wine-devel

wine-devel@winehq.org

84463 discussions

Re: Implement {G|S}etWindowLongPtr
by Eric Pouech 29 Sep '02

29 Sep '02

György 'Nog' Jeney a écrit : > > Apply this patch and observe nearly the whole wine recompile :) > > ChangLog: > * include/winuser.h > * win/win.c > Implement {G|S}etWindowLongPtr I don't want to see a whole wine recompilation every day, so I think those defs #define SetWindowLong WINELIB_NAME_AW(SetWindowLong) +LONG_PTR WINAPI SetWindowLongA(HWND,INT,LONG_PTR); +LONG_PTR WINAPI SetWindowLongW(HWND,INT,LONG_PTR); +#define SetWindowLongPtr WINELIB_NAME_AW(SetWindowLongPtr) should be instead #define SetWindowLong WINELIB_NAME_AW(SetWindowLong) +LONG_PTR WINAPI SetWindowLongPtrA(HWND,INT,LONG_PTR); +LONG_PTR WINAPI SetWindowLongPtrW(HWND,INT,LONG_PTR); +#define SetWindowLongPtr WINELIB_NAME_AW(SetWindowLongPtr) A+

1 0

Exception while trying to install winace 2.2
by György 'Nog' Jeney 29 Sep '02

29 Sep '02

While trying to get the winace 2.2 installer to run on wine, I got the following exception without any messages on the console: First chance exception: page fault on read access to 0x23c94fed in 32-bit code (0x23c94fed). Register dump: CS:0023 SS:002b DS:002b ES:002b FS:008f GS:0000 EIP:23c94fed ESP:40682e52 EBP:00400000 EFLAGS:00010646( R- 00 DI Z- -P1 ) EAX:00000000 EBX:40682e66 ECX:0000038b EDX:00420654 ESI:00000001 EDI:0044efb5 Stack dump: 0x40682e52 (_end+0x32cc32): 004209e2 40682e98 00420658 00000000 0x40682e62 (_end+0x32cc42): 00000000 00463047 0042066b 40682f44 0x40682e72 (_end+0x32cc52): 00463000 401111c0 00000001 40682f38 0x40682e82 (_end+0x32cc62): 40682e96 400fd024 00463042 00000600 0x40682e92 (_end+0x32cc72): 00463000 2f440246 c81a4068 66b12fc3 0x40682ea2 (_end+0x32cc82): c19d6f8a 25b92f81 51634d58 33c04011 0x40682eb2 (_end+0x32cc92): 0011: sel=008f base=401133c0 limit=00000fff 32-bit rw- Backtrace: =>0 0x23c94fed (_end+0x1bc38885) (ebp=00400000) 1 0x00000002 (ebp=00505a4d) *** Invalid address 0x00505a4d (wace22.exe.EntryPoint+0xa2a0b) 0x23c94fed (_end+0x1bc38885): *** Invalid address 0x23c94fed (_end+0x1bc38885) -- no code -- It seemd to me that the stack frame(s?) got corrupted so I debugged further. It seems that the app throws an exception and catches it later on. I set a breakpoint on EXC_CallHandler where the backtrace still looked fine. Just before wine calls the exception handler, it pushes edx and then edi onto the stack, then the handler gets called: call *%edx. This puts excecution into 0x420658 which calls 0x4206ac. The assembly code at 0x4206ac looks like this: 0x004206ac (wace22.exe.+0x1f6ac in C:\wace22.exe): xorl %eax,%eax 0x004206ae (wace22.exe.+0x1f6ae in C:\wace22.exe): popl %esi 0x004206af (wace22.exe.+0x1f6af in C:\wace22.exe): movl %fs:0x0(%eax),%ebx 0x004206b2 (wace22.exe.+0x1f6b2 in C:\wace22.exe): movl 0x0(%ebx),%ebx 0x004206b4 (wace22.exe.+0x1f6b4 in C:\wace22.exe): leal 0xffffffd6(%ebx),%esp 0x004206b7 (wace22.exe.+0x1f6b7 in C:\wace22.exe): popl %ebp This last pop is what makes the backtrace weird, before this the backtrace looks like: =>0 0x004206b7 (wace22.exe.+0x1f6b7 in C:\wace22.exe) (ebp=40570938) 1 0x400c84c0 (EXC_RtlRaiseException+0x10c(rec=0x405709dc, context=0x40570a34) [exception.c:214] in libntdll.dll.so) (ebp=405709c0) 2 0x400d26e9 (do_segv+0x1a5(context=0x40570d1c, trap_code=0x400d2b98, cr2=0x40570a50, err_code=0x1) [signal_i386.c:798] in libntdll.dll.so) (ebp=40570a2c) 3 0x400d2b4c (segv_handler+0x3c(__signal=0x2b, __context=0x2b) [[signal_i386.c:986] in libntdll.dll.so) (ebp=40570d28) 4 0x0000008f (ebp=00000000) But after it, it looks like this: =>0 0x004206c1 (wace22.exe.+0x1f6c1 in C:\wace22.exe) (ebp=00400000) 1 0x00000002 (ebp=00505a4d) *** Invalid address 0x00505a4d (wace22.exe.EntryPoint+0xa2a0b) Is this normal? If I just continue from this point then the first exception will be thrown but quite a lot of functions get called between here and that exception. The exception handler never does return. Any one have any ideas as to what might go wrong here? nog.

