On 01/05/2010 02:47 AM, James Hawkins wrote:
---
dlls/shell32/tests/appbar.c |3 +++
1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
Hi James,
Both Vincent and I tried something along those lines but AJ's response was:
"That's just hiding the problem, an app can pass the same structu
> The Top Ten Single Charts
> -
> This are the messages with the most occurrences in a single file.
Nifty!
How hard would it be to add some git-blame fu to that,
and then we'd know who to blame ?
Cheers,
Jeremy
Hello!
Introduction
Back at the last WineConf after the wineoops presentation I have been
asked if the wineoops could collect FIXME/ERR messages too and do some
statistics on those. Well, it doesn't and I didn't want to introduce
scope creep thus this new "project" winefixme was crea
Rob Shearman's commit,
http://source.winehq.org/git/wine.git/?a=commit;h=9dc584d0a2cae7cfb4816fe982071d264d2345ff
seems to have caused a spectacular improvement in jscript/tests/run.c's
leakage:
LEAK SUMMARY:
-definitely lost: NNN bytes in 19,001 blocks
+definitely lost: NNN bytes in 4 b
Ok,
We seem to have two questions that need to be resolved before the tango
icons can be merged.
First: The SVGs.
A little background on how I make the icon set: The icon set has been
assembled from different sources of artwork. Some my own, some from
other people, so there's a certain amount of
Paul Vriens schrieb:
> On 01/04/2010 10:00 PM, André Hentschel wrote:
>> Paul Vriens schrieb:
>>> On 01/04/2010 08:50 PM, André Hentschel wrote:
You can see wrong coloring e.g. here
http://test.winehq.org/data/f74e312bf81032c46bd2ce080a5f6a33c7ac3ee3/wine_ah-910-64-nv/rpcrt4:server.html
>
On 01/04/2010 10:00 PM, André Hentschel wrote:
Paul Vriens schrieb:
On 01/04/2010 08:50 PM, André Hentschel wrote:
You can see wrong coloring e.g. here
http://test.winehq.org/data/f74e312bf81032c46bd2ce080a5f6a33c7ac3ee3/wine_ah-910-64-nv/rpcrt4:server.html
Also the counting is wrong, that uni
Paul Vriens schrieb:
> On 01/04/2010 08:50 PM, André Hentschel wrote:
>> You can see wrong coloring e.g. here
>> http://test.winehq.org/data/f74e312bf81032c46bd2ce080a5f6a33c7ac3ee3/wine_ah-910-64-nv/rpcrt4:server.html
>>
>> Also the counting is wrong, that unit test is shown in the summary
>> with
On 01/04/2010 08:50 PM, André Hentschel wrote:
You can see wrong coloring e.g. here
http://test.winehq.org/data/f74e312bf81032c46bd2ce080a5f6a33c7ac3ee3/wine_ah-910-64-nv/rpcrt4:server.html
Also the counting is wrong, that unit test is shown in the summary with 2
errors, but only has 1
This pat
On Mon, Jan 4, 2010 at 7:18 PM, Geoffrey Hausheer
wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 4, 2010 at 9:06 AM, Wolfram Sang wrote:
>>> task. There doesn't appear to be anything in this code that would be
>>> patent encumbered, but the code itself certainly falls under
>>> Hidenori's copyright which he has effective
On Mon, Jan 4, 2010 at 7:05 AM, Nate Gallaher wrote:
> James Hawkins wrote:
>>
>> On Sat, Jan 2, 2010 at 10:36 AM, Nathan Gallaher
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> +struct cond_mem {
>> + struct list entry;
>> + void *ptr;
>> +};
>>
>>
>> +
>> +static void cond_free( void *info, void *ptr )
>>
On Mon, Jan 4, 2010 at 9:06 AM, Wolfram Sang wrote:
>> task. There doesn't appear to be anything in this code that would be
>> patent encumbered, but the code itself certainly falls under
>> Hidenori's copyright which he has effectively revoked permission to
>> use.
