"Rico Schüller" wrote:
-/* version info? */
-skip_dword_unknown(&ptr, 2);
+/* Compiled target version (e.g. fx_4_0=0xfeff1001, fx_4_1=0xfeff1011). */
+read_dword(&ptr, &e->version);
+TRACE("Target: %#x\n", e->version);
0xfeff/0xfffe is a unicode byte order mark, could it s
"Stephan Rose" wrote:
So if anyone can drop a full spec into my lap which outlines everything
I need to write and where (given I adhere to things as I should of course)
I won't have any issues getting that accepted later on, I'd be more than
willing to take on something like this.
Anyone need
2009/5/30 chris ahrendt :
>
> Question on this debate:
>
> Has AJ documented anywhere what the architectural issues are so they can
> be addressed?
This did not need a new thread. You should have posted it on the existing one.
> I have not seen this in the thread and was just wondering.
> If we h
On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 10:51 AM, James Mckenzie
wrote:
>>> Why do we have versions on Mac OS X? How about we combine them all?
>>
>>It can make a big difference in the bug. The X.org version in OS X
>>(partially?) depends on what OS X version you have. ...
>
> As far as OS/2 goes, it is still a
On 05/29/2009 12:28 PM, James Mckenzie wrote:
>> As was said in the other thread, just designing it alone would take a
>> few months work. AJ is really busy with other things, and a few months
>> work is both a lot of money and a lot of wasted productivity. No one
>> is stepping up to sponsor the
On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 4:26 PM, Steven Edwards wrote:
> On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 5:17 PM, Austin English
> wrote:
>> What is the status of the Wine Party Fund this year, to help with the
>> cost of transportation/lodging? I remember quite a bit of it was used
>> up last year...
>
> This also pro
On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 11:26 PM, Steven Edwards wrote:
> On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 5:17 PM, Austin English
> wrote:
>> What is the status of the Wine Party Fund this year, to help with the
>> cost of transportation/lodging? I remember quite a bit of it was used
>> up last year...
>
> This also pr
On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 5:17 PM, Austin English wrote:
> What is the status of the Wine Party Fund this year, to help with the
> cost of transportation/lodging? I remember quite a bit of it was used
> up last year...
This also provides a good time for us to publicly seek donations.
--
Steven Ed
On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 2:52 AM, Hans Leidekker wrote:
> Dear Wine developers,
>
> You may recall that I volunteered to help host WineConf in the Netherlands
> in 2007 when, after a vote, an offer by Dan Kegel to host at Google's offices
> in Zurich won the bid.
>
> Last year WineConf went across
On May 29, 2009, at 12:18 PM, Austin English wrote:
On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 12:14 PM, Dmitry Timoshkov
wrote:
"Austin English" wrote:
Why do we have versions on Mac OS X? How about we combine them all?
It can make a big difference in the bug. The X.org version in OS X
(partially?) depends
>>As was said in the other thread, just designing it alone would take a
>>few months work. AJ is really busy with other things, and a few months
>>work is both a lot of money and a lot of wasted productivity. No one
>>is stepping up to sponsor the work, so it's a bit hard for him to take
>>that on.
James Mckenzie ha scritto:
Luke:
Heh, I wonder if someone should approach Autodesk and say, "Give us
sponsorship and we'll get Autocad running on Linux" they surely have
deep pockets :)
If Autodesk were interested in making AutoCad work with Linux, they would make
a native version, not try to
>
>> Why do we have versions on Mac OS X? How about we combine them all?
>
>It can make a big difference in the bug. The X.org version in OS X
>(partially?) depends on what OS X version you have. Some bugs will
>only show up in Tiger, because Leopard has them fixed on Apple's end.
>(Someone corre
On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 12:14 PM, Dmitry Timoshkov
wrote:
> "Austin English" wrote:
>
>>> Why do we have versions on Mac OS X? How about we combine them all?
>>
>> It can make a big difference in the bug. The X.org version in OS X
>> (partially?) depends on what OS X version you have. Some bugs w
"Austin English" wrote:
Why do we have versions on Mac OS X? How about we combine them all?
It can make a big difference in the bug. The X.org version in OS X
(partially?) depends on what OS X version you have. Some bugs will
only show up in Tiger, because Leopard has them fixed on Apple's en
On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 12:02 PM, Dan Kegel wrote:
> On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 9:58 AM, Juan Lang wrote:
>>> I don't suppose you've changed your mind on also removing the obsolete
>>> OS's (BSDI, AIX, IRIX, HP-UX, SunOS, OS/2, Mac OS X < 10.3)?