1 0

Unable to compile current CVS
by Guy L. Albertelli 29 Sep '02

29 Sep '02

It seems that the D3D8 code depends heavily on both GL/gl.h and GL/glx.h being present. My system RH 6.1 does not have those header files. Is GL a requirement for developers now?? Thanks, Guy Albertelli <<galberte(a)neo.lrun.com>> Bathed in his currents of liquid helium, self-contained, immobile, vastly well informed by every mechanical sense: Shalmaneser. Every now and again there passes through his circuts a pulse which carries the cybernetic equivalent of the phrase, "Christ, what an imagination I've got. " - Stand on Zanzibar by John Brunner

1 0

patch to MZ_Exec() PE executables
by Chris Morgan 28 Sep '02

28 Sep '02

Guess this got lost when I mailed it from my web mail account... Look reasonable? dlls/winedos/module.c: Chris Morgan <cmorgan(a)alum.wpi.edu> Add PE support to MZ_Exec().

2 1

Open-GL Mesa patches (http://cvs.winehq.com/patch.py?id=5527)
by Uwe Bonnes 28 Sep '02

28 Sep '02

Hallo, the Open-GL Mesa patches (http://cvs.winehq.com/patch.py?id=5527) in wine/dlls/ddraw/mesa_private.h unconditional inclused GL/gl.h and GL/glx.h. On my Suse V8.0 system ( with the mesa package installed and the mesa-devel package not installed) this leads to: make[2]: Wechsel in das Verzeichnis Verzeichnis »/home/bon/tmp/wine/compile/wine-realclean/wine/dlls/ddraw« gcc -c -I. -I. -I../../include -I../../include -g -O2 -Wall -mpreferred-stack-boundary=2 -fPIC -D__WINE__ -D_REENTR ANT -I/usr/X11R6/include -o dsurface/main.o dsurface/main.c In file included from dsurface/main.c:27: mesa_private.h:32: GL/gl.h: Datei oder Verzeichnis nicht gefunden mesa_private.h:33: GL/glx.h: Datei oder Verzeichnis nicht gefunden make[2]: *** [dsurface/main.o] Fehler 1 Probably it's a bad idea to only install mesa and not mesa-devel, but I think wine should cope with this situation or at least warn the user about that. Bye -- Uwe Bonnes bon(a)elektron.ikp.physik.tu-darmstadt.de Institut fuer Kernphysik Schlossgartenstrasse 9 64289 Darmstadt --------- Tel. 06151 162516 -------- Fax. 06151 164321 ----------

