / sizeof(WCHAR); + if (subkeys) *subkeys = info->SubKeys; + if (max_subkey) *max_subkey = info->MaxNameLen; + if (max_class) *max_class = info->MaxClassLen; + if (values) *values = info->Values; + if (max_value) *max_value = info->MaxValueNameLen; + if (max_data) *max_data = info->MaxValueDataLen; + if (modif) *modif = info->LastWriteTime; + done: if (buf_ptr != buffer) HeapFree( GetProcessHeap(), 0, buf_ptr ); return RtlNtStatusToDosError( status ); } @@ -502,7 +501,7 @@ NTSTATUS status; char buffer[256], *buf_ptr = buffer; KEY_FULL_INFORMATION *info = (KEY_FULL_INFORMATION *)buffer; - DWORD total_size; + DWORD total_size, len; TRACE( "(0x%x,%p,%ld,%p,%p,%p,%p,%p,%p,%p,%p)\n", hkey, class, class_len ? *class_len : 0, reserved, subkeys, max_subkey, values, max_value, max_data, security, modif ); @@ -511,6 +510,7 @@ return ERROR_INVALID_PARAMETER; status = NtQueryKey( hkey, KeyFullInformation, buffer, sizeof(buffer), &total_size ); + if (status && status != STATUS_BUFFER_OVERFLOW) goto done; if (class || class_len) { @@ -524,39 +524,37 @@ status = NtQueryKey( hkey, KeyFullInformation, buf_ptr, total_size, &total_size ); } - if (!status) - { - DWORD len = WideCharToMultiByte( CP_ACP, 0, - (WCHAR *)(buf_ptr + info->ClassOffset), - info->ClassLength/sizeof(WCHAR), - NULL, 0, NULL, NULL ); - if (class_len) - { - if (len + 1 > *class_len) status = STATUS_BUFFER_OVERFLOW; - *class_len = len; - } - if (class && !status) - { - WideCharToMultiByte( CP_ACP, 0, - (WCHAR *)(buf_ptr + info->ClassOffset), - info->ClassLength/sizeof(WCHAR), - class, len, NULL, NULL ); - class[len] = 0; - } - } - } + if (status) goto done; - if (!status || status == STATUS_BUFFER_OVERFLOW) - { - if (subkeys) *subkeys = info->SubKeys; - if (max_subkey) *max_subkey = info->MaxNameLen; - if (max_class) *max_class = info->MaxClassLen; - if (values) *values = info->Values; - if (max_value) *max_value = info->MaxValueNameLen; - if (max_data) *max_data = info->MaxValueDataLen; - if (modif) *modif = info->LastWriteTime; - } + len = WideCharToMultiByte( CP_ACP, 0, + (WCHAR *)(buf_ptr + info->ClassOffset), + info->ClassLength/sizeof(WCHAR), + NULL, 0, NULL, NULL ); + if (class_len) + { + if (len + 1 > *class_len) status = STATUS_BUFFER_OVERFLOW; + *class_len = len; + } + if (class && !status) + { + WideCharToMultiByte( CP_ACP, 0, + (WCHAR *)(buf_ptr + info->ClassOffset), + info->ClassLength/sizeof(WCHAR), + class, len, NULL, NULL ); + class[len] = 0; + } + } + else status = STATUS_SUCCESS; + + if (subkeys) *subkeys = info->SubKeys; + if (max_subkey) *max_subkey = info->MaxNameLen; + if (max_class) *max_class = info->MaxClassLen; + if (values) *values = info->Values; + if (max_value) *max_value = info->MaxValueNameLen; + if (max_data) *max_data = info->MaxValueDataLen; + if (modif) *modif = info->LastWriteTime; + done: if (buf_ptr != buffer) HeapFree( GetProcessHeap(), 0, buf_ptr ); return RtlNtStatusToDosError( status ); } @@ -821,6 +819,7 @@ } else if (status != STATUS_BUFFER_OVERFLOW) goto done; } + else status = STATUS_SUCCESS; if (type) *type = info->Type; if (count) *count = total_size - info_size; @@ -880,36 +879,35 @@ buf_ptr, total_size, &total_size ); } - if (!status) + if (status) goto done; + + if (is_string(info->Type)) { - if (is_string(info->Type)) + DWORD len = WideCharToMultiByte( CP_ACP, 0, (WCHAR *)(buf_ptr + info_size), + (total_size - info_size) /sizeof(WCHAR), + NULL, 0, NULL, NULL ); + if (data && len) { - DWORD len = WideCharToMultiByte( CP_ACP, 0, (WCHAR *)(buf_ptr + info_size), - (total_size - info_size) /sizeof(WCHAR), - NULL, 0, NULL, NULL ); - if (data && len) + if (len > *count) status = STATUS_BUFFER_OVERFLOW; + else { - if (len > *count) status = STATUS_BUFFER_OVERFLOW; - else - { - WideCharToMultiByte( CP_ACP, 0, (WCHAR *)(buf_ptr + info_size), - (total_size - info_size) /sizeof(WCHAR), - data, len, NULL, NULL ); - /* if the type is REG_SZ and data is not 0-terminated - * and there is enough space in the buffer NT appends a \0 */ - if (len < *count && data[len-1]) data[len] = 0; - } + WideCharToMultiByte( CP_ACP, 0, (WCHAR *)(buf_ptr + info_size), + (total_size - info_size) /sizeof(WCHAR), + data, len, NULL, NULL ); + /* if the type is REG_SZ and data is not 0-terminated + * and there is enough space in the buffer NT appends a \0 */ + if (len < *count && data[len-1]) data[len] = 0; } - total_size = len + info_size; - } - else if (data) - { - if (total_size - info_size > *count) status = STATUS_BUFFER_OVERFLOW; - else memcpy( data, buf_ptr + info_size, total_size - info_size ); } + total_size = len + info_size; } - else if (status != STATUS_BUFFER_OVERFLOW) goto done; + else if (data) + { + if (total_size - info_size > *count) status = STATUS_BUFFER_OVERFLOW; + else memcpy( data, buf_ptr + info_size, total_size - info_size ); + } } + else status = STATUS_SUCCESS; if (type) *type = info->Type; if (count) *count = total_size - info_size; @@ -1056,6 +1054,7 @@ } } } + else status = STATUS_SUCCESS; if (type) *type = info->Type; if (count) *count = info->DataLength; @@ -1151,6 +1150,7 @@ else memcpy( data, buf_ptr + info->DataOffset, total_size - info->DataOffset ); } } + else status = STATUS_SUCCESS; if (type) *type = info->Type; if (count) *count = info->DataLength; -- Alexandre Julliard julliard(a)winehq.com

