Max TenEyck Woodbury wrote:
> I created the top page as a table and populated it with all the
> directory entries in the 'dll' directory. Somebody immediately deleted
> it. WTF?
Creating a MSDN clone does not belong to the Wine project.
--
Dmitry.
On 06/30/2010 03:43 PM, Erich Hoover wrote:
On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 1:36 PM, James Mckenzie
wrote:
...
How about some place on the Wiki along with an implementation status. That way
we can also annotate items that are missing in MSDN (I just re-stumbled across
something in my latest Richedi
I've been reading the Wine code and noticed that some of the external
interfaces are practically undocumented. I did a web search on some of
the names and found descriptions in MSDN.
I realize that copying the information from MSDN directly into the code
is a poor idea (like copyright violati
On 06/30/2010 03:46 PM, Nikolay Sivov wrote:
> On 7/1/2010 02:20, Scott Ritchie wrote:
>> Translation by Sven Augustin
>
>> @@ -20,7 +21,12 @@ Name[sr]=Wine - аДаИаЗаАб� Windows аПб�аОаГб�аАаМаА
>> name...@latin]=wine - diza� Windows programa
>> Name[hr]=Wine - diza� Windows programa
>> E
On 7/1/2010 02:20, Scott Ritchie wrote:
Translation by Sven Augustin
@@ -20,7 +21,12 @@ Name[sr]=Wine - аДаИаЗаАб� Windows аПб�аОаГб�аАаМаА
name...@latin]=wine - diza� Windows programa
Name[hr]=Wine - diza� Windows programa
Exec=wine start /unix %f
+<<< HEAD
MimeType=applicati
Erich Hoover wrote:
>Sent: Jun 30, 2010 12:43 PM
>To: James Mckenzie
>Cc: Alexandre Julliard , Max TenEyck Woodbury
>, wine-devel@winehq.org
>Subject: Re: (Resent) Documentation - Reference to MSDN?
>
>On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 1:36 PM, James Mckenzie
> wrote:
>> ...
>> How about some place on the
On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 1:36 PM, James Mckenzie
wrote:
> ...
> How about some place on the Wiki along with an implementation status. That
> way we can also annotate items that are missing in MSDN (I just re-stumbled
> across something in my latest Richedit tests) as well. This would help
> gr
Alexandre Julliard wrote:
>
>Erich Hoover writes:
>
>> Alright, well then I won't do it. Is the existing documentation going
>> to be stripped at some point? It seems to me like we would benefit
>> from more-detailed function descriptions in the auto-generated API
>> documentation. I think it
On 06/30/2010 03:13 PM, Alexandre Julliard wrote:
Erich Hoover writes:
Alright, well then I won't do it. Is the existing documentation going
to be stripped at some point? It seems to me like we would benefit
from more-detailed function descriptions in the auto-generated API
documentation. I
Howdy,
I was looking at http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=23421, and
wanted to add a stub for it. Using winedump on a Windows 7 shlwapi.dll
gives different exports than Windows XP SP3 shlwapi.dll. Which dll
should the spec file be updated to match? I'm assuming the latest and
greatest, since
Erich Hoover writes:
> Alright, well then I won't do it. Is the existing documentation going
> to be stripped at some point? It seems to me like we would benefit
> from more-detailed function descriptions in the auto-generated API
> documentation. I think it would save a lot of time for new de
On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 12:44 PM, Alexandre Julliard
wrote:
> Erich Hoover writes:
>
>> Personally, I think that it would be really good to do a better job of
>> documenting the API functions (particularly edge cases). I'm
>> currently very busy with work, but if Alexandre is ok with
>> document
Erich Hoover writes:
> Personally, I think that it would be really good to do a better job of
> documenting the API functions (particularly edge cases). I'm
> currently very busy with work, but if Alexandre is ok with
> documentation-only patches then this is something I'm tempted to jump
> on (
Juan Lang:
Of course one of the reasons to add documentation is precisely
because the information on MSDN is less than perfect. Having a good
interface definition makes things easier. I'm still in the process of
learning how to submit patches. These would be low risk but useful
changes so they m
On Jun 30, 2010, at 11:47 AM, Ken Thomases wrote:
> I happened to stumble across some code which didn't look quite right in
> dlls/ntdll/serial.c. However, I have no expertise in serial comms or
> termios. Also, I have no means to test the change I propose. On the other
> hand, the change se
On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 11:44 AM, Juan Lang wrote:
>
> ...
> A more general response: I'm not sure that a lot of documentation
> patches will be accepted. MSDN has to be considered the definitive
> resource for the Windows API. It's often incorrect, of course, and
> our regression tests aim to
No. MSDN is in the habit of changing its URLs all too frequently.
For what it's worth, while MSDN seems to like changing its URLs a lot,
it does seem to be quite good at maintaining forwarders for the old URLs
- most API documentation URLs I've randomly found from 5 years ago still
work, for
В сообщении от Среда 30 июня 2010 Вы написали:
> Dmitry Timoshkov wrote:
...
> Also it doesn't make much sense to send a half completed translation.
You are welcome :)
I have no time for translate stupid, obsoleted, unexisted errors.
Later, as next step, I will do review again and update translat
Am 30.06.2010 19:25, schrieb Max TenEyck Woodbury:
> I've been reading the Wine code and noticed that some of the external
> interfaces are practically undocumented. I did a web search on some of
> the names and found descriptions in MSDN.
>
> I realize that copying the information from MSDN direc
Hi Max,
> 1) Would including the URL of the MSDN article be useful/a good idea?
No. MSDN is in the habit of changing its URLs all too frequently.
A more general response: I'm not sure that a lot of documentation
patches will be accepted. MSDN has to be considered the definitive
resource for t
I've been reading the Wine code and noticed that some of the external
interfaces are practically undocumented. I did a web search on some of
the names and found descriptions in MSDN.
I realize that copying the information from MSDN directly into the code
is a poor idea (like copyright violation)
Hi,
I happened to stumble across some code which didn't look quite right in
dlls/ntdll/serial.c. However, I have no expertise in serial comms or termios.
Also, I have no means to test the change I propose. On the other hand, the
change seems clearly right and conforms to what I learn from ma
Hi, wine-devel
I'm working on implementation of Windows Game Explorer interfaces
for Wine. The work is in advanced stage now, but I have problem with
implementation of conformance tests.
Thing I want to test is loading and parsing so-called Game Definition Files.
GDF are not separate files, but s
André Hentschel wrote:
> This fixes bug 22862 which blocks bug 12804 (1.2)
> We already do a similar recursion in DEFDLG_FindDefButton and
> GetNextDlgGroupItem
>
> I didnt found any other changes in the tests... i expected some more "Test
> succeeded inside todo block"
You need to add explic
On 06/30/2010 03:43 PM, Dmitry Timoshkov wrote:
Dmitry Timoshkov wrote:
Vitaly Lipatov wrote:
+LanguageNames=(RUS=0x19:winerr)
+CodePages=(FRA=65001:0)
'FRA'? This doesn't look correct.
Also it doesn't make much sense to send a half completed translation.
I could agree but if you loo
Dmitry Timoshkov wrote:
> Vitaly Lipatov wrote:
>
> > +LanguageNames=(RUS=0x19:winerr)
> > +CodePages=(FRA=65001:0)
>
> 'FRA'? This doesn't look correct.
Also it doesn't make much sense to send a half completed translation.
--
Dmitry.
Vitaly Lipatov wrote:
> +LanguageNames=(RUS=0x19:winerr)
> +CodePages=(FRA=65001:0)
'FRA'? This doesn't look correct.
--
Dmitry.
27 matches
Mail list logo
