Hans Leidekker writes:
> ---
> programs/uninstaller/main.c | 23 +++
> 1 files changed, 19 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
Note that appwiz.cpl will need the same change (of course uninstaller
should really be calling appwiz.cpl in the first place).
--
Alexandre
Forgot to remove the "[PATCH 2/2]". There is no dependency for this patch.
bye
michael
Michael Stefaniuc wrote:
> Translation by Radek Vokal.
> ---
> programs/uninstaller/Cs.rc |9 -
> 1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> diff
On Dec 2, 2007 9:07 PM, Aric Stewart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> ---
> programs/uninstaller/main.c | 34 +++---
> 1 files changed, 23 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
>
I'm not saying that this patch shouldn't be accepted, but I want
the bug # in
your patch email with each try, and just to submit one patch with the
proper spacing. And if you still don't see it committed, I would try to
get in touch with Alexandre and see if he has specific comments.
As far as I can tell, there aren't any unit/conformance tests for the
uninstaller program (or even anything in the programs folder period???)
so I wouldn't think that should hold up its adoption...
Misha
On 6/14/07, Misha Koshelev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Actually that brings up a good point, does anything ever get written to
Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion in HKEY_CURRENT_USER in windows? I
have no such
key on my (rather plain) XP install, and from what I can tell wine MSI never
wr
> > week or so, maybe longer) I would either get in touch with the list
> > again or try to get in touch with Alexandre to see if he has any
> > specific comments.
> >
> > Hope that helps.
> >
> > Misha
> Also, there are no changes to tests that show that
Also, there are no changes to tests that show that the uninstaller
changes are adding/correcting behavior so it matches windows. Unit
tests would make the change more compelling.
Chris
On 6/14/07, Misha Koshelev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
First of all, of course I am not Alexandre.
First of all, of course I am not Alexandre.
But I have to say I think I agree with James on this, with regards to
submitting just one patch with the correct spacing. I can see how seeing
one patch without any spacing changes keeps the diff very simple (I am
assuming this is why you submitted your
It's been a while since I brought anything up on this, so I figured
I'd ask what was wrong with the last set of patches I sent.. The
patches are at [1] and [2], the discussion generated by them are at
[3], [4], [5], and [6]...
Summary, I did everything I was told in private by a developer (who
i
On 6/1/07, Christoph Frick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
please excuse my bold mail on top of plain ignorance of the windows api
- but i would consider finding a key in either the user or the global
branch of the registry a task that many developers had to face (even in
wine) and i bet there is an A
On Fri, Jun 01, 2007 at 01:28:36PM -0500, Tom Spear wrote:
> root is used in more than just FetchUninstallInformation It is
> used in UninstallProgram. So unless I declare root as a global
> variable, it would not be accessible by UninstallProgram, and would
> therefore fail to compile. Als
On 6/1/07, James Hawkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 6/1/07, Tom Spear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Here is part 2 of try 2. Just cleans up the indentation of my changes
> in the previous patch in this series.
>
I think you misunderstood what Dan meant about indentation changes.
You shouldn't
my own tree. Oh and its onl;y a
> 2-parter
>
> This will make wine's programs/uninstaller look thru not only
> HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE for uninstall entries, but also HKEY_CURRENT_USER.
>
+/* Loop thru HKCU first, then thru HKLM */
+for (iRootKey=0;
my own tree. Oh and its onl;y a
> 2-parter
>
> This will make wine's programs/uninstaller look thru not only
> HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE for uninstall entries, but also HKEY_CURRENT_USER.
>
+/* Loop thru HKCU first, then thru HKLM */
+for (iRootKey=0; iRootKey
It was rec
On 6/1/07, Tom Spear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Here is part 2 of try 2. Just cleans up the indentation of my changes
in the previous patch in this series.
I think you misunderstood what Dan meant about indentation changes.
You shouldn't have a patch that doesn't properly indent if you add a
;s programs/uninstaller look thru not only
HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE for uninstall entries, but also HKEY_CURRENT_USER.
