>I just tried Ivan's patch on my program, and get the same insufficient
>version
>error that I was getting with the original, unpatched, version. My
>original patch did not have this problem.
Why don't you add a few traces to see what's going on? I've already explained
that your orginal patch is wr
I just tried Ivan's patch on my program, and get the same insufficient
version
error that I was getting with the original, unpatched, version. My
original patch did not have this problem.
William
On Tue, 14 Dec 2004 15:13:51 +0100, Alexandre Julliard wrote:
> So now it will be a bit of work before we can get rid of
> them, but that should be the long term goal; and that's why I don't
> think we should add more code to support them.
I'm a bit confused, the specfile level stubs are handy if
On Tue, 2004-12-14 at 15:41 +0100, Alexandre Julliard wrote:
> Not adding the functions at all is even easier, and the results are
> pretty much the same... As you noted, in general the only advantage of
> stubs is that you get a better error message, but that would be fairly
> easy to handle at th
Mike Hearn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> They also make adding new DLLs easier, as you don't have to submit lots of
> stub functions for every entry point. I guess we could have a script to
> generate them given a header, but still ...
Not adding the functions at all is even easier, and the resu
I've got this strange error
wine-pthread: virtual.c:703: map_file_into_view: Assertion `start + size <=
view->size' failed.
Aborted
the wine loader seems unable to load the binary into memory, I tried commenting
out the code between line 701 and 719 with #if 0, but that just caused a few
compiler
> It was 4. Pehaps there is yet another bug someplace else.
That's why in my updated patch I check the OS using the available info.
It's here, you may want to try it out and check if it works for you app
http://www.winehq.com/hypermail/wine-patches/2004/12/att-0275/01-wkivcf2.diff
You patch was wro
Ivan Leo Puoti wrote:
I can view the maintainers queue, and I can click on view, but I'm just
redirected to the queue again and can't approve maintainers.
Ivan.
Jonathan has a patch in the queue. Chris will probably apply it tonight
sometime.
There are some other bugs too. Screenshots page for one
I actually test-ran my version of the patch with VB .NET's installer, which
requires 2K or higher, where the other version was only compile-tested. It
fixed the problem of the installer saying that I needed WIN2K or higher. I
had
actually tried exactly what Andreas Mohr had before coming up with th
"Ge van Geldorp" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I don't think we want to add a special mode just for stubs;
> > they should really be replaced by proper functions (even if
> > the functions are stubs themselves, at least they can print
> > the parameters and try to return something meaningful i
> From: Alexandre Julliard
>
> > Seems impossible for functions with unknown calling conventions and
> > number of parameters.
>
> I don't think that's a common case, most of these have been
> identified by now. But anyway, if you have an app calling the
> function you should be able to determi
I can view the maintainers queue, and I can click on view, but I'm just
redirected to the queue again and can't approve maintainers.
Ivan.
Libero ADSL: 3 mesi gratis e navighi a 1.2 Mega, senza costi di attivazione.
Abbonati subito su
Hi,
On Tue, Dec 14, 2004 at 11:47:11AM +0100, Ge van Geldorp wrote:
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> > I don't think we want to add a special mode just for stubs;
> > they should really be replaced by proper functions (even if
> > the functions are stubs themselves, at least they can print
>
"Ge van Geldorp" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Seems impossible for functions with unknown calling conventions and number
> of parameters.
