wine-devel

wine-devel@winehq.org

9 participants
84397 discussions

Still more clipping issues - but getting better
by Guy L. Albertelli 20 Jun '01

20 Jun '01

Hi Alexandre, The latest commits (through "Clip parent client area when using the drawable from a higher level parent." julliard@wine2. 01/06/19 20:22:40) have fixed the problem mentioned in the previous email. However certain problems still exist. The attached JPG shows the results with the latest commits and the native control when the second band is deleted (band # 1). Somehow it never erases the band. This did work correctly in 6/1 CVS. Recreation instructions: Select RB_DELETEBAND and change the first zero (second line) to a 1 and send it. The second band with the ComboBoxEx should disappear. There is another issue with IE4 (one of my test programs). When a string is typed into the address line (a ComboBoxEx) and "return" pressed, the entire IE window disappears. IE is still running and by selecting the item in the GNOME taskbar, the IE window reappears correctly. Thanks a lot, Guy Albertelli <<galberte(a)neo.lrun.com>>

1 0

Still clipping issues
by Guy L. Albertelli 19 Jun '01

19 Jun '01

The REBAR ControlSpy (as a simple test application) still displays clipping/drawing issues since 6/1/2001 even with the native control. The enclosed JPG shows some of the problems. The method for recreation is to select the Styles menu and then select the Recreate Control button. At the end of the redraw cycle the distortion is as shown. Note the partial combobox dropdown arrow just below the word "Control_" in the center of the screen. This seems to be due to an unclipped rectangle/too large a client area during the ComboBoxEx creation. In the 6/1 CVS version, you can see the same dropdown arrow but it is within the left hand control window not beyond. Note also the badly drawn text in the two listboxes to the right. If there is anything I can supply to help fix this please let me know. Thanks, Guy Albertelli <<galberte(a)neo.lrun.com>>

1 0

Re: PATCH: wine-config
by Alexandre Julliard 19 Jun '01

19 Jun '01

Malte Starostik <malte(a)kde.org> writes: > For example if the winelib app is only part of a project that for some reason > has its own Makefile management and/or merges its own rules with the ones for > wine. Yes, this refers to activexproxy where we currently have a self-written > configure check, but I could imagine other places where this might be of > interest... Well, of course you don't have to use the complete configure and makefile generated by winemaker, you can just take the subset you need and copy it into your makefiles. But I don't see how a wine-config could help you do that. Also I don't see why you'd necessarily want to use the same flags to compile your winelib app that have been used to compile wine itself; in fact you may not even be using the same compiler. -- Alexandre Julliard julliard(a)winehq.com

1 0

Re: PATCH: wine-config
by Alexandre Julliard 19 Jun '01

19 Jun '01

Marcus Meissner <marcus(a)jet.franken.de> writes: > to help winelib using developers, this program exports flags and directories > to /usr/bin/. > > I am not sure whether exported cflags and libs are ok. > > Hmm, we probably should also tell how to build .so libs. And specs -> .cs. > (Hmm, supply Makefile snippets?) Actually we already have winemaker that can generate a complete configure and makefile, so I'm not sure what purpose a wine-config would serve. -- Alexandre Julliard julliard(a)winehq.com

2 1

problem in create_icon_window in x11drv/window.c ?
by Adriaan Moors 19 Jun '01

19 Jun '01

hi just checked out wine from cvs today (exams are finally over ;-)), and tried to run WinMX (which ran fine, and still runs fine, using the precompiled cvs i have from june 9th), now with today's cvs i get this error: (i think it happens when the window for the tray icon is created...) <snip> trace:x11drv:create_icon_window created 280000d X Error of failed request: BadMatch (invalid parameter attributes) Major opcode of failed request: 1 (X_CreateWindow) Serial number of failed request: 89 Current serial number in output stream: 94 <wine exits> when i comment out the TSXCreateWindow in create_icon_window, the program starts up, but the windows keep moving about... i'm sorry if this is not the right newsgroup to post to, i hope it's not something i've done wrong regards, adriaan moors -- ADDING "JUST KIDDING" DOESN'T MAKE IT OKAY TO INSULT THE PRINCIPAL Bart Simpson on chalkboard in episode 2F09

1 0

RE: Use the libreadline in Winedbg, if available
by Patrik Stridvall 19 Jun '01

19 Jun '01

> Patrik Stridvall <ps(a)leissner.se> writes: > > > Trying to claim, even though you didn't, that Winelib is > > effected is absurd since it is independent of the debugger. > > Distributing the debugger with WineLib is merly an aggregation > > nothing more. > > In theory any library that the debugger uses will also fall under the > GPL. In _theory_ yes, but hardly in pratices. No sane court would claim that, not even, would I dare say, the one of Judge Kaplan of DeCSS fame. Of course Microsoft (I can't remember the link but search on Slashdot) do claim it in their FUD campaign against the GPL but that doesn't make it true. Whether the GPL:ed is designed to be a "virus" or not is one thing that I will not argue for or against, but copyright law defintely isn't, so I will be quite hard for it to spread in the real world. > And someone shipping Wine binaries may not be aware that parts of > it need to be GPLed, and they will get flamed to death on Slashdot. That is a very convincing argument, yes. :-) > I mostly agree with you that the FSF stance on dynamic linking has no > basis in copyright law, but I'm not interested in providing the test > case. So if you want to use readline you can patch your local copy, > but I won't ship this in the main distribution. I was pretty sure that would be your answer.