+/* Loop thru HKCU first, then thru HKLM */
+for (iRootKey=0; iRootKey
;s programs/uninstaller look thru not only
HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE for uninstall entries, but also HKEY_CURRENT_USER.
+/* Loop thru HKCU first, then thru HKLM */
+for (iRootKey=0; iRootKey
23/07, Tom Spear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
This patch shortens the length of some lines in
FetchUninstallInformation, as suggested by Peter Beutner
--
Thanks
Tom
--
Thanks
Tom
0002-uninstaller-shorten-variable-and-attribute-names-fo.patch
Description: Binary data
"Tom Spear" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 5/10/07, James Hawkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Yes, you should make a new define. MAX_STRING_LEN is the maximum
length for a string from the resource file, which is totally unrelated
to the limit for the length of a subkey name.
Should the new defi
On 5/10/07, James Hawkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Yes, you should make a new define. MAX_STRING_LEN is the maximum
length for a string from the resource file, which is totally unrelated
to the limit for the length of a subkey name.
Should the new define be put in resource.h, main.c, or somew
On 5/10/07, Tom Spear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
MAX_STRING_LEN is defined in resource.h at 255. According to
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms724872.aspx the limit for
the length of a subkey name is 255.
>> Please let me know if I should make a new define instead of using
MAX_STRING_
On 5/8/07, Dan Hipschman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I'm not sure what version of C wine is strictly trying to conform to,
but it's usually best to go with the lowest common denominator. This is
not C89. The const keyword doesn't actually make the variable constant
(I know it's not the greatest
On Tue, May 08, 2007 at 11:19:16AM -0500, Tom Spear wrote:
> static const DWORD MAXSUBKEYNAMELEN = 255;
> WCHAR subKeyName[MAXSUBKEYNAMELEN + 1];
I'm not sure what version of C wine is strictly trying to conform to,
but it's usually best to go with the lowest common denominator. This is
not C89.
Scan HKCU for uninstall entries.
Separated out the trace fix, moved the HeapAlloc for entries outside
the for loop, realigned the 2nd line of code for a trace.
This patch obsoletes all previous ones.
--
Thanks
Tom
Check out this new 3D Instant Messenger called IMVU. It's the best I
have seen
On 4/25/07, Robert Shearman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
What happens if you cancel the uninstall? Won't the uninstaller remove
the entry with the program still installed?
That is true too. I was originally thinking along the lines of
checking the exit status of the uninstaller, but
Tom Spear wrote:
However, on that same note, I think we should, since this uninstaller
is not designed to mimic Windows' Add/Remove Programs, catch when a
program's uninstaller does not remove it's uninstall entry from the
registry, after the process exits, and go ahead and r
On 4/25/07, Tom Spear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I assume, then, that you have since fixed it? If not, I'd like to take a stab.
Someone fixed it a while back. I don't know what the cause of the
original bug was. When your done with your testing if you don't mind
and have MSVC or a mingw cross-
On 4/25/07, Frank Richter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
So a user starts the uninstall app but doesn't see a dialog... and
probably thinks it's a bug. On the other hand, just showing a dialog
with an empty list makes it clear that there's nothing to uninstall and
will probably not produce false bug
On 4/25/07, Steven Edwards <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi Tom,
I've watched your discussions for a while and have been meaning to
comment but have been super busy. The uninstaller was one of the first
things I looked at when getting in to wine development and it confused
me to no e
On 25.04.2007 19:58, Steven Edwards wrote:
>> Why do we show a dialog if there are no uninstall entries found in the
>> registry? Windows does not do that, and I think we shouldn't either.
>
> I agree.
So a user starts the uninstall app but doesn't see a dialog... and
probably thinks it's a bug.
