[PATCH] winex11.drv: Use correct cursors for OCR_SIZEWE,OCR_SIZENS

[Alistair Leslie-Hughes]

From: Dmitry Timoshkov

Fixes: https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=44914

Signed-off-by: Alistair Leslie-Hughes 
---
 dlls/winex11.drv/mouse.c | 4 ++--
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/dlls/winex11.drv/mouse.c b/dlls/winex11.drv/mouse.c
index c3ec916..a7e2515 100644
--- a/dlls/winex11.drv/mouse.c
+++ b/dlls/winex11.drv/mouse.c
@@ -834,8 +834,8 @@ static const struct system_cursors user32_cursors[] =
     { OCR_ICON,        "icon" },
     { OCR_SIZENWSE,    "top_left_corner" },
     { OCR_SIZENESW,    "top_right_corner" },
-    { OCR_SIZEWE,      "left_side" },
-    { OCR_SIZENS,      "top_side" },
+    { OCR_SIZEWE,      "h_double_arrow" },
+    { OCR_SIZENS,      "v_double_arrow" },
     { OCR_NO,          "not-allowed" },
     { OCR_HAND,        "hand2" },
     { OCR_APPSTARTING, "left_ptr_watch" },

[PATCH] winex11.drv: Use correct cursors for OCR_SIZEWE, OCR_SIZENS

[Alexandre Julliard]

Alistair Leslie-Hughes  writes:
> From: Dmitry Timoshkov
>
> Fixes: https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=44914
> Signed-off-by: Alistair Leslie-Hughes
>
> dlls/winex11.drv/mouse.c | 4 ++--
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

I don't think there's such a thing as the "correct" name. I worry that
this will just be moving the problem around. We should probably add
support for checking multiple names.

[Dmitry Timoshkov]

Alexandre Julliard  wrote:
> I don't think there's such a thing as the "correct" name. I worry that
> this will just be moving the problem around. We should probably add
> support for checking multiple names.

For WE/NS cursors when bi-directional arrows are expected "left_side"
and "top_side" names don't seem to be an appropriate choice in any case,
"h_double_arrow" and "v_double_arrow" appear to be more correct.

[PATCH] winex11.drv: Use correct cursors for OCR_SIZEWE, OCR_SIZENS

[Alexandre Julliard]

Dmitry Timoshkov  writes:
> Alexandre Julliard  wrote:
> > I don't think there's such a thing as the "correct" name. I worry that
> > this will just be moving the problem around. We should probably add
> > support for checking multiple names.
>
> For WE/NS cursors when bi-directional arrows are expected "left_side"
> and "top_side" names don't seem to be an appropriate choice in any case,
> "h_double_arrow" and "v_double_arrow" appear to be more correct.

I'm not sure how you'd determine what's more correct. left_side and
top_side at least are in cursorfont.h, so by that metric they are more
standard. Checking a random sampling of existing themes there doesn't
seem to be a clear winner.