>>
>> Did he say he wasn't for it? I didn't catch tha
On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 9:58 AM, Juan Lang wrote:
>> I don't suppose you've changed your mind on also removing the obsolete
>> OS's (BSDI, AIX, IRIX, HP-UX, SunOS, OS/2, Mac OS X < 10.3)?
>
> Did he say he wasn't for it? I didn't catch that. Dan, here's a vote
> for removing those. I can't comm
On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 11:58 AM, Juan Lang wrote:
>> I don't suppose you've changed your mind on also removing the obsolete
>> OS's (BSDI, AIX, IRIX, HP-UX, SunOS, OS/2, Mac OS X < 10.3)?
>
> Did he say he wasn't for it? I didn't catch that. Dan, here's a vote
> for removing those. I can't com
> I don't suppose you've changed your mind on also removing the obsolete
> OS's (BSDI, AIX, IRIX, HP-UX, SunOS, OS/2, Mac OS X < 10.3)?
Did he say he wasn't for it? I didn't catch that. Dan, here's a vote
for removing those. I can't comment on all of them, but SunOS has
been obsolete for a deca
On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 11:43 AM, Juan Lang wrote:
>> The only use of these platforms was three mistaken
>> bug reports that probably wanted PC. I don't see
>> any reason to keep these old system types around
>> any more.
>> OK to remove?
>> (Suggested in http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=13
> The only use of these platforms was three mistaken
> bug reports that probably wanted PC. I don't see
> any reason to keep these old system types around
> any more.
> OK to remove?
> (Suggested in http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=13363 )
Please.
--Juan
The only use of these platforms was three mistaken
bug reports that probably wanted PC. I don't see
any reason to keep these old system types around
any more.
OK to remove?
(Suggested in http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=13363 )
Luke:
>
>Heh, I wonder if someone should approach Autodesk and say, "Give us
>sponsorship and we'll get Autocad running on Linux" they surely have
>deep pockets :)
>
If Autodesk were interested in making AutoCad work with Linux, they would make
a native version, not try to get it working with Wine
>As was said in the other thread, just designing it alone would take a
>few months work. AJ is really busy with other things, and a few months
>work is both a lot of money and a lot of wasted productivity. No one
>is stepping up to sponsor the work, so it's a bit hard for him to take
>that on.
Who
2009/5/29 Austin English :
> On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 10:50 AM, chris ahrendt wrote:
>> Right Austin,
>> I have... thats why I asked the question why not sit down and say
>> here is what we want from the DIB engine here is the Spec do this ..
>> I have seen the here is what I don't like. But nothin
On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 10:50 AM, chris ahrendt wrote:
> Right Austin,
> I have... thats why I asked the question why not sit down and say
> here is what we want from the DIB engine here is the Spec do this ..
> I have seen the here is what I don't like. But nothing showing what
> exactly is neede
On 05/29/2009 11:14 AM, Austin English wrote:
> On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 10:10 AM, chris ahrendt wrote:
>
>> Question on this debate:
>>
>> Has AJ documented anywhere what the architectural issues are so they can
>> be addressed?
>> I have not seen this in the thread and was just wondering.
>>
On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 10:10 AM, chris ahrendt wrote:
>
> Question on this debate:
>
> Has AJ documented anywhere what the architectural issues are so they can
> be addressed?
> I have not seen this in the thread and was just wondering.
> If we have them documented then its a relatively easy task
Question on this debate:
Has AJ documented anywhere what the architectural issues are so they can
be addressed?
I have not seen this in the thread and was just wondering.
If we have them documented then its a relatively easy task to address
each of them.
Yes it may be a hack but you would be su
On May 28, 2009, at 01:49 AM, Ben Klein wrote:
So you also know you can't run x86 apps on PPC platforms without
emulation, just like you can't run z80 code on x86 without emulation.
Also, where is this PPC code in Wine exactly? What source file
exactly?
Files containing PPC specific related c
Dear Wine developers,
You may recall that I volunteered to help host WineConf in the Netherlands
in 2007 when, after a vote, an offer by Dan Kegel to host at Google's offices
in Zurich won the bid.
Last year WineConf went across the pond to Minnesota, so it seems natural
that this year's WineConf
31 matches
Mail list logo