>
> Strictly speaking, this is
Henri Verbeet schrieb:
> 2010/1/4 André Hentschel :
>> I dont see a reason to take that warning serious, as its not a problem in
>> any case. in kernel32 it just happens because we use a Macro. Taking that
>> case(v==1) out of the Macro leads to harder readable code.
>> So IMHO i would not make
2010/1/4 André Hentschel :
> I dont see a reason to take that warning serious, as its not a problem in any
> case. in kernel32 it just happens because we use a Macro. Taking that
> case(v==1) out of the Macro leads to harder readable code.
> So IMHO i would not make -Wlogical-op the default.
>
N
task. There doesn't appear to be anything in this code that would be
patent encumbered, but the code itself certainly falls under
Hidenori's copyright which he has effectively revoked permission to
use.
Strictly speaking, this is not possible. Although IANAL, this code is
LGPL, so he can't r
Gerald Pfeifer schrieb:
> I had a patch for this one (comctl32/tests) which I received feedback on
> and need to brush up. I should be able to do so coming week. Anybody
> volunteering to look into the other ones?
>
>> kernel32/tests:
>> atom.c:70: warning: logical ?||? with non-zero constant
On Mon, Jan 4, 2010 at 4:39 AM, John Klehm wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 4, 2010 at 4:46 AM, Huw Davies wrote:
>> On Sun, Jan 03, 2010 at 03:00:12PM -0800, Geoffrey Hausheer wrote:
>>> I found a patch from 2001 written by TAKESHIMA Hidenori that
>>> was posted to wine-patches
>>> (http://www.winehq.org/pip
James Hawkins wrote:
On Sat, Jan 2, 2010 at 10:36 AM, Nathan Gallaher
wrote:
+struct cond_mem {
+struct list entry;
+void *ptr;
+};
+
+static void cond_free( void *info, void *ptr )
+{
+COND_input *cond = (COND_input*) info;
+struct cond_mem *mem, *safety;
+
+LIS
2010/1/4 Paul Vriens :
> On 01/03/2010 10:12 PM, Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
>>
>> On Sun, 3 Jan 2010, Austin English wrote:
On my FreeBSD test system I am see no warnings triggered by -Wlogical-op
any more. How does it look on your side?
>>>
>>> ole32:
>>> usrmarshal.c:485: warning: logi
On 01/03/2010 10:12 PM, Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
On Sun, 3 Jan 2010, Austin English wrote:
On my FreeBSD test system I am see no warnings triggered by -Wlogical-op
any more. How does it look on your side?
ole32:
usrmarshal.c:485: warning: logical ?&&? with non-zero constant will
always evaluate a
Hi Alexandre,
2010/1/4 Alexandre Julliard :
> Maarten Lankhorst writes:
>
>> This reverts commit b474649e0e9491f938f1daec74cdca01343dd97e.
Fixes bug 21196, Max Payne apparently uses the pointer to the guid
after having done the enumeration, which means it used random stack
contents.
Cheers,
Maar
On Mon, Jan 4, 2010 at 4:46 AM, Huw Davies wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 03, 2010 at 03:00:12PM -0800, Geoffrey Hausheer wrote:
>> I found a patch from 2001 written by TAKESHIMA Hidenori that
>> was posted to wine-patches
>> (http://www.winehq.org/pipermail/wine-patches/2001-October/001229.html)
>> but nev
> > I've completed phase 2 of the testbot: besides (32 and 64 bit) Windows
> > executables you can now also submit patch files to the bot. The bot will
> > apply the patch files to a clean git tree, cross-compile the test and run
> > the
> > test on Windows VMs. You'll also be able to download the
Maarten Lankhorst writes:
> This reverts commit b474649e0e9491f938f1daec74cdca01343dd97e.
Please explain why.
--
Alexandre Julliard
julli...@winehq.org
On Sun, Jan 03, 2010 at 03:00:12PM -0800, Geoffrey Hausheer wrote:
> I found a patch from 2001 written by TAKESHIMA Hidenori that
> was posted to wine-patches
> (http://www.winehq.org/pipermail/wine-patches/2001-October/001229.html)
> but never committed.
Actually it was commited (2843934af5515c7f
25 matches
Mail list logo
