Adam Martinson wrote:
> +static HDC (WINAPI *pGetWindowDC)(HWND hWnd);
> +static int (WINAPI *pReleaseDC)(HWND hWnd,HDC hDC);
There is no need to dynamically import these APIs, they are always available.
> +static DWORD WINAPI test_ulw_thread(void *data)
> +{
> +struct test_ulw_tdata *tdata
On Feb 3, 2012, at 10:13 AM, Jeremy White wrote:
> On 02/03/2012 10:47 AM, Dan Kegel wrote:
>> Jeremy wrote:
>>> the VMWare folks are not willing to provide a permanent license for VMWare
>>> to us.
>>>
>>> So, we've shifted gears, and are exploring whether something like qemu +
>>> kvm would b
On Wed, Feb 1, 2012 at 1:11 PM, Jeremy White wrote:
> Hi Folks,
>
> At the last Wine conference, I volunteered to find a home for the
> WineTestBot that Ge's brother has been hosting, and to take over the
> Buildbot that Dan and Austin have been so diligently maintaining.
> ...
Is there any chanc
On 02/03/2012 10:47 AM, Dan Kegel wrote:
> Jeremy wrote:
>> the VMWare folks are not willing to provide a permanent license for VMWare
>> to us.
>>
>> So, we've shifted gears, and are exploring whether something like qemu +
>> kvm would be a sufficient alternate.
>
> What's the plan for automated
Hi Hans,
hr = IXMLDOMNode_get_text( node, &s );
IXMLDOMNode_Release( node );
-if (!strcmpW( s, product_code )) r = ERROR_SUCCESS;
-SysFreeString(s);
+if (hr == S_OK && !strcmpW( s, product_code )) r = ERROR_SUCCESS;
+SysFreeString( s );
Is it real
Jeremy wrote:
> the VMWare folks are not willing to provide a permanent license for VMWare to
> us.
>
> So, we've shifted gears, and are exploring whether something like qemu +
> kvm would be a sufficient alternate.
What's the plan for automated MacOSX testing? I hear 10.7
supports running in a
Yeah, I agree there is something odd happening with this function.
It clearly wants a pointer to a pointer, and then graphedit and all the
sample code I see online frees the inner pointer but never the outer
pointer.
So I cannot alloc that outer pointer of we get a leak. It does not help
t
On Friday, February 03, 2012 2:43:57 PM Dmitry Timoshkov wrote:
> Aric Stewart wrote:
> > -REGFILTER2 *prf2;
> > +static REGFILTER2 *prf2;
>
> What's the point of this change?
It returns a pointer to the pointer, so the variable needs to remain valid
after the function exits. The code d
