wine-devel

wine-devel@winehq.org

4 participants
84403 discussions

Re: patch for the ldconfig fix in latest snapshot
by Tony Lambregts 12 May '02

12 May '02

Dustin Navea wrote: [snip] >--- tools/wineinstall Sat May 4 13:31:24 2002 >+++ tools/wineinstall.new Sat May 11 01:19:04 2002 >@@ -319,7 +319,9 @@ > # to our sucommand string > if [ -f /etc/ld.so.conf ] > then >- if [ ! grep -qs "$libdir" /etc/ld.so.conf ] >+ # why were there brackets around this? it wasn't evaluating >+ # correctly because of them! -Dustin Navea > Doh!... The previous two lines should not be in the patch . If it was applied it would make for very strange reading. Please re-submit without them. >+ if ! grep -qs "$libdir" /etc/ld.so.conf > then { > echo > echo "$libdir doesn't exist in your /etc/ld.so.conf, it will be added" > > lookingoveryourshoulder Tony Lambregts

3 2

Making wine complain if profile dir isn't valid
by Paul Millar 12 May '02

12 May '02

Hi, Got caught out by a "gotcha", where %USERPROFILE% was not mapped into the correct directory because the directory didn't exist. A valid %USERPROFILE% is a requirement of one of Juergen regression tests (%USERPROFILE%\\subdir1 > 25). The attached patch will make wine emit a warning if the directory isn't valid. This is "the right thing", isn't it? ChangeLog: Wine now warns if Profile directory doesn't exist. ---- Paul Millar

1 0

Running unit tests on Windows
by Jakob Eriksson 12 May '02

12 May '02

The http://www.codeweavers.com/about/news/talks/wineconf2002/regression/Slide17… talks about compiling on Windows with proprietary compilers. Since I've seen on this list ideas about compiling with mingw on Windows instead. Shouldn't it be possible to cross-compile with mingw on Linux instead? That way the samba share would also keep the .EXE files, and life would be much simpler... just a thought. what do you all think? -- regards, Jakob Eriksson The wages of sin is debugging. -- Ron Jeffries

5 19

(no subject)
by Paul Millar 12 May '02

12 May '02

Hi, I've tried to get wine to compile under a 2.2.17 kernel machine (w/ RedHat 7.0), not particularly because of Stefan's problems under RH-5.2, but trying to track down some other bugs (although hopefully the patches will help a little :) The first stumbling block was in dlls/ntdll/cdrom.c. Two routines in the file try to set members of the cdrom_generic_command structure (defined in linux/cdrom.h) that don't exist in 2.2.x kernels, but do exist in 2.4.x kernels. The attached patch adds configure checks for these structure members and puts "#ifdef"s around the assignments in dlls/ntdll/cdrom.c . I don't know the knock-on effects for not setting these values, but presumably getting something to work is better than wine not compiling :) On a point of style, should there be one test for these two structure members, or two independent tests? The members appear in the kernel at the same time (2.2.x -> 2.4.0) ChangeLog: Towards fixing compilation under 2.2.x kernels NB both configure and include/config.h.in need to be regenerated. ... but, the problems didn't stop there. The compilation continues until it starts to use wmc, which core-dumps on the /second/ usage. ------------------------[ Compilation log ]--------------------------- [...] make[2]: Leaving directory `/scratch/remus1/paulm/wine/dlls/ntdll' rm -f ntdll.dll.so && ln -s ntdll/ntdll.dll.so ntdll.dll.so rm -f libntdll.dll.so && ln -s ntdll/ntdll.dll.so libntdll.dll.so make[2]: Entering directory `/scratch/remus1/paulm/wine/dlls/kernel' LD_LIBRARY_PATH="../../library:../../unicode:$LD_LIBRARY_PATH" ../../tools/wmc/wmc -i -H /dev/null -o messages/winerr_enu.mc.rc messages/winerr_enu.mc DEBUG: setting up handler DEBUG: getting time DEBUG: cmdlen=72 LD_LIBRARY_PATH="../../library:../../unicode:$LD_LIBRARY_PATH" ../../tools/wrc/wrc -I. -I. -I../../include -I../../include -o kernel.res -r kernel.rc make[2]: *** [kernel.res] Segmentation fault (core dumped) make[2]: Leaving directory `/scratch/remus1/paulm/wine/dlls/kernel' make[1]: *** [kernel/kernel32.dll.so] Error 2 make[1]: Leaving directory `/scratch/remus1/paulm/wine/dlls' make: *** [dlls] Error 2 [paulm@mowgli wine]$ ------------------------------[ End of log ]------------------------- The DEBUG output above was from the following patch: --- wmc.c 10 Mar 2002 00:24:24 -0000 1.3 +++ wmc.c 11 May 2002 19:49:33 -0000 @@ -125,8 +125,10 @@ int i; int cmdlen; + printf( "DEBUG: setting up handler\n"); signal(SIGSEGV, segvhandler); + printf( "DEBUG: getting time\n"); now = time(NULL); /* First rebuild the commandline to put in destination */ @@ -134,6 +136,7 @@ cmdlen = 4; /* for "wmc " */ for(i = 1; i < argc; i++) cmdlen += strlen(argv[i]) + 1; + printf( "DEBUG: cmdlen=%u\n", cmdlen); cmdline = (char *)xmalloc(cmdlen); strcpy(cmdline, "wmc "); for(i = 1; i < argc; i++) so, wmc is crashing before it is running main(), suggesting some linking problem? The machine is running glibc 2.2.4 (via RedHat RPM glibc-2.2.4-18.7.0.3) and I was compiling with the alleged "v2.96" release of gcc (RPM gcc-2.96-85). Any ideas? Cheers, ---- Paul Millar

