+tmp = Math.floor(1.1);
+ok(tmp === 1, "Math.round(1.1) = " + tmp);
Copy/paste error?
Vincent Povirk
2008/10/21 Jacek Caban <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> ---
> dlls/jscript/math.c | 20 ++--
> dlls/jscript/tests/api.js | 18 ++
> 2 files changed, 36 insertio
Yep.
It's still broken though; the string I allocated is too small (strlen
excludes the null terminator), and that will be a problem if cmdline
ends in a backslash.
Vincent Povirk
On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 8:41 PM, Juan Lang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Oops, sorry Vincent, James caught me:
>
>>
Oops, sorry Vincent, James caught me:
> +result = HeapAlloc(GetProcessHeap(), HEAP_ZERO_MEMORY,
> sizeof(WCHAR)*strlenW(cmdline));
The HEAP_ZERO_MEMORY is the something obvious I was missing.
/me slinks back to his corner.
--Juan
> I suppose it is possible for the string to not be null-terminated if
> the command line ends in a backslash. I'll fix that and resend.
It's more probable than that, unless I'm missing something. You
allocate result:
+result = HeapAlloc(GetProcessHeap(), HEAP_ZERO_MEMORY,
sizeof(WCHAR)*strle
I suppose it is possible for the string to not be null-terminated if
the command line ends in a backslash. I'll fix that and resend.
Vincent Povirk
On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 8:14 PM, Juan Lang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi Vincent,
>
> +while (*src)
> +{
> +*dest = *src;
> +
Hi Vincent,
+while (*src)
+{
+*dest = *src;
+if (*src == '\\')
+{
+DWORD attrs = GetFileAttributesW(result);
It sure looks like you're calling GetFileAttributesW with a
non-NULL-terminated string. I doubt this will work as you intend.
--Juan
On Mon, Oct 20, 2008 at 8:27 PM, Hirofumi Katayama
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> See attachment.
>
>
>
>
Howdy,
Thanks for the patch, a few comments:
>From b5fc5d2fc2c74507aa2dcf2daa4fe404e9b1ba06 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Katayama Hirofumi MZ <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2008 03:41
Henri Verbeet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> at Oct 21, 2008 10:04 AM wrote about
configure: Require at least version 1.6 of gnutls.
>
>
Why are we looking to use gnutls 1.6? Is there a feature that is needed for
Wine? If so, I will have to check Fink before building Darwine again.
Thank you.
James McKe
"Henri Verbeet" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> @@ -916,17 +916,20 @@ WINE_NOTICE_WITH(hal,[test "x$ac_cv_lib_soname_hal" =
> "x"],
> dnl Check for libgnutls
> if test "x$with_gnutls" != "xno" -a "$PKG_CONFIG" != "false"
> then
> -ac_save_CPPFLAGS="$CPPFLAGS"
> -ac_gnutls_libs=
> Like I said, it's exactly the set of conditions that happens to satisfy
> Outlook. The typical scenario is that you can't connect to a secure
> server because of an invalid certificate and then forcibly import the
> certificate. The invalid certificates I tried on Windows where added
> to the roo
В сообщении от Tuesday 14 October 2008 23:54:54 Mathias Kosch написал(а):
> Hallo!
>
> About two weeks ago I tried to hand in a (corrected version of my)
> patch for "StretchDIBits" [1].
> However it isn't accepted until now and I didn't yet notice any
> response.
>
> Would someone please tell me w
В сообщении от Tuesday 14 October 2008 23:54:54 Mathias Kosch написал(а):
> Hallo!
>
> About two weeks ago I tried to hand in a (corrected version of my)
> patch for "StretchDIBits" [1].
> However it isn't accepted until now and I didn't yet notice any
> response.
>
> Would someone please tell me w
The blacklist has grown a bit, adding
d3d8:visual.c
winhttp:Timeout...Killing.child
wldap32:parse.c
wldap32/tests/__test__
Rob has been busy helping get the distributed patchwatcher
scripts working. He has a msvc9 build slave coming along
nicely(!).
I've ordered a second computer to use as a
On Tuesday 21 October 2008 16:46:51 Juan Lang wrote:
> > I don't think I said that. I put a fixme in the code that explicitly
> > warns that the store should be determined dynamically.
>
> No, but that's what the code does. What bothers me is that your
> implementation is correct in only an extre
>> You haven't convinced me that Windows does indeed import the
>> certificate to the root store in all cases. Making the root store
>
> I don't think I said that. I put a fixme in the code that explicitly
> warns that the store should be determined dynamically.
