, what other windows is there? Wine dsound works fine under windows.
I was wondering if you meant Wine running as Windows XP. Thanks for
the clarification.
> >> It is the least of all evils as far as I could see. It's either
> >> this or adding RegDeleteTree to libwine, unless
e dsound dll work in windows xp and older versions of windows
>> again.
>>
> By this, do you mean running the Wine dsound.dll on _native_ Windows?
>
Yes, what other windows is there? Wine dsound works fine under windows.
>> It is the least of all evils as far as
indows
> again.
By this, do you mean running the Wine dsound.dll on _native_ Windows?
> It is the least of all evils as far as I could see. It's either
> this or adding RegDeleteTree to libwine, unless someone has a third option.
If the intent is to get this working on native, add
Maarten Lankhorst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I'm open for suggestions though, since I really can't come up with any
> good ways to make sure wine dlls will keep working for older versions of
> windows.
I don't think we want to add more infrastructure for that regsvr.c
stuff. It should really b
Now that most functions get replaced with RegDeleteTree, I'm wondering
if it is possible to link against that function statically for
mingw/msvc dlls, so wine dlls can be still be used on win9x and windows
nt and win2k.
The problem is I don't know what the best solution would be to mak
Am Friday 25 May 2007 18:41 schrieb James Hawkins:
> On 5/25/07, Stefan Leichter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Am Friday 25 May 2007 00:48 schrieb Juan Lang:
> > > Hi Stefan,
> > >
> > > +/* Find how many subkeys there are */
> > >
> > > This comment is incorrect.
> > >
> > > You have also rei
On 5/25/07, Stefan Leichter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Am Friday 25 May 2007 00:48 schrieb Juan Lang:
> Hi Stefan,
>
> +/* Find how many subkeys there are */
>
> This comment is incorrect.
>
> You have also reintroduced tabs in this patch - please don't do that.
> --Juan
ChangeLog
---
Hi Stefan,
+/* Find how many subkeys there are */
This comment is incorrect.
You have also reintroduced tabs in this patch - please don't do that.
--Juan
Pinpoint
customers who are looking for what
Stefan Leichter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> +/* Recursively delete all the subkeys */
> +for (i = 0; i < dwKeyCount; i++) {
> +dwSize = dwMaxLen;
> +ret = RegEnumKeyExW(hSubKey, 0, lpszName, &dwSize, NULL,
> + NULL, NULL, NULL);
There's no reason to u
Stefan Leichter a écrit :
Am Tuesday 22 May 2007 18:05 schrieb Laurent Vromman:
There is a few tabs in the file :
Here (line 92), first blank character :
+ &dwValCount, NULL, NULL, NULL, NULL);
Here (line 103)
+ }
Laurent
Hello Laurent,
thank you for t
Am Tuesday 22 May 2007 18:05 schrieb Laurent Vromman:
> There is a few tabs in the file :
>
> Here (line 92), first blank character :
> + &dwValCount, NULL, NULL, NULL, NULL);
>
> Here (line 103)
> + }
>
> Laurent
>
Hello Laurent,
thank you for the comment. How did you sp
There is a few tabs in the file :
Here (line 92), first blank character :
+ &dwValCount, NULL, NULL, NULL, NULL);
Here (line 103)
+ }
Laurent
> Hello,
>
> any comment on the current version of this patch?
>
> ChangeLog
> -
> added implementation
Hi Stefan,
+if (!lpszName) {
+ret = ERROR_NOT_ENOUGH_MEMORY;
+ goto cleanup;
+}
Now you're mixing tabs and spaces (here and elsewhere.) Please honor the
existing formatting.
--Juan
___
Hi Stefan,
+if (ret) return ret;
+
+ret = RegDeleteTreeW(hSubKey, lpszName);
+if (ret) return ret;
you've followed James's advice, but now you leak hSubKey (when it isn't
hKey) and lpszName (when it isn't szNameBuf.) A goto would be better.
--Juan
_
On 5/17/07, Stefan Leichter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hello,
is anything wrong with this patch?
+#if (_WIN32_WINNT >= 0x0600)
+LONGWINAPI RegDeleteTreeA(HKEY,LPCSTR);
+LONGWINAPI RegDeleteTreeW(HKEY,LPCWSTR);
+#define RegDeleteTree WINELIB_NAME_AW(RegDeleteTree
Am Wednesday 25 April 2007 23:00 schrieb Robert Shearman:
> Stefan Leichter wrote:
> > Am Thursday 19 April 2007 12:14 schrieb Alexandre Julliard:
> >> Stefan Leichter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >>> + } else {
> >>> +if (!ret)
> >>> + ret = RegSetValueW(hSubKey, NULL, REG_SZ,
Stefan Leichter wrote:
Am Thursday 19 April 2007 12:14 schrieb Alexandre Julliard:
Stefan Leichter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
+ } else {
+if (!ret)
+ ret = RegSetValueW(hSubKey, NULL, REG_SZ, emptyW, 0);
The function is supposed to delete the ke
Stefan Leichter wrote:
Am Saturday 21 April 2007 20:13 schrieb Paul Vriens:
Hi Stefan
the results:
registry.c:576:test_query_value_ex: type set to: 0x0022fe78
registry.c:1163: Test failed: Expected ERROR_SUCCESS, got 6
registry: 293 tests executed (0 marked as todo, 1 failure), 0 skipped.