Hi Tom,
I've watched your discussions for a while and have been meaning to
comment but have been super busy. The uninstaller was one of the first
things I looked at when getting in to wine development and it confused
me to no end due to a bug that only showed up when running it under
wi
Why do we show a dialog if there are no uninstall entries found in the
registry? Windows does not do that, and I think we shouldn't either.
However, on that same note, I think we should, since this uninstaller
is not designed to mimic Windows' Add/Remove Programs, catch when a
Scan HKCU for uninstall entries.
Separated out the trace fix, moved the HeapAlloc for entries outside
the for loop, realigned the 2nd line of code for a trace.
This patch obsoletes all previous ones.
--
Thanks
Tom
Check out this new 3D Instant Messenger called IMVU. It's the best I
have seen
On 4/25/07, Peter Beutner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Tom Spear schrieb:
Imo it's more common to use all uppercase names only for macros.
And i think it is mostly done that way in wine.
In fact you have to look quite hard to find an all uppercase variable name ;)
I agree, which is why I had it wi
Tom Spear schrieb:
> On 4/24/07, James Hawkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On 4/24/07, Tom Spear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > This patch makes the wine uninstaller check HKCU for uninstall entries
>> > in addition to HKLM.
>> >
>>
On 4/24/07, James Hawkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 4/24/07, Tom Spear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> This patch makes the wine uninstaller check HKCU for uninstall entries
> in addition to HKLM.
>
+const int numrootkeys = 2;
+static const DWORD maxSubkeyNameLen = 255;
c
On 4/24/07, Tom Spear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
This patch makes the wine uninstaller check HKCU for uninstall entries
in addition to HKLM.
+const int numrootkeys = 2;
+static const DWORD maxSubkeyNameLen = 255;
const variables should be all uppercase to differentiate them from
non
t
turns out that the uninstaller I was using removes the local machine
uninstall entry on its own. So I started futzing with the code some
to try to figure a way to get the root key to be properly passed to
UninstallProgram. The only thing I can come up with is some form of
using entries[sel].key.
With James' help, I managed to get the uninstaller patch done up
right, however, I am running into a small problem.
The way I had originally done the array at the top of
FetchUninstallInformation was not correct, however it allowed for
proper functionality.
HKEY hkeyroot[numrootkeys];
hke
I rewrote the patch based on your suggestions, and I'm having a little
difficulty with certain things. I did a little more testing, and it
turns out that the uninstaller I was using removes the local machine
uninstall entry on its own. So I started futzing with the code some
to try to fig
On 4/19/07, Tom Spear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Try applying the patch before you comment on it. See below..
I read all your reply comments, and nothing you said leads me to
believe that I need to apply this patch to review it.
On 4/19/07, James Hawkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 4/19
Try applying the patch before you comment on it. See below..
On 4/19/07, James Hawkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 4/19/07, Tom Spear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Apparently the last patch had multiple patches in the file because I
> didnt delete it before creating the new one..
>
> So here w
On 4/19/07, Tom Spear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Apparently the last patch had multiple patches in the file because I
didnt delete it before creating the new one..
So here we go again.
Check HKCU as well as HKLM for uninstall entries, using a for loop
@@ -69,7 +69,7 @@
/**
* Used to output
Oops, here it is lol.
Tom
On 4/18/07, Steven Edwards <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 4/18/07, Tom Spear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Comments, questions, feel free.
Please resend with the attachment.
--
Steven Edwards
"There is one thing stronger than all the armies in the world, and
that is a
Submitting for approval to here before I send to wine-patches
This pretty much changes most of the functions in the uninstaller to
handle arrays so that we can actually handle scanning HKCU as well as
HKLM.
In my tests, this did not break anything, and allows entries listed in
uninstall for
James Liggett wrote:
> On Sun, 2007-02-25 at 20:29 -0800, Scott Ritchie wrote:
>> As it is, most people don't even know this handy uninstaller applet
>> exists. So let's fix that.
> Good idea. And while we're at it, why not one for winecfg too?