No, but that's what the code does.
"Paul Vriens" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Is there a way the existing tests can be improved? Apparently the
> existing tests show the behaviour but didn't prevent the regression.
Existing tests only check for the flags (and the state) of the MMIO
handle after it has been created. An improvement
yup, i saw that when i updated this morning. Sorry. ignore my patch.
-aric
Hans Leidekker wrote:
> On Tuesday 21 October 2008 14:29:45 Aric Stewart wrote:
>
>> -ok( !ret, "ldap_search_ext_sA failed 0x%x\n", ret );
>> +ok( ret==0x55 || ret == 0x51, "ldap_search_ext_sA unexpected return
On Tuesday 21 October 2008 14:29:45 Aric Stewart wrote:
> -ok( !ret, "ldap_search_ext_sA failed 0x%x\n", ret );
> +ok( ret==0x55 || ret == 0x51, "ldap_search_ext_sA unexpected return
> 0x%x\n", ret );
This should be fixed by my last patch already.
-Hans
Hi AJ,
Alexandre Julliard schreef:
> Maarten Lankhorst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>
>> +curpos.QuadPart = 0;
>> +SetFilePointerEx(hFile, curpos, &oldpos, FILE_CURRENT);
>> +SetFilePointerEx(hFile, curpos, NULL, FILE_BEGIN);
>>
>
> That's not thread-safe.
>
My
> Where are the patches? Should they have been attached here?
Sorry, I guess I should have specified. The patches are in the bugzilla
entry http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10495 . The patches are too
big for attaching.
--
Arthur Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Maarten Lankhorst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Oops, thanks for catching that. Apparantly it somehow didn't complete
> crash for me. In the error paths I also found that I forgot to call
> the cleanup functions, so I'll send a revised patch.
Actually you probably don't want to free the library a
Ivan Peevski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> ChangeLog:
> Followed the documentation at
> http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/w7sa2b22(VS.80).aspx. First,
> ignore pmode if the file already exist. Then, apply pmode permissions
> to the file, once it has been created.
This should be done by pass
Hi AJ,
Alexandre Julliard schreef:
> Maarten Lankhorst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>
>> +wintrust = LoadLibraryW(wintrust_dll);
>> +pCryptCATAdminAcquireContext = (void *)GetProcAddress(wintrust,
>> "CryptCATAdminAcquireContext");
>> +pCryptCATAdminAddCatalog = (void
2008/10/21 chris ahrendt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Austin English wrote:
>> On Sun, Oct 19, 2008 at 9:15 PM, chris ahrendt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> Anyone else having a problem compiling the latest git?
>>>
>>> mine has failed 2 times when I compile... one with a clean tree and one
>>> with an o
Dmitry Timoshkov wrote:
> Existing tests show that MMIO_ALLOCBUF flag is dropped if a valid buffer
> is being passed to mmioOpen, that means the buffer is valid in that case.
>
> This patch fixes a regression reported in the bug 15694.
> ---
> dlls/winmm/mmio.c |5 +++--
> 1 files changed, 3
Maarten Lankhorst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> +curpos.QuadPart = 0;
> +SetFilePointerEx(hFile, curpos, &oldpos, FILE_CURRENT);
> +SetFilePointerEx(hFile, curpos, NULL, FILE_BEGIN);
That's not thread-safe.
--
Alexandre Julliard
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Maarten Lankhorst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> +wintrust = LoadLibraryW(wintrust_dll);
> +pCryptCATAdminAcquireContext = (void *)GetProcAddress(wintrust,
> "CryptCATAdminAcquireContext");
> +pCryptCATAdminAddCatalog = (void *)GetProcAddress(wintrust,
> "CryptCATAdminAddC
"Austin English" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> From bd4408eccc01418077727b75f8383fb4d03d2b90 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Austin English <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2008 16:43:27 -0500
> Subject: [PATCH] gdi32: fix a potential NULL point dereference
Please don't add NULL checks un
On Tuesday 21 October 2008 08:29:47 Paul Bryan Roberts wrote:
> The conformance tests for LookupAccountName() use LookupAccountSid() so
> if the former is to support the 'first user account' SID then so must
> the latter and the latter needs prior implementation.
There's no guarantee that the fir
On Tuesday 21 October 2008 08:30:27 Paul Bryan Roberts wrote:
> The implementation is backed up with a new conformance case, which was
> verified against W2K SP4.
After the complete test series, the advapi32/tests/security.c tests pass fine
against a Win2k3 DC.
Thanks for pushing this further a
30 matches
Mail list logo