3 3

Uninstaller problem on mingw port
by Steven Edwards 12 May '02

12 May '02

Hello Jeremy, Andi suggested I email you about my issues with uninstaller under mingw. The main unstaller window will render but be blank and then the program will crash when it gets to this line /*---------------------------------------------------------------------- -- ** Handle requests just to list the programs **---------------------------------------------------------------------- */ if (cmdline && strlen(cmdline) >= 6 && memcmp(cmdline, "--list", 6) == 0) I have inserted debugging code at every line around this point but it never makes it to the next messagebox. Do you see anything that might explain it? Thanks Steven "Every revolution was once a thought in one man's mind" - Ralph Waldo Emerson

2 2

Re: PATCH: Preliminary DMA and SOUNDBLASTER emulation
by Dustin Navea 12 May '02

12 May '02

which sound cards is this meant for? i have a live platinum 5.1, is it to be used by people who _do_ or who _dont_ have sb cards? i must be missing the point, but what is the need for sb emulation? -Dustin __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? LAUNCH - Your Yahoo! Music Experience http://launch.yahoo.com

3 3

Stubbed implementations and Windows objects
by Ian D. Stewart 12 May '02

12 May '02

I am currently in the process of implementing a stubbed version of ctl3d.dll. For functions that return BOOL, I'm printing a fixme and then returning TRUE. What is the convention for stubbed implementations that return a Windows object (HBRUSH, HWND, etc)? Thanx, Ian

2 2

Re: Little correction to kernel32.spec
by Francois Gouget 12 May '02

12 May '02

On Sat, 11 May 2002, Vincent Béron wrote: > There's a bunch of APIs defined with ptr instead of str/wstr: should I > clean them up also? > > Changelog: > - The definition of GetSystemWideDirectory{A,W} in kernel32.spec had > some ptr args, while they are supposed to be {str, wstr} respectively. This is wrong. These parameters are output parameters. If you declare them as str, then the relay code will print them when the function is called, i.e. before the buffer is initialized. -- Francois Gouget fgouget(a)free.fr http://fgouget.free.fr/ In a world without fences who needs Gates?

2 1

Re: Little correction to kernel32.spec
by Andreas Mohr 11 May '02

11 May '02

On Sat, May 11, 2002 at 06:04:08PM -0400, Vincent Béron wrote: > There's a bunch of APIs defined with ptr instead of str/wstr: should I > clean them up also? > > Changelog: > - The definition of GetSystemWideDirectory{A,W} in kernel32.spec had > some ptr args, while they are supposed to be {str, wstr} respectively. Wrong. The string buffer is a *return* variable. Thus using str/wstr will simply display useless garbage in relay trace. :-\ -- Andreas Mohr Stauferstr. 6, D-71272 Renningen, Germany Tel. +49 7159 800604 http://home.arcor.de/andi.mohr/

1 0

Re: Better implementation of GetCalendarInfoA
by Francois Gouget 11 May '02

11 May '02

On Sat, 11 May 2002, Vincent Béron wrote: [...] > Also, I'm not sure how to translate that code to the W version of the > function. Should the W call the A? Or reimplement the same algorithm, > with different string constants and function calls (A vs W)? xxxA should call xxxW. Typically this is done as follows (the NT way): xxxA() { convert input parameters from Ansi to Unicode ret=call xxxW convert return values from Unicode to Ansi return ret; } -- Francois Gouget fgouget(a)free.fr http://fgouget.free.fr/ Any sufficiently advanced bug is indistinguishable from a feature. -- from some indian guy

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