Yes, I am working on this. I won't be able to get the code off my laptop
for a few weeks :( but the upside is that I'm hoping to have it much
improved by the end of the summer.
Roger Olson wrote:
Hi All,
Not sure what the status is or even if anyone else is working on this but
here is my 2 cents
I think yes, for me it would an improvement. The only bad thing here is
my lack of the ideas on how to implement such forking.
We already do it for user.reg vs system.reg, though in this case it's
separate registry "hives". I'm not sure if we can do it on the key level.
I'm certainly not bothe
I'm not too sure it will work for wine, it was just a wild suggestion.
Debian uses it to get arround the problem of modifying certain config
files. For example, if you install the nvidia drivers, you have to
modify /etc/modules.conf. The usual way is to employ some perl or some
other magic to
On Wed, 18 Aug 2004, Izak Burger wrote:
> How about the Debian way of adding stubs to a .d directory...
>
> wine.d with lots of small easily editable .reg files. I'm sure this is
> a silly suggestion, but if you REALLY have a problem with a 5000 line
> .reg file (I sure did when I had to config
How about the Debian way of adding stubs to a .d directory...
wine.d with lots of small easily editable .reg files. I'm sure this is
a silly suggestion, but if you REALLY have a problem with a 5000 line
.reg file (I sure did when I had to configure squid.. uggh), nothing
prevents you from doing
On Tue, 17 Aug 2004, Mike Hearn wrote:
> > 256 /home/s2/.wine/config
> >4946 /home/s2/.wine/system.reg
...
> Maybe we should fork the Wine/Config branch into a separate .reg file to
> appease those who want to edit it using a text editor. That would make
> the switch from config file -> r
Right, I am forgetting about this. And the difference is in the size of
the files:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] SRPMS]$ wc -l ~/.wine/config ~/.wine/system.reg
256 /home/s2/.wine/config
4946 /home/s2/.wine/system.reg
5202 total
Text editor for the registry tweaking isn't an easy choice for me, be
(Sorry, wrong key-press)
On Tue, 17 Aug 2004, Saulius Krasuckas wrote:
> Or in a bash-awk code:
>
> #!/bin/bash
> PATH_REG=tmp.reg
> PATH_BRANCH='HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\System\CurrentControlSet\Control\Session
> Manager\Environment'
> AWK_APPEND_NPATH='{if (match($0,/^"PATH"=/)) sub(/"\r/, ";"ENVIRO
On Tue, 17 Aug 2004, Mike Hearn wrote:
> > Again, this may be need by power-win32-users, who basically can't stand
> > the GUI of "regedit". :-P
>
> By definition, Windows power users are comfortable with the registry, as
> how else did they get to be power users in the first place?
Ughm, maybe
Again, this may be need by power-win32-users, who basically can't stand
the GUI of "regedit". :-P
By definition, Windows power users are comfortable with the registry, as
how else did they get to be power users in the first place?
PS maybe an alternative for the "winecfg" may be some cmd-line opt
Sorry for being a bit unclear:
On Tue, 17 Aug 2004, Saulius Krasuckas wrote:
> On Mon, 16 Aug 2004, Alexandre Julliard wrote:
> > and if an app needs a different PATH the installer for that app will
> > change the registry itself. If users really need to change them, IMO we
> > are doing something
On Mon, 16 Aug 2004, Alexandre Julliard wrote:
> Jacek Caban <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > But PATH and temp directory are useful and can be configured this way.
> > Maby we could add this two options?
>
> I don't think they really need to be configured, at least not often
> enough to put them i
Jacek Caban <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> But PATH and temp directory are useful and can be configured this way.
> Maby we could add this two options?
I don't think they really need to be configured, at least not often
enough to put them in winecfg. There's no real reason to change the
temp direc
Alexandre Julliard wrote:
Mike Hearn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
I guess so - please send this patch to me ASAP as I was planning on
hacking winecfg a bit next week (dunno if I'll have time but ...) so it'd
be nice if I could work from latest sources.
I'm not really convinced that being able to
Mike Hearn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I guess so - please send this patch to me ASAP as I was planning on
> hacking winecfg a bit next week (dunno if I'll have time but ...) so it'd
> be nice if I could work from latest sources.
>
> I'm not really convinced that being able to configure these pa
On Sun, 01 Aug 2004 11:12:52 -0400, Chris Morgan wrote:
> Here is a patch that recreates the "Global settings" entry in the app defaults
> tab if the user removes it. It also fixes some indenting and removes a
> while() loop that was inside of another identical while().
>
> Mike, it doesn't l
I guess so - please send this patch to me ASAP as I was planning on
hacking winecfg a bit next week (dunno if I'll have time but ...) so it'd
be nice if I could work from latest sources.
I'm not really convinced that being able to configure these paths is a
useful thing but I guess if people want
> You probably want to increase the size of the drive mappings list so it
> fills the tab, currently there is just a lot of empty space at the top of
> the pane now you removed the old stuff.
I have almost ready patch. I've attached screenshot. Is it a good idea?
Thanks,
Jacek
<>
Here is a patch that recreates the "Global settings" entry in the app defaults
tab if the user removes it. It also fixes some indenting and removes a
while() loop that was inside of another identical while().
Mike, it doesn't look like I'll have time test this and I've been sitting on
it for
On Thu, 29 Jul 2004 23:19:11 -0500, Alexandre Julliard wrote:
> Log message:
> James Hawkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Under the Drives tab, remove the 'Windows Drive' section.
You probably want to increase the size of the drive mappings list so it
fills the tab, currently there is just a
20 matches
Mail list logo