1 0

Re: PATCH: Move 16-bit COMM stuff to USER, where it belongs
by Alexandre Julliard 19 Jun '01

19 Jun '01

"Dmitry Timoshkov" <dmitry(a)baikal.ru> writes: > Alexandre, you are right that that code should be revised and duplications > must be remove. But since I'm not an expert in the win32 communications code, > I can't do it without risk to break a working code. This patch was mostly > inspired by the fact, that while USER exports 16-bit comm stuff, that stuff > is not in the USER code. Instead of doing an ugly thing exporting 16-bit comm > functions from KERNEL I decided to move the code around. Please consider the > applying of the patch as it is now. Code duplication can be removed later. No, I'm afraid it won't be fixed if it is moved to a separate file. Also the split is not going to help for dll separation anyway, since the 16-bit routines use the SERVICE_* functions that aren't exported. So if you want clean dll separation the only choice is to rewrite the 16-bit routines. Any volunteer? -- Alexandre Julliard julliard(a)winehq.com

1 0

Re: Use the libreadline in Winedbg, if available
by Alexandre Julliard 19 Jun '01

19 Jun '01

Patrik Stridvall <ps(a)leissner.se> writes: > Trying to claim, even though you didn't, that Winelib is > effected is absurd since it is independent of the debugger. > Distributing the debugger with WineLib is merly an aggregation > nothing more. In theory any library that the debugger uses will also fall under the GPL. And someone shipping Wine binaries may not be aware that parts of it need to be GPLed, and they will get flamed to death on Slashdot. I mostly agree with you that the FSF stance on dynamic linking has no basis in copyright law, but I'm not interested in providing the test case. So if you want to use readline you can patch your local copy, but I won't ship this in the main distribution. -- Alexandre Julliard julliard(a)winehq.com

1 0

RE: Use the libreadline in Winedbg, if available
by Patrik Stridvall 19 Jun '01

19 Jun '01

> Patrik Stridvall <ps(a)leissner.se> writes: > > > No, it is enough that it is GPL compatible which the Wine > license is. > > But then the code can no longer be distributed under a non GPL > compatible license, while this is allowed by the Wine license. winedbg _binaries_ compiled with --enable-readline quite possibly. As far as the source code to winedbg is concerned maybe but probably not. It might depend on whether --enable-readline or --disable-readline is the default, but that remains to be tested in court, but it is not certain it matters at all. The court might quite reasonably rule that no linking to readline has taken place yet and thus no derived work can have been created and even if they hold that some sort of linking has taken place it might not consider it a derived work. In short linking, especially potential linking, do not always imply a derived work which is all that matters as far as the law is concerned. Also note that I'm not convinced that any court will hold that the GPL is different from the LGPL in any relevant way with the possible exception of in bad faith trying to circumvent the requirements by trying to be "clever". Of course it is a little unclear that you really can do unlawful circumvention of license requirements. This is a like claiming that somebody circumvented trespassing your land by moving around it. Either you trespass or you do not. Either you violate the license or you do not. The analogy is quite good even in other areas: Even if you are on somebodies land you do not nessary trespass either because of copyright like "fair use" requirements in the law of most countries. As a sidenote: In Sweden "fair use" concerning trespass is so extensive that I never heard about _any_ case concerning it. > I think the benefit of using readline in the debugger is much too > small to justify the potential license issues this would cause. Only the debugger (winedbg) links with readline => only the debugger can be effected. Trying to claim, even though you didn't, that Winelib is effected is absurd since it is independent of the debugger. Distributing the debugger with WineLib is merly an aggregation nothing more.

1 0

Re: PATCH: Move 16-bit COMM stuff to USER, where it belongs
by Alexandre Julliard 19 Jun '01

19 Jun '01

Dmitry Timoshkov <dmitry(a)baikal.ru> writes: > Move 16-bit COMM stuff to USER, where it belongs. While the idea of the patch is correct, I think it would be much better to fix the huge code duplication while everything is in the same file. The 16-bit stuff should be implemented on top of the 32-bit stuff, instead of duplicating most of it. -- Alexandre Julliard julliard(a)winehq.com

2 1

Jump to page:

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

2001

wine-devel