Tuesday, May 16, 2006, 11:39:42 PM, Dmitry Timoshkov wrote:
> Hello,
> this patch makes all the recently added ShowWindow tests pass in Wine,
> and is aimed to fix the bug #4960.
> GetWindowRect(hwnd, &rc);
> +todo_wine {
> ok( rc.right-rc.left == GetSystemMetrics(SM_CXSCREEN) &&
>
Hi,
mark cox wrote:
> The documentation directory in cvs and in the tarball contains no
> documentation, i got cvs and did a find for '*.sgml'. Nothing to be
> found. Am i missing something?
> mark
I just had a quick look at the Makefile and you might want to do "make
sgmlpages". I never used it
On Wed, 2006-05-17 at 13:35 +1000, mark cox wrote:
> The documentation directory in cvs and in the tarball contains no
> documentation, i got cvs and did a find for '*.sgml'. Nothing to be
> found. Am i missing something?
Yes, you are looking in the wrong place. The documentation is
maintained in
The documentation directory in cvs and in the tarball contains no documentation, i got cvs and did a find for '*.sgml'. Nothing to be found. Am i missing something?mark
This modified hack fixes both cases, but presumably is going to break
unmanaged windows.
--
Troy Rollo - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
diff --git a/dlls/x11drv/window.c b/dlls/x11drv/window.c
diff --git a/dlls/x11drv/winpos.c b/dlls/x11drv/winpos.c
index 5fdde83..f164b00 100644
--- a/dlls/x11drv/winpos.c
On Tuesday 16 May 2006 19:15, Mike McCormack wrote:
> The problem is that we should ask the Window manager to minimize us.
This is what the XIconifyWindow call (made in X11DRV_set_iconic_state in
dlls/x11drv/window.c, called by WINPOS_MinMaximise, called by the
SW_MINIMIZE and SW_SHOWMINIMIZED
Alexandre Julliard wrote:
Andrew Ziem <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
--- dlls/kernel/tests/path1.c 2006-05-14 23:32:47.0 -0600
+++ dlls/kernel/tests/path.c2006-05-15 08:08:52.0 -0600
@@ -339,14 +339,22 @@
newdir,tmpstr,tmpstr1,id);
ok(DeleteFileA(newdir),"Couldn't
Andrew Ziem <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Thanks for the reply. Now, since some behavior is mutually
> exclusive, that implies the wine tests will never see 0 total
> failures?
No, it means that the test should accept both cases, since both are
valid behaviors of the Windows API. You can replac
Michael Jung <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> ChangeLog:
> Remove Wine specific hack from PrivateExtractIconsW.
>
> It's not necessary anymore, due to the new fake dlls.
I don't think we want to require creation of fake dlls for all
builtins that contain icons. Fake dlls should only be created when
Andrew Ziem <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> --- dlls/kernel/tests/path1.c 2006-05-14 23:32:47.0 -0600
> +++ dlls/kernel/tests/path.c 2006-05-15 08:08:52.0 -0600
> @@ -339,14 +339,22 @@
> newdir,tmpstr,tmpstr1,id);
>ok(DeleteFileA(newdir),"Couldn't delete the temporary file
Yes good idea. Things are a bit hectic around here but I'll try to do that
in the next couple of days.
/Ulrich
On Fri, May 12, 2006 at 09:22:49AM -0400, Dimi Paun wrote:
>
> Wine's clipboard implementation is a bit of a mistery to
> a lot of people :)
>
> Ulrich, it would be really great if you
On Tue, 2006-05-16 at 16:44 +0200, Marcus Meissner wrote:
> > This appears to also be a libfreetype issue. It's been reported
> several
> > times in various contexts, google for 'libfreetype inflate' to see
> them.
>
> Looks like a missing NEEDED libz.so.1 in the libfreetype.so.6.
>
> Add -lz to
Saulius Krasuckas wrote:
I just have submited an additional attachment on my report page [*].
After this bugzilla said to me:
Changes Submitted
--
Attachment #2466 to Bug #2082 Created
Email sent to: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED],
[EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECT
On Mon, May 15, 2006 at 02:38:14PM -0700, David Anderson wrote:
> I just installed kubuntu 6.06 on a new laptop (no binary avail), AMD64.
>
> Compiling wine failed as 4979 says, no libfreetype.so that is
> compatible.
>
> The problem is not in the -L or in gcc or in wine.
>
> The problem is in t
I just installed kubuntu 6.06 on a new laptop (no binary avail), AMD64.
Compiling wine failed as 4979 says, no libfreetype.so that is
compatible.
The problem is not in the -L or in gcc or in wine.
The problem is in the m32 libfreetype.
/usr/lib32 is searched (as /usr/lib/../lib32) by gcc automa
On Tue, 2006-05-16 at 08:07 -0400, Ivan Gyurdiev wrote:
> Paul Vriens wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > don't know anything about wined3d, but the code in
> > IWineD3DVertexShaderImpl_ExecuteSW could make use of 6 parameters. The
> > definitions should cover this.
> >
> I don't think so... the case for 6 p
Ivan Gyurdiev wrote:
Paul Vriens wrote:
Hi,
don't know anything about wined3d, but the code in
IWineD3DVertexShaderImpl_ExecuteSW could make use of 6 parameters. The
definitions should cover this.
I don't think so... the case for 6 parameters should be removed.
I can't find 6-parameter inst
Paul Vriens wrote:
Hi,
don't know anything about wined3d, but the code in
IWineD3DVertexShaderImpl_ExecuteSW could make use of 6 parameters. The
definitions should cover this.
I don't think so... the case for 6 parameters should be removed.
I can't find 6-parameter instructions in the ins ta
I have a problem with OGL , during initialisation I have a segfault occurring
in the following code segment, note that I have instrumented the code
XVisualInfo *X11DRV_setup_opengl_visual( Display *display )
{
XVisualInfo *visual = NULL;
/* In order to support OpenGL or D3D, we require a
* Mike McCormack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [16/05/06, 09:56:40]:
> You are probably aware of this, but for others who are interested,
> rpcrt4 seems to work something like:
>
> 1. Client sends NTLMSSP_NEGOTIATE to server on first outgoing packet
> 2. Server sends NTLMSSP_CHALLENGE to client on first
I just have submited an additional attachment on my report page [*].
After this bugzilla said to me:
Changes Submitted
--
Attachment #2466 to Bug #2082 Created
Email sent to: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED],
[EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EM
Troy Rollo wrote:
The attached C sample demonstrates two problems with using
ShowWindow(hwnd,SW_SHOWMINIMIZED) to minimise a top level window. The tests
were done in KDE, but the second problem has been confirmed in Gnome and I
suspect the first also occurs there.
The problem is that we shou
"Alexandre Julliard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
No, the existing tests don't fail for me, otherwise they wouldn't be
in the tree.
They didn't fail for me either, but started to fail very recently, I'll
investigate why. In the mean time, could you please commit my patch without
s/FALSE/TRUE/ ch
"Dmitry Timoshkov" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> It would be better, yes, but I don't see how adding new tests could avoid
> that if the existing test fail already. I don't see how I can make existing
> tests not fail while adding new ones and not touching any real code. I can
> resend the patch w
24 matches
Mail list logo