2 1

Re: process.h patch
by Alexandre Julliard 14 Feb '01

14 Feb '01

Jon Griffiths <tntjpgriff(a)tsnxt.co.uk> writes: > * THIS SOFTWARE IS NOT COPYRIGHTED > * > * This source code is offered for use in the public domain. You may > * use, modify or distribute it freely. > * > * This code is distributed in the hope that it will be useful but > * WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY. ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED ARE HEREBY > * DISCLAMED. This includes but is not limited to warranties of > * MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. > > You can't get more clear than that, I think. Of course it would be good to > acklowdge their contribution and let them know their modified code is being > used. Since it's public domain then yes we can use it; but you should *always* add a comment when you use code from somewhere else stating where it came from, even if there is no license requiring it. It's just the polite thing to do. > One thing I _don't_ think we need to do is to try to use the headers when > building msvcrt and Francois suggested. I think its extra work for no real > benefit, bugs show themselves soon enough, and winapi_check catches several > kinds of parameter bugs already. I alos dont like having to use a different > build command for one dll (ie include he msvcrt header dir). The advantage of using the headers for building msvcrt is that they will then automatically get tested by anybody compiling Wine; while with the other approach they only get tested by people compiling Winelib apps, i.e. just about nobody <grin> OTOH the macros make the headers quite ugly, so I don't have any strong preference one way or the other. -- Alexandre Julliard julliard(a)winehq.com

2 1

howto use dll´s in C
by christian richter 14 Feb '01

14 Feb '01

Hello, i have a dll which makes some string conversions, and i want to use it in my C-Programm in Linux, i found out that wine can execute win32 exe´s and so i thought it should be possible to use a winelib or something to use the dll-functions and to get back values from this dll . . please help me, i don´t want to convert the whole dll (written in M$ Visual Basic ) into C - sources .. thank you

2 1

Re: Registry patch
by Alexandre Julliard 13 Feb '01

13 Feb '01

davep <davep(a)cyw.uklinux.net> writes: > 123 calls RegQueryValueEx for the binary values with lpData set to NULL and > lpcbData non-NULL. RegQueryValueEx is supposed to return the size of the buffer > needed to hold the data, but Wine is returning the size of its initial buffer > (0xeb IIRC, sizeof(buffer)-sizeof(KEY_VALUE_PARTIAL_INFORMATION)). This causes > a crash when 123 immediately calls the same function again with a real buffer > address, presumably because 123 didn't allocate enough storage space. Could you please send me a +reg,+server trace of the offending calls? -- Alexandre Julliard julliard(a)winehq.com

2 1

Re: Registry patch
by Alexandre Julliard 13 Feb '01

13 Feb '01

davep <davep(a)cyw.uklinux.net> writes: > RegQueryValue() & RegEnumValue() > > We need to return the data length for REG_BINARY value types as well as strings > when called with a null buffer pointer. I don't understand why you need that. We already return the data length in all cases, including REG_BINARY. Could you elaborate a bit on exactly what is going wrong? -- Alexandre Julliard julliard(a)winehq.com

2 1

running a daemon ?
by Philippe Moutarlier 13 Feb '01

13 Feb '01

Hi, this is not really a development question .. sorry . I am trying to see if I could use wine for running an lmgrd.exe daemon. How can I do this (and do you think it would work) ? When I just run > wine lmgrd.exe it starts running seemingly correctly and then exits instead of keeping running. Thanks Philippe

2 1

RE: Should Wine use alloca or not?
by Patrik Stridvall 13 Feb '01

13 Feb '01

> On Monday 12 February 2001 15:33, Patrik Stridvall wrote: > > > > So perhaps we should debate whether we should use alloca or not. > > It seems this has been decided. Yes, see below. > I haven't examined or used > alloca in years, > so its possible that my personal objections don't apply in todays > implementations ( a quick test shows gcc on i386 _doesn't_ > use a function > call these days, for example, so thats no longer a valid > reason). So rather > than saying its evil, I'll tone down to it simply being > unesessary, and > continue to avoid it for (no doubt dubious) reasons of 'style'. I would rather say that the problem of using it, is that it, as Alexandre pointed out, introduces unrecovorable/undetectable errors if we allocate more than one page memory and if we only need a maximum of one page we can just allocate that or less if we know the exact maximum. The only problem I can see with this approach is that it uses an unnessary amount of stack space for recursive functions, but then I know of no such function in Wine and even if there is one, it is probably better to rewrite it as a non-recursive function anyway. So yes, the issue is decided.