Tha
Am Saturday 21 April 2007 20:13 schrieb Paul Vriens:
>Hi Stefan
>
>the results:
>
>registry.c:576:test_query_value_ex: type set to: 0x0022fe78
>registry.c:1163: Test failed: Expected ERROR_SUCCESS, got 6
>registry: 293 tests executed (0 marked as todo, 1 failure), 0 skipped.
>
>That's because you'r
Stefan Leichter wrote:
Am Thursday 19 April 2007 12:14 schrieb Alexandre Julliard:
Stefan Leichter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
+/* Recursively delete all the subkeys */
+for (i = 0; i < dwKeyCount && !ret; i++) {
+dwSize = dwMaxSubkeyLen;
+
Am Friday 20 April 2007 05:54 schrieb Tom Spear:
> I actually have a Vista Home Basic install on a laptop that I can
> check testcases on, at least for right now. I'm thinking of going out
> and getting a licensed copy of xp for it (linux isn't viable for it
> because it isnt my laptop and its bei
On 4/19/07, Stefan Leichter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Am Thursday 19 April 2007 12:14 schrieb Alexandre Julliard:
> Stefan Leichter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > +/* Recursively delete all the subkeys */
> > +for (i = 0; i < dwKeyCount && !ret; i++) {
> > +
I actually have a Vista Home Basic install on a laptop that I can
check testcases on, at least for right now. I'm thinking of going out
and getting a licensed copy of xp for it (linux isn't viable for it
because it isnt my laptop and its being used as the main pc for
business transactions, so it
Am Thursday 19 April 2007 12:14 schrieb Alexandre Julliard:
> Stefan Leichter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > +/* Recursively delete all the subkeys */
> > +for (i = 0; i < dwKeyCount && !ret; i++) {
> > +dwSize = dwMaxSubkeyLen;
> > +
Stefan Leichter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> +/* Recursively delete all the subkeys */
> +for (i = 0; i < dwKeyCount && !ret; i++) {
> +dwSize = dwMaxSubkeyLen;
> +ret = RegEnumKeyExW(hSubKey, i, lpszName, &dwSize, NULL,
> +
Paul Vriens schrieb:
Stefan Leichter wrote:
ChangeLog
--
added implementation of RegDeleteTreeA/W
--- ../wine-git/dlls/advapi32/advapi32.spec2006-10-03
10:52:50.0 +0200
+++ dlls/advapi32/adv
Stefan Leichter wrote:
ChangeLog
--
added implementation of RegDeleteTreeA/W
--- ../wine-git/dlls/advapi32/advapi32.spec 2006-10-03 10:52:50.0
+0200
+++ dlls/advapi32/advapi32.spec 2007-04
On So, 2007-04-15 at 10:02 +0200, Stefan Leichter wrote:
I did not test the code, but ...
> +LONG WINAPI RegDeleteTreeW(HKEY hKey, LPCWSTR lpszSubKey)
> +{
> +if (!ret)
> + ret = RegSetValueA(hSubKey, NULL, REG_SZ, "", 0);
Please do not call an ANSI-Function in an UNI
p a little
>
> --Brad DeMorrow
>
>
> On 9/28/06, Frank Richter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 28.09.2006 15:26, Paul Vriens wrote:
> > I'll have a few hours tomorrow and will have a look. The
> cleanest
> > solution f
303.html
>>> ([ros-svn] [weiden] 17572: implemented RegDeleteTree() (untested!))
>>> mentions this, and nothing more:
>>> --- CUT ---
>>> implemented RegDeleteTree() (untested!)
>>>
>>> Updated files:
>>> trunk/reactos/lib/advapi32/reg/reg.c
>
James Hawkins wrote:
> On 10/10/06, Segin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >
>> Some Google searching provides that there may or may not be an
>> implementation.
>>
>> http://www.reactos.org/pipermail/ros-svn/2005-August/005303.html
>> ([ros-svn] [weid
On 10/10/06, Segin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
Some Google searching provides that there may or may not be an
implementation.
http://www.reactos.org/pipermail/ros-svn/2005-August/005303.html
([ros-svn] [weiden] 17572: implemented RegDeleteTree() (untested!))
mentions this, and not
Morrow
>
>
> On 9/28/06, Frank Richter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> On 28.09.2006 15:26, Paul Vriens wrote:
>> > I'll have a few hours tomorrow and will have a look. The cleanest
>> > solution for now seems to create RegDeleteTree[A|W] in advapi
.09.2006 15:26, Paul Vriens wrote:> I'll have a few hours tomorrow and will have a look. The cleanest> solution for now seems to create RegDeleteTree[A|W] in advapi32 and use> that wherever possible (unless we find that it forwards to shlwapi).
> Most DLL's already import adva
inecfg.
>
> Vitaliy.
>
Do you mean winecfg has it's implementation, or winecfg has the
solution?
I had another look, apparently shlwapi has SHDeleteKey[A|W]. It does the
same thing.
I'll have a few hours tomorrow and will have a look. The cleanest
solution for now seems to crea
On 28.09.2006 15:26, Paul Vriens wrote:
> I'll have a few hours tomorrow and will have a look. The cleanest
> solution for now seems to create RegDeleteTree[A|W] in advapi32 and use
> that wherever possible (unless we find that it forwards to shlwapi).
> Most DLL's already
Paul Vriens wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I was browsing some code and found that we have several places where we
> made our own implementation of a recursive delete of registry
> keys/value.
See winecfg.
Vitaliy.
Hi,
I was browsing some code and found that we have several places where we
made our own implementation of a recursive delete of registry
keys/value.
Apparently there is an official one in Vista:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/sysinfo/base/regopenkeyex.asp
I do
38 matches
Mail list logo