1 0

Re: A problem reading configuration file
by Sylvain Petreolle 28 Sep '02

28 Sep '02

Me too. I made some programs with assembly under MS-DOS in the 90s before switching to Linux ;) > I think its normal. Findfirst finds the first entry, and findnext > returns only > the next :) > I'm sure it works that way. I have tried to check that in some > documentation, > but if I remember right then I have used those in something like > Borland > Delphi at the university. But I dont have Delphi at home... > > If that is ok, then do you have some idea, what could be the problem? > There was a patch applied few days ago on findnext... perhaps it's it. http://www.winehq.com/hypermail/wine-patches/2002/09/0243.html ___________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? -- Une adresse @yahoo.fr gratuite et en français ! Yahoo! Mail : http://fr.mail.yahoo.com

1 0

Re: A problem reading configuration file
by Sylvain Petreolle 28 Sep '02

28 Sep '02

Remarque : message transféré en pièce jointe. ___________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? -- Une adresse @yahoo.fr gratuite et en français ! Yahoo! Mail : http://fr.mail.yahoo.com

1 0

Re: Fix for msvcrt sscanf/swscanf
by Uwe Bonnes 28 Sep '02

28 Sep '02

>>>>> "Jukka" == Jukka Heinonen <jhei(a)iki.fi> writes: Jukka> Wine msvcrt sscanf and swscanf implementations incorrectly expect Jukka> strings to end with EOF. This crashes some applications which did Jukka> work with older versions of Wine that just forwarded msvcrt Jukka> sscanf to libc sscanf. Jukka> Changelog: Functions sscanf and swscanf now expect strings to be Jukka> terminated with null (0) instead of EOF (-1). I asked some weeks ago about the test framework for msvcrt, but nobody jumped on the waggon. The mix of msvcrt and libc was something I couldn't do myself. Perhaps somebody can come up with someting. It sure is important to codify findings like Jukkas. Bye -- Uwe Bonnes bon(a)elektron.ikp.physik.tu-darmstadt.de Institut fuer Kernphysik Schlossgartenstrasse 9 64289 Darmstadt --------- Tel. 06151 162516 -------- Fax. 06151 164321 ----------

1 0

Re: [Controversial] Developper only CVS sandbox
by Dan Kegel 28 Sep '02

28 Sep '02

I've strongly opposed to using ClearCase for Wine development :-) I'm also somewhat opposed to CVS. The big problem with CVS is that it makes it *too* easy to contribute changes, and too hard to disentangle changes later when trying to contribute them back to the main tree. (This kind of thing has caused huge nightmares in the past.) So all you folks that feel that creating and posting patches is hard -- the payoff is *each change is much easier to peer review*. That makes for much higher quality code! If you really want to use a CVS-like system, go have a look at Bitkeeper. It's free for open source projects, and it is the only source code control system that doesn't make it hard to disentangle changes later. - Dan

2 1

Re: RFC: Winsock todo's
by Dan Kegel 28 Sep '02

28 Sep '02

Martin Wilck wrote: > Although I had a relevant part in implementing the asynchronous IO in > winsock, I am not quite content with it because it is not really > asynchronous. And not really high-performance, I bet (though I wouldn't know, I haven't looked at the code or tested it). > Alexandre is against using threads. Me, too. glibc uses threads to emulate aio, and the performance is poor. On platforms that natively support AIO, I bet you *really* want to implement Wine AIO using Posix AIO if you can. > On Linux at least, Ben > LaHaise's asyncio can be expected to become part of the > 2.6 kernel series, and if that happens the wine asynchronous IO > functionality should be rewritten to use the asyncio API on systems that > support it. Yes. Exactly. > (I still havent't figured out whether aio will support > sockets, though). It will. SGI's kaio does already, and Ben's will support it when he's finished. That should give good performance. - Dan p.s. Looks like the threads implementation for the 2.6 kernel will rock, too. See http://www.kegel.com/c10k.html#threaded (Somebody remind me why Wine has its own threads implementation again? Is it because the semantics are too different from Posix threads?)

1 0

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