1 0

Re: Should Wine use alloca or not?
by Jon Griffiths 13 Feb '01

13 Feb '01

On Monday 12 February 2001 15:33, Patrik Stridvall wrote: > > > So perhaps we should debate whether we should use alloca or not. It seems this has been decided. I haven't examined or used alloca in years, so its possible that my personal objections don't apply in todays implementations ( a quick test shows gcc on i386 _doesn't_ use a function call these days, for example, so thats no longer a valid reason). So rather than saying its evil, I'll tone down to it simply being unesessary, and continue to avoid it for (no doubt dubious) reasons of 'style'. Cheers, Jon -- "Don't wait for the seas to part, or messiahs to come, Dont you sit around and waste this chance ..." -Live tntjpgriff(a)tsnxt.co.uk , jon_p_griffiths(a)yahoo.com

1 0

Re: No implementation for shlwapi.dll.0(StrRetToBufA)
by Francois Gouget 13 Feb '01

13 Feb '01

On Sat, 10 Feb 2001, David D. Hagood wrote: > Francois Gouget wrote: > > > David, > > > > Can you shed some light on the MAPS DUL stuff below? > > > > > Evidently, my ISP is implementing the dialup blocking feature of MAPS > (and I never even KNEW they were doing any filtering, from the volume of > spam I get!). Yep. They definitely should really have told you. I'm all for anti-spam measures (if you check my web site you'll see I even translated the 'Advertising on Usenet' FAQ to french a few years back) but I disagree with MAPS DUL. From what you say it seems pretty ineffective and I'm really irked by the following paragraph: >From http://mail-abuse.org/dul/intro.htm: > What gives you the right... > > ...to deny access to our own, privately owned, equipment? > > Our mail servers are private property, to allow others to use as we > see it. We have not found a legitimate reason for dial-up users to > talk directly to recipients' mail servers, especially since your ISP > provides a good mail server for you to use as a gateway. As such, > please respect our choice and use the equipment you're authorized to use. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Sure they have the right to deny me access to their mail server, but to imply that I'm only allowed to connect to my ISP's mail server is bullshit. What next? Web site administrators are going to deny access to their site from dialup users if they don't go through their ISP's proxy? After all nobody gave you the autorisation to access their web server! Well, I cannot tell you that you should switch to another ISP, it would be too easy for me and hypocritical as I'm not sure I would do it if I were in your situation. I'll see if I can send them a complaint email (without it getting bounced). Oh. Damn. I cannot send this email to you, it will get bounced! Hmm, I'll spam the mailing list with an OT email then (last and only one hopefully). -- Francois Gouget fgouget(a)free.fr http://fgouget.free.fr/ 1 + e ^ ( i * pi ) = 0