I don't think that's a common case, most of these have been identified
by now. But anyway, if you have an app calling the function you should
be able to deter
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> I don't think we want to add a special mode just for stubs;
> they should really be replaced by proper functions (even if
> the functions are stubs themselves, at least they can print
> the parameters and try to return something meaningful instead
> of killing the
Gerald Pfeifer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> --- dlls/ntdll/virtual.c 11 Oct 2004 20:59:06 - 1.41
> +++ dlls/ntdll/virtual.c 3 Dec 2004 04:06:42 -
> @@ -119,6 +119,12 @@ static CRITICAL_SECTION csVirtual = { &c
> /* Note: these are Windows limits, you cannot change them. */
Jonathan Gevaryahu a écrit :
Eric Pouech <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
To: Anish Mistry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Wine regression caused by 12/02 18:05:37 UTC commit:
breaks Total
Annihilation
and if you remove the entire line (if (!is_version_nt()) access =
TIMER_ALL_A
Rémi Assailly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Changelog:
> * get rid of dce.h
> --- dlls/x11drv/winpos.c 2004-12-09 19:10:35.0 +0100
> +++ dlls/x11drv/winpos.c 2004-12-11 19:46:03.0 +0100
> @@ -40,7 +40,6 @@
> #include "x11drv.h"
> #include "win.h"
> #include "winpos.h"
Mike Hearn wrote:
On Mon, 2004-12-13 at 20:16 +0200, Shachar Shemesh wrote:
I'd love to get my digital camera syncing on Linux (Mustek). It uses a
shell extension. Good enough reason for you? :-)
Is a shell extension really the only way you can access the camera?
That's pretty poor UI desig
On Mon, Dec 13, 2004 at 11:39:58PM +0800, Dmitry Timoshkov wrote:
> Hello,
>
> due to a GDI bug new values don't actually work, and that's another
> thing I'm going to look at.
>
> Changelog:
> Dmitry Timoshkov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Perform automatic bitmap font configuration based on the
On Mon, 2004-12-13 at 20:16 +0200, Shachar Shemesh wrote:
> I'd love to get my digital camera syncing on Linux (Mustek). It uses a
> shell extension. Good enough reason for you? :-)
Is a shell extension really the only way you can access the camera?
That's pretty poor UI design if so (imho :).
Wh
Eric Pouech <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
To: Anish Mistry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Wine regression caused by 12/02 18:05:37 UTC commit: breaks Total
Annihilation
and if you remove the entire line (if (!is_version_nt()) access =
TIMER_ALL_ACCESS;)?
A+
--__--__--
That do
On Monday 13 December 2004 02:27 am, Eric Pouech wrote:
> and if you remove the entire line (if (!is_version_nt()) access =
> TIMER_ALL_ACCESS;)?
> A+
Nope, still the same problem.
--
Anish Mistry
pgpPnu9aV74uR.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Mike Hearn wrote:
Shachar Shemesh wrote:
Though, if we would want to support shell extensions, I don't see how
we could effectively do it without having it do everything the native
explorer does
That would be the other reason. But, I think it makes more sense to
try and bridge shell extensi
What would be a shame again, we aren't particularly
overwhelmed with Win2k3 testers. Hope we can sort it out.
In the meantime just disable winrash if it's too disturbing,
I'll drop you a note once the necessary changes are in place.
I have been looking from time to time the tests (it is interesti
Tero Tamminen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Yes. But will sticking to a fixed directory name (and
>> possibly file name) help, or does ZoneAlarm check eg. MD5
>> sums to thwart any countermeasure from our side? Anyway,
>> I have the feeling that this should be solved by
>> configuring ZoneAlarm
Hi,
On Sun, Dec 12, 2004 at 01:21:44AM -0800, Walt Ogburn wrote:
> Sorry, I was thinking of the debug channels, but I don't know which ones
> to use, short of turning on "trace+all."
Probably something like +edit,+relay,+string
Andreas Mohr
On Mon, 2004-12-13 at 14:02 +0100, Jonathan Ernst wrote:
> I forgot to mention that it should be checked if the used config.php
> file is using short tags ( longtags (
Shachar Shemesh wrote:
Though, if we would want to support shell extensions, I don't see how we
could effectively do it without having it do everything the native
explorer does
That would be the other reason. But, I think it makes more sense to try
and bridge shell extensions to Nautilus/Kon
Alexandre Julliard wrote:
Calling it Explorer would imply that it's supposed to do everything
Windows explorer does, which seems a bit dubious to me. It'd be like
calling the wineserver the winekernel.
