Hi Paul,
I guess it could fall under bug #19807. I was actually testing it with Nokia Ovi Installer.
So, If I take out the \host\C$ part, then this patch won't change which tests are passed. So I think we need to add GetLongPathNameW tests. I'm going to give it a bash...
I would prefer not to work further on UNC pathnames that refer to shares, I would rather try to solve other problems...
Kind regards Alexandre
On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 10:32 AM, Paul Vriens paul.vriens.wine@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Alexandre,
On 12/11/2009 09:02 AM, Alexandre Hardy wrote:
Hi,
I have written a patch to add basic UNC pathname support which tries to handle UNC pathnames according to the MSDN spec.
The patch satisfies some of the UNC pathname tests for GetLongPathNameA, but is actually intended to fix GetLongPathNameW.
I am not entirely satisfied with the patch, and would appreciate some comments.
Some issues:
- Paths prefixed by '\?' require GetLongPathName to handle
strings of length 32767. I don't like the fact that the patch creates two such large strings on the local stack, should the memory be dynamically allocated only when needed?
Dynamic is preferred. We maybe needs some tests to see what Windows does if we pass longer strings (without the '\?') to the A- and W-version and variants of this (including '\?').
- The handling of shares \hostname\C$ is implemented, but no other
shares are handled. And even in this case, only the host on which wine
We need a more general way of handling UNC paths. We can't just have this single one (only local host and only C: drive) to satisfy the tests. This probably goes beyond GetLongPathName though.
is executed is handled, no other hosts are handled. I have read that Windows 7 disables this share by default. So should wine be handling this particular URL, or should more general sharing be implemented?
The test results on test.winehq.org tells us a different thing though. It looks like this is only the case for the Home versions of Windows.
And (again) I think we need more general sharing to be implemented not just one case to have a test succeed.
The patch is included as an attachment to this message.
Kind regards Alexandre
For what bug was this?
-- Cheers,
Paul.