8 14

New EnumPrinterDataEx
by Ian Pilcher 13 Feb '01

13 Feb '01

While the great alloca debate rages on, here is a version of the patch that uses HeapAlloc for all dynamic allocation. (FWIW, my personal take is that if alloca causes the program to crash when it fails, then it's not really useful. I only used it, because the GNU libc documentation indicates that it returns NULL when it fails.) If no one has any other feedback on the patch, I'll submit it to wine- patches tomorrow. (So speak now or forever hold your peace.) -- ======================================================================== Ian Pilcher pilcher(a)concentric.net ======================================================================== --- ../wine-20010211cvs/include/winspool.h Sun Feb 11 19:26:47 2001 +++ include/winspool.h Mon Feb 12 09:32:58 2001 @@ -763,6 +763,25 @@ DECL_WINELIB_TYPE_AW(PPROVIDOR_INFO_1) DECL_WINELIB_TYPE_AW(LPPROVIDOR_INFO_1) +typedef struct _PRINTER_ENUM_VALUESA { + LPSTR pValueName; + DWORD cbValueName; + DWORD dwType; + LPBYTE pData; + DWORD cbData; +} PRINTER_ENUM_VALUESA, *PPRINTER_ENUM_VALUESA; + +typedef struct _PRINTER_ENUM_VALUESW { + LPWSTR pValueName; + DWORD cbValueName; + DWORD dwType; + LPBYTE pData; + DWORD cbData; +} PRINTER_ENUM_VALUESW, *PPRINTER_ENUM_VALUESW; + +DECL_WINELIB_TYPE_AW(PRINTER_ENUM_VALUES) +DECL_WINELIB_TYPE_AW(PPRINTER_ENUM_VALUES) + /* DECLARATIONS */ INT WINAPI DeviceCapabilitiesA(LPCSTR pDevice,LPCSTR pPort,WORD fwCapability, LPSTR pOutput, LPDEVMODEA pDevMode); @@ -1082,6 +1101,14 @@ BOOL WINAPI DeletePrintProvidorW(LPWSTR pName, LPWSTR pEnvironment, LPWSTR pPrintProvidorName); #define DeletePrintProvidor WINELIB_NAME_AW(DeletePrintProvidor) + +DWORD WINAPI EnumPrinterDataExA(HANDLE hPrinter, LPCSTR pKeyName, + LPBYTE pEnumValues, DWORD cbEnumValues, + LPDWORD pcbEnumValues, LPDWORD pnEnumValues); +DWORD WINAPI EnumPrinterDataExW(HANDLE hPrinter, LPCWSTR pKeyName, + LPBYTE pEnumValues, DWORD cbEnumValues, + LPDWORD pcbEnumValues, LPDWORD pnEnumValues); +#define EnumPrinterDataEx WINELIB_NAME_AW(EnumPrinterDataEx) --- ../wine-20010211cvs/dlls/winspool/winspool.drv.spec Sun Feb 11 19:26:47 2001 +++ dlls/winspool/winspool.drv.spec Mon Feb 12 09:32:58 2001 @@ -80,6 +80,10 @@ @ stub EnumPrintProcessorDatatypesW @ stub EnumPrintProcessorsA @ stub EnumPrintProcessorsW +@ stub EnumPrinterDataA +@ stdcall EnumPrinterDataExA(long str ptr long ptr ptr) EnumPrinterDataExA +@ stdcall EnumPrinterDataExW(long wstr ptr long ptr ptr) EnumPrinterDataExW +@ stub EnumPrinterDataW @ stdcall EnumPrinterDriversA(str str long ptr long ptr ptr) EnumPrinterDriversA @ stdcall EnumPrinterDriversW(wstr wstr long ptr long ptr ptr) EnumPrinterDriversW @ stdcall EnumPrintersA(long ptr long ptr long ptr ptr) EnumPrintersA --- ../wine-20010211cvs/dlls/winspool/info.c Sun Feb 11 19:26:47 2001 +++ dlls/winspool/info.c Mon Feb 12 10:51:00 2001 @@ -2561,3 +2561,328 @@ return GetPrinterDataExW(hPrinter, PrinterDriverDataW, pValueName, pType, pData, nSize, pcbNeeded); } + +/* + * The Win32 doc says that RegCloseKey and HeapFree can fail, but it's hard to + * imagine why either of them would. And what is the calling function supposed + * to do about it anyway? + */ + +#define REGCLOSEKEY(X) \ +{ \ + DWORD ret; \ + \ + ret = RegCloseKey (X); \ + if (ret != ERROR_SUCCESS) \ + WARN ("RegCloseKey returned %li\n", ret); \ +} + +#define HEAPFREE(X,Y,Z) \ +{ \ + if (HeapFree ((X), (Y), (Z)) == 0) \ + WARN ("HeapFree failed with code %li\n", GetLastError ()); \ +} + +/******************************************************************************* + * EnumPrinterDataExW [WINSPOOL.197] + */ +DWORD WINAPI EnumPrinterDataExW(HANDLE hPrinter, LPCWSTR pKeyName, + LPBYTE pEnumValues, DWORD cbEnumValues, + LPDWORD pcbEnumValues, LPDWORD pnEnumValues) +{ + HKEY hkPrinter, hkSubKey; + DWORD ret, dwIndex, cValues, cbMaxValueNameLen, + cbValueNameLen, cbMaxValueLen, cbValueLen, + cbBufSize, dwType; + LPWSTR lpValueName; + HANDLE hHeap; + PBYTE lpValue; + PPRINTER_ENUM_VALUESW ppev; + + TRACE ("%08x %s\n", hPrinter, debugstr_w (pKeyName)); + + if (pKeyName == NULL || *pKeyName == 0) + return ERROR_INVALID_PARAMETER; + + ret = WINSPOOL_GetOpenedPrinterRegKey (hPrinter, &hkPrinter); + if (ret != ERROR_SUCCESS) + { + TRACE ("WINSPOOL_GetOpenedPrinterRegKey (%08x) returned %li\n", + hPrinter, ret); + return ret; + } + + ret = RegOpenKeyExW (hkPrinter, pKeyName, 0, KEY_READ, &hkSubKey); + if (ret != ERROR_SUCCESS) + { + REGCLOSEKEY (hkPrinter); + TRACE ("RegOpenKeyExW (%08x, %s) returned %li\n", hPrinter, + debugstr_w (pKeyName), ret); + return ret; + } + + REGCLOSEKEY (hkPrinter); + + ret = RegQueryInfoKeyW (hkSubKey, NULL, NULL, NULL, NULL, NULL, NULL, + &cValues, &cbMaxValueNameLen, &cbMaxValueLen, NULL, NULL); + if (ret != ERROR_SUCCESS) + { + REGCLOSEKEY (hkSubKey); + TRACE ("RegQueryInfoKeyW (%08x) returned %li\n", hkSubKey, ret); + return ret; + } + + TRACE ("RegQueryInfoKeyW returned cValues = %li, cbMaxValueNameLen = %li, " + "cbMaxValueLen = %li\n", cValues, cbMaxValueNameLen, cbMaxValueLen); + + if (cValues == 0) /* empty key */ + { + REGCLOSEKEY (hkSubKey); + *pcbEnumValues = *pnEnumValues = 0; + return ERROR_SUCCESS; + } + + ++cbMaxValueNameLen; /* allow for trailing '\0' */ + + hHeap = GetProcessHeap (); + if (hHeap == (HANDLE) NULL) + { + ERR ("GetProcessHeap failed\n"); + REGCLOSEKEY (hkSubKey); + return ERROR_OUTOFMEMORY; + } + + lpValueName = HeapAlloc (hHeap, 0, cbMaxValueNameLen * sizeof (WCHAR)); + if (lpValueName == NULL) + { + ERR ("Failed to allocate %li bytes from process heap\n", + cbMaxValueNameLen * sizeof (WCHAR)); + REGCLOSEKEY (hkSubKey); + return ERROR_OUTOFMEMORY; + } + + lpValue = HeapAlloc (hHeap, 0, cbMaxValueLen); + if (lpValue == NULL) + { + ERR ("Failed to allocate %li bytes from process heap\n", cbMaxValueLen); + HEAPFREE (hHeap, 0, lpValueName); + REGCLOSEKEY (hkSubKey); + return ERROR_OUTOFMEMORY; + } + + TRACE ("pass 1: calculating buffer required for all names and values\n"); + + cbBufSize = cValues * sizeof (PRINTER_ENUM_VALUESW); + + TRACE ("%li bytes required for %li headers\n", cbBufSize, cValues); + + for (dwIndex = 0; dwIndex < cValues; ++dwIndex) + { + cbValueNameLen = cbMaxValueNameLen; cbValueLen = cbMaxValueLen; + ret = RegEnumValueW (hkSubKey, dwIndex, lpValueName, &cbValueNameLen, + NULL, NULL, lpValue, &cbValueLen); + if (ret != ERROR_SUCCESS) + { + HEAPFREE (hHeap, 0, lpValue); HEAPFREE (hHeap, 0, lpValueName); + REGCLOSEKEY (hkSubKey); + TRACE ("RegEnumValueW (%li) returned %li\n", dwIndex, ret); + return ret; + } + + TRACE ("%s [%li]: name needs %li bytes, data needs %li bytes\n", + debugstr_w (lpValueName), dwIndex, + (cbValueNameLen + 1) * sizeof (WCHAR), cbValueLen); + + cbBufSize += (cbValueNameLen + 1) * sizeof (WCHAR); + cbBufSize += cbValueLen; + } + + TRACE ("%li bytes required for all %li values\n", cbBufSize, cValues); + + *pcbEnumValues = cbBufSize; + *pnEnumValues = cValues; + + if (cbEnumValues < cbBufSize) /* buffer too small */ + { + HEAPFREE (hHeap, 0, lpValue); HEAPFREE (hHeap, 0, lpValueName); + REGCLOSEKEY (hkSubKey); + TRACE ("%li byte buffer is not large enough\n", cbEnumValues); + return ERROR_MORE_DATA; + } + + TRACE ("pass 2: copying all names and values to buffer\n"); + + ppev = (PPRINTER_ENUM_VALUESW) pEnumValues; /* array of structs */ + pEnumValues += cValues * sizeof (PRINTER_ENUM_VALUESW); + + for (dwIndex = 0; dwIndex < cValues; ++dwIndex) + { + cbValueNameLen = cbMaxValueNameLen; cbValueLen = cbMaxValueLen; + ret = RegEnumValueW (hkSubKey, dwIndex, lpValueName, &cbValueNameLen, + NULL, &dwType, lpValue, &cbValueLen); + if (ret != ERROR_SUCCESS) + { + HEAPFREE (hHeap, 0, lpValue); HEAPFREE (hHeap, 0, lpValueName); + REGCLOSEKEY (hkSubKey); + TRACE ("RegEnumValueW (%li) returned %li\n", dwIndex, ret); + return ret; + } + + cbValueNameLen = (cbValueNameLen + 1) * sizeof (WCHAR); + memcpy (pEnumValues, lpValueName, cbValueNameLen); + ppev[dwIndex].pValueName = (LPWSTR) pEnumValues; + pEnumValues += cbValueNameLen; + + /* return # of *bytes* (including trailing \0), not # of chars */ + ppev[dwIndex].cbValueName = cbValueNameLen; + + ppev[dwIndex].dwType = dwType; + + memcpy (pEnumValues, lpValue, cbValueLen); + ppev[dwIndex].pData = pEnumValues; + pEnumValues += cbValueLen; + + ppev[dwIndex].cbData = cbValueLen; + + TRACE ("%s [%li]: copied name (%li bytes) and data (%li bytes)\n", + debugstr_w (lpValueName), dwIndex, cbValueNameLen, cbValueLen); + } + + HEAPFREE (hHeap, 0, lpValue); HEAPFREE (hHeap, 0, lpValueName); + REGCLOSEKEY (hkSubKey); + return ERROR_SUCCESS; +} + +/******************************************************************************* + * EnumPrinterDataExA [WINSPOOL.196] + * + * The observant will note that this function returns ASCII strings in Unicode- + * sized buffers (for value names and values of type REG_SZ, REG_EXPAND_SZ, and + * REG_MULTI_SZ). This is what Windows 2000 does. + * + */ +DWORD WINAPI EnumPrinterDataExA(HANDLE hPrinter, LPCSTR pKeyName, + LPBYTE pEnumValues, DWORD cbEnumValues, + LPDWORD pcbEnumValues, LPDWORD pnEnumValues) +{ + INT len; + LPWSTR pKeyNameW; + DWORD ret, dwIndex, dwBufSize; + HANDLE hHeap; + LPSTR pBuffer; + + TRACE ("%08x %s\n", hPrinter, pKeyName); + + if (pKeyName == NULL || *pKeyName == 0) + return ERROR_INVALID_PARAMETER; + + len = MultiByteToWideChar (CP_ACP, 0, pKeyName, -1, NULL, 0); + + hHeap = GetProcessHeap (); + if (hHeap == (HANDLE) NULL) + { + ERR ("GetProcessHeap failed\n"); + return ERROR_OUTOFMEMORY; + } + + pKeyNameW = HeapAlloc (hHeap, 0, len * sizeof (WCHAR)); + if (pKeyNameW == NULL) + { + ERR ("Failed to allocate %li bytes from process heap\n", + (LONG) len * sizeof (WCHAR)); + return ERROR_OUTOFMEMORY; + } + + if (MultiByteToWideChar (CP_ACP, 0, pKeyName, -1, pKeyNameW, len) == 0) + { + HEAPFREE (hHeap, 0, pKeyNameW); + TRACE ("MultiByteToWide Char (%s, %i) failed with code %li\n", pKeyName, + len, GetLastError ()); + return GetLastError (); + } + + ret = EnumPrinterDataExW (hPrinter, pKeyNameW, pEnumValues, cbEnumValues, + pcbEnumValues, pnEnumValues); + if (ret != ERROR_SUCCESS) + { + HEAPFREE (hHeap, 0, pKeyNameW); + TRACE ("EnumPrinterDataExW returned %li\n", ret); + return ret; + } + + HEAPFREE (hHeap, 0, pKeyNameW); + + if (*pnEnumValues == 0) /* empty key */ + return ERROR_SUCCESS; + + dwBufSize = 0; + for (dwIndex = 0; dwIndex < *pnEnumValues; ++dwIndex) + { + PPRINTER_ENUM_VALUESW ppev = + &((PPRINTER_ENUM_VALUESW) pEnumValues)[dwIndex]; + + if (dwBufSize < ppev->cbValueName) + dwBufSize = ppev->cbValueName; + + if (dwBufSize < ppev->cbData && (ppev->dwType == REG_SZ || + ppev->dwType == REG_EXPAND_SZ || ppev->dwType == REG_MULTI_SZ)) + dwBufSize = ppev->cbData; + } + + TRACE ("Largest Unicode name or value is %li bytes\n", dwBufSize); + + pBuffer = HeapAlloc (hHeap, 0, dwBufSize); + if (pBuffer == NULL) + { + ERR ("Failed to allocate %li bytes from process heap\n", dwBufSize); + return ERROR_OUTOFMEMORY; + } + + for (dwIndex = 0; dwIndex < *pnEnumValues; ++dwIndex) + { + PPRINTER_ENUM_VALUESW ppev = + &((PPRINTER_ENUM_VALUESW) pEnumValues)[dwIndex]; + + len = WideCharToMultiByte (CP_ACP, 0, ppev->pValueName, + ppev->cbValueName / sizeof (WCHAR), pBuffer, dwBufSize, NULL, + NULL); + if (len == 0) + { + HEAPFREE (hHeap, 0, pBuffer); + TRACE ("WideCharToMultiByte (%s, %li) failed with code %li\n", + debugstr_w (ppev->pValueName), dwBufSize, GetLastError ()); + return GetLastError (); + } + + memcpy (ppev->pValueName, pBuffer, len); + + TRACE ("Converted '%s' from Unicode to ASCII\n", pBuffer); + + if (ppev->dwType != REG_SZ && ppev->dwType != REG_EXPAND_SZ && + ppev->dwType != REG_MULTI_SZ) + continue; + + len = WideCharToMultiByte (CP_ACP, 0, (LPWSTR) ppev->pData, + ppev->cbData / sizeof (WCHAR), pBuffer, dwBufSize, NULL, NULL); + if (len == 0) + { + HEAPFREE (hHeap, 0, pBuffer); + TRACE ("WideCharToMultiByte (%s, %li) failed with code %li\n", + debugstr_w ((LPWSTR) ppev->pData), dwBufSize, + GetLastError ()); + TRACE (" (only first string of REG_MULTI_SZ printed)\n"); + return GetLastError (); + } + + memcpy (ppev->pData, pBuffer, len); + + TRACE ("Converted '%s' from Unicode to ASCII\n", pBuffer); + TRACE (" (only first string of REG_MULTI_SZ printed)\n"); + } + + HEAPFREE (hHeap, 0, pBuffer); + return ERROR_SUCCESS; +} + +#undef REGCLOSEKEY +#undef HEAPFREE