No, I don't see why it implies that it has to do everything the
Windows one does, but it has
On Mon, Dec 13, 2004 at 02:08:31PM +0100, Francois Gouget wrote:
>
> I have noticed a lot of constructs of the form:
>
> HRESULT WINAPI DMUSIC_CreateDirectMusicScriptImpl (LPCGUID lpcGUID, LPVOID*
> ppobj, LPUNKNOWN pUnkOuter) {
> IDirectMusicScriptImpl* obj;
>
> obj = HeapAlloc(GetProcessH
On Mon, Dec 13, 2004 at 03:09:29PM +0100, Ivan Leo Puoti wrote:
> > I fixed a bug in ntdll's VERSION_GetLinkedDllVersion which caused it to
> > not be able to return any Windows version higher than WIN98. It has now been
> > extended for WIN2K, WINXP, and WIN2K3. This function would eventually be
>
Alexandre Julliard wrote:
No, I don't see why it implies that it has to do everything the
Windows one does,
Depends on whose perspective you're looking at if from. From a developer
perspective, you are able to easily distinguish what invisible Explorer
functions need to be replicated and which do
I forgot to mention that it should be checked if the used config.php
file is using short tags (
signature.asc
Description: Ceci est une partie de message =?ISO-8859-1?Q?num=E9riquement?= =?ISO-8859-1?Q?_sign=E9e?=
Hi,
> Well, it's more work for the poor slob who has to review, test, and
> commit the resulting patches
gulp, I guess thats me, ;-)
> (not to mention for people who
> maintain local changes and need to fix merge conflicts after each
> commit).
I wondered about that; the good news is that al
I have noticed a lot of constructs of the form:
HRESULT WINAPI DMUSIC_CreateDirectMusicScriptImpl (LPCGUID lpcGUID, LPVOID*
ppobj, LPUNKNOWN pUnkOuter) {
IDirectMusicScriptImpl* obj;
obj = HeapAlloc(GetProcessHeap(), HEAP_ZERO_MEMORY,
sizeof(IDirectMusicScriptImpl));
if (NULL == obj) {
Mike Hearn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> If by explorer you mean things like the taskbar then yes, maybe once
> the winedesktop works gets in (I wonder what happened to that) we'll
> need some kind of task switcher/shell program. I don't think we need
> an entire file browser - there is winefile b
On Sunday 12 December 2004 02:54 pm, Eric Pouech wrote:
Jonathan Gevaryahu a écrit :
does this help?
A+
Index: sync.c
===
RCS file: /home/cvs/cvsroot/wine/wine/dlls/kernel/sync.c,v
retrieving revision 1.64
diff -u -u -r1.64 sync.c
---
Alexandre Julliard wrote:
We will sooner or later need an Explorer clone, if only for desktop
mode, and it seems to me it is exactly the right place for the systray
code.
If by explorer you mean things like the taskbar then yes, maybe once the
winedesktop works gets in (I wonder what happened to t
Mike Hearn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> No, I think that'd be misleading. It doesn't explore stuff and never
> will, and it may also do other things in future that Explorer
> doesn't. It's a rough analogue of Explorer in the same way that the
> wineserver is a bit like the Windows kernel.
We wil
Steven Edwards wrote:
Maybe we should just go ahead and call it explorer in case you plan on adding
stuff later on or
adapting parts of ReactOS explorer.
No, I think that'd be misleading. It doesn't explore stuff and never
will, and it may also do other things in future that Explorer doesn't.
It
On Sun, 12 Dec 2004 21:35:44 +0200, you wrote:
> Well, if the setting is win98 instead of win2k, than the output differs
> a little. The program tries to connect to a http server and gets the
> HEAD of the server / page. That's what's actually doing. Right now it
> just fails, i.e. no connectio
42 matches
Mail list logo
