Alexandre Julliard wrote:
Vitaliy Margolen wine-devel@kievinfo.com writes:
Any reasons why this patch is not applied? http://www.winehq.org/pipermail/wine-patches/2007-January/035264.html
This is one of the major headaches for users trying to get programs requiring direct CD-ROM drive access to work. And it's nearly impossible to get required information from users to find if the direct access actually works or not.
I think you should distinguish the case of no device at all from the case of a SCSI ioctl failing, for instance loop mounts wouldn't support the ioctl but would still work fine for many things. Also the
That is exactly the point! Some "smart" users use iso images and complain that cd-checks fail. This is a more generic ioctl that will fail on a loop device. And that's a reason I used it.
no device case needs to be less scary, there's nothing wrong with it
I disagree. It have to be scary! It have to tell user that they do not have direct access to the device. And that enything that will try doing that will fail! In most cases users will get some obscure error messages that will tell them nothing about the actual cause. I want to have at least one place where we can point users to go look if they have or properly configured system or not.
for most devices. And the strings need to be in resources.
Will do that.
Vitaliy.