David Laight <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Just tell the Solaris user to put /usr/xpg4/bin on $PATH
> before /usr/bin. Then 'sh' will be 'ksh' and posix
> compliant...
We are talking about #!/bin/sh now. $PATH is out of
consideration here, I'm afraid.
Feri.
> "Vitaly" == Vitaly Lipatov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Vitaly> On 20 äÅËÁÂÒØ 2003 22:34, Hans Verkuil wrote:
>> planning to make a patch for the DeviceIOControls? I've added them
>> myself in order to allow DVD Shrink to use encrypted DVDs. As the
>> implementation is just pa
On 20 Декабрь 2003 22:34, Hans Verkuil wrote:
> planning to make a patch for the DeviceIOControls? I've added
> them myself in order to allow DVD Shrink to use encrypted
> DVDs. As the implementation is just passing on the
Really we will can use any disks with copy protection system?
--
Lav
Vitaly
On December 20, 2003 05:08 pm, David Laight wrote:
> Just tell the Solaris user to put /usr/xpg4/bin on $PATH before /usr/bin.
> Then 'sh' will be 'ksh' and posix compliant...
This would be just us trying to be nasty.
There absolutely _zero_ reason to not use expr in this
case. And don't tell me t
On Sat, Dec 20, 2003 at 08:57:29PM +0100, Ferenc Wagner wrote:
> David Laight <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> >> BTW, there's no need to make the script bash specific,
> >> we can use expr instead:
> >>
> >> -i=$(($i+1))
> >> +i=`expr $i + 1`
> >
> > That isn't a bashism, it is required t
Hello Uwe,
Uwe Bonnes wrote:
> appended patch opens the devicefile connected to a drive as connected by
> the user in ~/.wine/config [Drive X] "Device" = "/dev/yyy".
> The appropriate action on that file ( read, write, set_file_pointer, ...)
> succeed according the the righte the user has on that
David Laight <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> BTW, there's no need to make the script bash specific,
>> we can use expr instead:
>>
>> -i=$(($i+1))
>> +i=`expr $i + 1`
>
> That isn't a bashism, it is required to be supported by
> any shell that claims to be Posix compliant. That
> probably
Sylvain Petreolle wrote:
Trying to dump a winme dll,
winedump crashed with a segfault.
Does this patch helps ?
A+
--
Eric Pouech
Index: tools/winedump/main.c
===
RCS file: /home/cvs/cvsroot/wine/wine/tools/winedump/main.c,v
retrieving
After getting depressed at how broken InstallShield still is, I thought
I'd check up on why this patch was never merged. I know Alexandre isn't
on holiday, but maybe he'll see this when he gets back.
thanks -mike
On Tue, 2003-10-21 at 15:13, Alex Pasadyn wrote:
> This is a first attempt at "fixin
Hi,
Since the NPTL runtime code split wine into two binaries, I've noticed
the following problems (ignoring the winedbg breakage):
* I get this message in my /var/log/messages file:
application bug: wine-pthread(12443) has SIGCHLD set to SIG_IGN but
calls wait().
* I often get lots of zombie wi
Sami Aario wrote:
I did some Googling and found this link which I believe is relevant:
http://lists.debian.org/debian-kde/2003/debian-kde-200305/msg00357.html.
I've been launching applications from the console, where DISPLAY is not set.
Under an X bash shell however, 'echo $DISPLAY' gives me ':0.0
- Original Message -
From: "Shachar Shemesh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Sami Aario" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, December 20, 2003 5:28 PM
Subject: Re: Problems with x11drv_main.c version 1.83
> No, I don't think it is. X applications (and that's what Wine is
Sami Aario wrote:
Sami Aario wrote:
Hi list,
Version 1.83 of dlls/x11drv/x11drv_main.c does not work for me. This
patch
removes
the Display option in the config file, and now I get this error message:
"x11drv: Can't
open display: " (and no display name given). I've had to revert t
> Sami Aario wrote:
>
> >Hi list,
> >
> >Version 1.83 of dlls/x11drv/x11drv_main.c does not work for me. This
patch
> >removes
> >the Display option in the config file, and now I get this error message:
> >"x11drv: Can't
> >open display: " (and no display name given). I've had to revert to
version
Sami Aario wrote:
Hi list,
Version 1.83 of dlls/x11drv/x11drv_main.c does not work for me. This patch
removes
the Display option in the config file, and now I get this error message:
"x11drv: Can't
open display: " (and no display name given). I've had to revert to version
1.81.
Is the display nam
Normally apps take the value of the DISPLAY environment variable. If
that isn't set from within X your system is hosed, no two ways about
it...
On Sat, 2003-12-20 at 14:39, Sami Aario wrote:
> Hi list,
>
> Version 1.83 of dlls/x11drv/x11drv_main.c does not work for me. This patch
> removes
> the
Hi list,
Version 1.83 of dlls/x11drv/x11drv_main.c does not work for me. This patch
removes
the Display option in the config file, and now I get this error message:
"x11drv: Can't
open display: " (and no display name given). I've had to revert to version
1.81.
Is the display name supposed to be g
On December 19, 2003 07:11 pm, Bill Medland wrote:
> Can Brett use the [Version] "Windows" setting in the config instead?
One option. Or if the old winver was working for him, he can
just grab it from CVS from a few releases ago.
--
Dimi.
On December 19, 2003 03:19 pm, Flameeyes wrote:
> I hope this one is good.
> I also removed the leading '?' list.
A ChangeLog entry explaining what your changes are
doing would also be good :)
--
Dimi.
On December 19, 2003 05:16 pm, Sylvain Petreolle wrote:
> > What other parts, he was just renaming __WINE__ to WINELIB
> > for no good reason...
>
> This commit was just a *part* of his patch for winefile winelib
> extensions:
> http://www.winehq.org/hypermail/wine-patches/2003/12/0151.html
>
> If
20 matches
Mail list logo