2 4

Re: winebuild ppc
by Ulrich Weigand 13 Feb '01

13 Feb '01

Josh DuBois wrote: > Well, on the ppc it seems that CRITICAL_SECTIONS which are initialized (they > get set to CRITICAL_SECTION_INIT a lot) fairly reliably get put on 2-byte > boundaries. I am not certain why this is the case. But this is the real question ;-) As I said, the *default* alignment of these structs is 4 byte. If they are in fact placed at 2-byte boundaries, I can see only a few possible explanations: - compiler bug - some weird interaction with Wine that causes the compiler to misbehave - *another* explicit alignment attribute somewhere The first two I consider rather unlikely (but certainly possible). The last point is the IMO most likely, however. Maybe there's a #pragma pack(1) section somewhere that isn't properly terminated or something similar. > I could perhaps try to change > all the instances of initialized critial sections to have their data copied into > them during an init routine, but that seems like yet another big weirdness. Or > maybe I can convince the compiler to stop aligning them strangely in the first > place. It should by default :-/ > The problem is that the instructions to implement Interlocked* functions on > the ppc require the destination of a store to be 4-byte aligned (so I want to align > the LockCount member). Sure. > I'm not sure, actually, how to be certain that regular > int's passed to these functions will be aligned, but I havn't seen problems (yet) > other than with the funny alignment of the CRITICAL_SECTION structs. Every 'int' is supposed to be 4-byte aligned, unless you override by some explicit alignment/packing statement. Bye, Ulrich

1 0

Re: Should Wine use alloca or not?
by Alexandre Julliard 13 Feb '01

13 Feb '01

James Sutherland <jas88(a)cam.ac.uk> writes: > Last time this came up, someone had found the stack overflowing with a > large allocation - something like the char foo[10*1024] Patrik mentions - > and moved it to malloc(). At which point, someone else suggested turning > the malloc() into an alloca(), since it's faster... > > At the time, there were some fairly tight stack constraints in > places. Have these disappeared, or is alloca() still the wrong thing to > do??? The stack space is limited to 1Mb per thread (unless the application changed the defaults); it's not very tight, but it still means we cannot allocate arbitrary-sized data. -- Alexandre Julliard julliard(a)winehq.com

1 0

One step forward two steps back
by Alan Chandler 12 Feb '01

12 Feb '01

I noticed that when using winedbg, in konsole of kde, I got an error trying to create the debug terminal. I checked and realised that I did not have xterm installed. So I installed it. Now, when I start winedbg it briefly creates the xterm and almost immediately closes and exits. I don't even get to a first breakpoint before starting the programme, although xterm does have time to complain that it can't find font vga and that its using fixed. What am I doing wrong? TIA Alan alan(a)chandlerfamily.org.uk http://www.chandler.u-net.com

2 2

Re: Should Wine use alloca or not?
by Alexandre Julliard 12 Feb '01

12 Feb '01

Patrik Stridvall <ps(a)leissner.se> writes: > Sure, but the "char buffer[10*PAGE_SIZE]" have the same problem haven't it? > We are not talking about allocation large amounts of space anyway, > but being able to allocate a buffer for ANSI <=> UNICODE translation > on the stack would be useful and most strings are not that large. If you know that the allocation will be small you don't need alloca(), you can use a constant-size buffer. And if you don't know the allocation maximum size you cannot use alloca() either because it may crash. So it doesn't buy anything and introduces potential portability problems. -- Alexandre Julliard julliard(a)winehq.com

2 1

Re: annoying EndDialog "feature"
by Alexandre Julliard 12 Feb '01

12 Feb '01

Andreas Mohr <amohr(a)codeweavers.com> writes: > Windows definitely does NOT do it this way, of course > (well, I'd be surprised if it actually did ;-). > This is just a (crude, if you want) hack to make it work. > And I figured sending WM_NULL shouldn't hurt. That's in the "famous last words" category... please check how Windows does it and try to do it the same way. -- Alexandre Julliard julliard(a)winehq.com