>
>
On Sun, 2007-02-25 at 20:29 -0800, Scott Ritchie wrote:
> As it is, most people don't even know this handy uninstaller applet
> exists. So let's fix that.
Good idea. And while we're at it, why not one for winecfg too?
James
As it is, most people don't even know this handy uninstaller applet
exists. So let's fix that.
Thanks,
Scott Ritchie
Michael Stefaniuc <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I wonder if we shouldn't just fix wrc to cope with
> #pragma code_page(65001) /* UTF-8 */
> and use that once and for all. UTF-8 is now the default on more and more
> distributions and "errors" like above will keep creeping in.
We probably sho
On Tue, 9 Jan 2007, Michael Stefaniuc wrote:
> Francois Gouget wrote:
> > ---
> > Resubmitting with the proper encoding this time, with thanks to Frank
> > Richter. I also switched SUBLANG_PORTUGUESE_PORTUGAL to the more
> > standard SUBLANG_PORTUGUESE to match all the other resource files.
> Ac
michael
>
> programs/uninstaller/Pt.rc | 21 +++--
> 1 files changed, 19 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/programs/uninstaller/Pt.rc b/programs/uninstaller/Pt.rc
> index 5797fb1..0f8ea11 100644
> --- a/programs/uninstaller/Pt.rc
> +++ b/p
Frank Richter wrote:
> On 08.01.2007 11:49, Francois Gouget wrote:
>
>>+CAPTION "Desinstalador de Aplicações Wine"
>
>
> That's UTF-8... Is that correct? I though Portugese resources should be
> in cp1252.
I wonder if we shouldn't just fix wrc to cope with
#pragma code_page(65001) /* U
On 08.01.2007 11:49, Francois Gouget wrote:
> +CAPTION "Desinstalador de Aplicações Wine"
That's UTF-8... Is that correct? I though Portugese resources should be
in cp1252.
-f.r.
Jonathan Ernst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hello,
>
> I noticed Alexandre committed patch #1/3 of the new uninstaller; thanks for
> that.
> Could you please tell me why #2 (find-as-you-type) and #3
> (internationalization) stayed out ?
They don't apply clean
Hello,
I noticed Alexandre committed patch #1/3 of the new uninstaller; thanks for
that.
Could you please tell me why #2 (find-as-you-type) and #3
(internationalization) stayed out ?
Thanks a lot for your help.
Jonathan
signature.asc
Description: Ceci est une partie de message =?ISO-8859-1?Q
Jonathan Ernst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> +#include "resource.h"
> +#include "En.rc"
The new resource.h file is missing.
> -/* BINRES uninstaller.ico */
> -UNINSTALLER ICON MOVEABLE uninstaller.ico
> -/* {
> - '00 00 01 00 01 00 20 20 10 00 0
Jonathan Ernst wrote:
Here is the new uninstaller.
This is the first patch out of 3 of the new installer.
Thanks to Dmitry Timoshkov for helping me a lot with my first win32 program.
Changelog:
- use dialog instead of window
Hey Jonathan,
Your patch is still quite big. You've rewritten
P.S. Do I really have to split this new uninstaller in different patches
as nearly everything changed ?
It's up to Alexandre to decide, just send your work to wine-patches.
I would suggest that you do split it into seperate patches. If one of
your patches causes a regression, it's
);
> +LoadStringW(hInst, IDS_UNINSTALLFAILED, sUninstallFailed,
> sizeof(sUninstallFailed));
LoadStringW takes number of WCHARs, not bytes.
Everything else seems to be good enough.
> P.S. Do I really have to split this new uninstaller in different patches
> as nearly everything
ed to find out.
It seems that CharUpperW works well.
[...]
> > Last but not least, since these changes the uninstaller crashes (very)
> > often. I have an unhandled exception when retrieving some apps from the
> > uninstall key and I don't know what cause this:
> >
>
#x27;t suggest a win32 equivalent
from the top of my head, you need to find out.
> pptr = (WCHAR *)Pattern;
There is no need for a cast here.