1 0

Re: Should Wine use alloca or not?
by Patrik Stridvall 12 Feb '01

12 Feb '01

> > So perhaps we should debate whether we should use alloca or not. > > I'll throw my reasons in: > > -alloca with unknown length argument resolves to a function > call, so isn't as > effiecient as just moving the stack pointer. It does? Even on x86? Why? I'm certainly not an expert on this, but AFAIK you can just dynamically move the stack pointer (SP) register, the base pointer (BP) register will know where the stack frame of the function is anyway. > -it does not fail gracefully, it segfaults (according to the > gcc docs). That is the problem of all cases of runs out of stack. Of course if you allow allocations of more than one page you must have multiple guard pages, but then one page allocation should be enough for most uses in Wine. BTW, haven't void foo(void) { char buffer[10*PAGE_SIZE]; } the same problem. > -Its not available on all platforms True, but does any intresting platform for Wine lack it? > -Over/underwriting stack memory leads to very hard to debug problems > (corrupted stack). Dynamic memory may catch this with page protection. Sure, but the "char buffer[10*PAGE_SIZE]" have the same problem haven't it? We are not talking about allocation large amounts of space anyway, but being able to allocate a buffer for ANSI <=> UNICODE translation on the stack would be useful and most strings are not that large. > -It may not play well with exceptions, and even when it does, > it slows them > down horribly (lists of stack allocated memory must be kept > in order to > unwind the stack correctly). Where we may be mixing c++ and > windows style > exceptions this could be especially bothersome. I (or you) must have missed something but, AFAIK the BP register and not the SP register is used for unwinding. As far as C++ is concerned nobody should expect destructors to be called of alloca:ed memory just like it doesn't on malloc:ed memory. > -Its easy to get it wrong when memory is allocated in a code > block, because > the standard says the memory can be freed at the end of the > block or the > function. Its easy to forget this and use the memory outside > of the block, > which will fail on some implementations. Of course you must be careful with what you do. The same goes for the "char buffer[]" case. > Thats why I say 'style-wise' I don't use it (I do have real > reasons). There > are too many potential problems lurking there for my liking. > I see it as an > optimisation, if required it should be added later, commented > and only once > the need to use it has been demonstrated by profiling. Well, I think for example that stack allocating buffers for ANSI <=> UNICODE translation might be a good idea.

1 0

Re: winebuild ppc
by Ulrich Weigand 12 Feb '01

12 Feb '01

Josh DuBois wrote: > @@ -3396,7 +3428,7 @@ > HANDLE OwningThread; > HANDLE LockSemaphore; > ULONG_PTR SpinCount; > -} RTL_CRITICAL_SECTION, *PRTL_CRITICAL_SECTION; > +} __attribute__ ((aligned (4))) RTL_CRITICAL_SECTION, *PRTL_CRITICAL_SECTION; Why? The default alignment of this struct is 4 anyway (as all its members have a default alignment of 4 ...) The only situation where a RTL_CRITICAL_SECTION could conceivably be not aligned to 4 would be if if were embedded into a packed struct. In this case, however, the aligned attribute wouldn't help either AFAIK. (Additionally, the gcc'ism will annoy Patrik ;-/) Bye, Ulrich -- Dr. Ulrich Weigand weigand(a)informatik.uni-erlangen.de

2 1

Should Wine use alloca or not?
by Patrik Stridvall 12 Feb '01

12 Feb '01

> Jon Griffiths wrote: > > > > I don't know anything about the Win32 print API, but style > wise I tend to > > stay away from alloca(). It screws up exception handling > because it messes > > with the stack, and is machine dependant. Maybe > LocalAlloc() would be a > > better choice? > > > > According to the Microsoft web site, LocalAlloc is deprecated in favor > of HeapAlloc and friends. Yes, LocalAlloc is for 16 bit source code compabillity and shouldn't be used by Win32 code. > Can anyone comment on whether using alloca will mess up Wine? (Jon's > comment seems to imply that he avoids alloca on general principles, > rather than for Wine-specific reasons.) Does Wine use exceptions? Wine uses exceptions (sort of), but I don't think alloca will interfer. IIRC the only thing alloca does on x86 is to move the stack pointer to allocate space. The general problem with using alloca is that not all platforms supports alloca, however I think all reasonable platforms that has enough power to support Wine is likely to have it so I don't see any real reason not to use it. Currently Wine uses it indirectly since the files generated by flex/bison uses it. That said Alexandre has at least once rejected patches from me that used alloca, so he doesn't seem to like it. I don't remeber him saying why though. So perhaps we should debate whether we should use alloca or not. Alexandre, can you explain why you have rejected patches with alloca? Have you any better reason that better safe than sorry? Not that it is a bad reason but still...

2 1

AFM-Handling problem
by Joerg Mayer 12 Feb '01

12 Feb '01

Moin, Marcus last patch to add default paths for afm files triggered a bug: Inside my font dirs, there is a directory that contains gzipped afm files. After I unzipped these files, wine started up again. Not nice. Ciao Jörg PS: This is the directory *after* decompression of the .afm.gz files: jmayer@alice:/usr/X11R6/lib/X11/fonts/Type1 > ls UTBI____.afm c0419bt_.afm c0632bt_.afm cour.afm cursor.pfa lcdxro.afm UTBI____.pfa c0419bt_.pfb c0632bt_.pfb cour.pfa encodings.dir lcdxro.pfa UTB_____.afm c0582bt_.afm c0633bt_.afm courb.afm fonts.dir lcdxrr.afm UTB_____.pfa c0582bt_.pfb c0633bt_.pfb courb.pfa fonts.scale lcdxrr.pfa UTI_____.afm c0583bt_.afm c0648bt_.afm courbi.afm lcdxmo.afm lcdxso.afm UTI_____.pfa c0583bt_.pfb c0648bt_.pfb courbi.pfa lcdxmo.pfa lcdxso.pfa UTRG____.afm c0611bt_.afm c0649bt_.afm couri.afm lcdxmr.afm lcdxsr.afm UTRG____.pfa c0611bt_.pfb c0649bt_.pfb couri.pfa lcdxmr.pfa lcdxsr.pfa jmayer@alice:/usr/X11R6/lib/X11/fonts/Type1 > -- Joerg Mayer <jmayer(a)loplof.de> I found out that "pro" means "instead of" (as in proconsul). Now I know what proactive means.

2 1

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