>
> while (toupper(*sptr) == toupper(*pptr))
same as above.
> Last but not least, since these changes the uninstaller c
"Jonathan Ernst" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I tried to fix every char->WCHAR I though was worth it; please have a
> second look at it.
>
> The problem now with unicode is that when I try to strstr my token with
> the element of the list (entries[i].descr) it works only with the first
> letter (
Jonathan Ernst wrote:
Additionally, there's no need to change the name of main.c to
uninstaller.c, that will just make it harder to see what has changed
between versions.
I thought it would be more homogeneous as taskmanager, winecfg where
using .c files and that most of this file was rewritten
Le jeudi 03 mars 2005 Ã 21:51 +0900, Mike McCormack a Ãcrit :
> Hi Jonathan,
>
> You'll have more success getting this applied if you send each step as a
> seperate patch. I suggest starting by sending a single patch that
> converts the uninstaller to use a dialog instead
Jonathan Ernst wrote:
Here is the new uninstaller.
I'll be away all this week so I send it already as it works well here
(no regressions found) and has already some more features than the
current one (so Iguess it can be safely committed, but I might be wrong
of course).
With some help I&
"Jonathan Ernst" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> With some help I'll be able to improve it (more unicodification, etc.)
> when I'll come back.
You can't really convert to unicode partially, you have to do it in one go.
That not only will simplify things a lot, but also will save you a lot of time.
Here is a new version.
I'm thinking to send it as is to wine-patches if nobody complains before
tonight (tomorrow I'll be leaving for one week).
Thanks everyone for your help.
Changelog:
- new uninstaller
- "find as you type" search
- use dialog instead of window
- internati
"Jonathan Ernst" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm thinking to send it as is to wine-patches if nobody complains before
> tonight (tomorrow I'll be leaving for one week).
First of all thanks for your efforts. Since this is your first Win32 app
I personally understand all the difficulties you faced
"Jonathan Ernst" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > It's better to avoid using string tables, since now you have converted
> > code to use dialog box instead.
>
> How can I do it for messageboxes ? Is there a way to define them in the
> resource files or do I have to make a dialog instead of messageb
Le samedi 26 fÃvrier 2005 Ã 12:09 +0800, Dmitry Timoshkov a Ãcrit :
[...]
> > 3) Stringtables
> > a)Is there a way to load localized strings without having to guess
> > beforehand the size of the string in each language ?
> > b)Is there a way to not call LoadString for each string ?
> > c)Where is
Le samedi 26 fÃvrier 2005 Ã 09:49 +0900, Mike McCormack a Ãcrit :
[...]
> Cool. Some comments:
>
> The dialog box procedure should not handle WM_PAINT or WM_CLOSE, so just
> delete those cases from the switch statement.
>
Ok I did it, but the listbox should be updated when the user ask to
unins
Jonathan Ernst wrote:
Ok I did it, but the listbox should be updated when the user ask to
uninstall someting OR the user changes the filter string ? How can I do
that using only WM_INITDIALOG ?
You can get notifications from the controls that things change. For
example, the edit control will send
"Jonathan Ernst" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 1) Strange problem with UpdateWindow
> uninstaller.c, line 264
> I implemented a search/filter field and I want to repaint the window
> after each input in the EDITTEXT control. However, when I call
> UpdateWindow on this line, the value returned is 1
"Ivan Leo Puoti" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Jonathan Ernst wrote:
> > 4) Please tell me if you see things that are bad in the attached code,
> > so that I'll fix it before submitting a patch.
>
> I think you probably want to pass a valid HINSTANCE to DialogBox, to do this
> you should
> start
Jonathan Ernst wrote:
As requested, I'm trying to make a new uninstaller using a dialog
instead of a window.
It's my first windows program and I have something working but there are
still some issues.
If someone could help with some of the following problems, I'd be very
thanfu
Jonathan Ernst wrote:
4) Please tell me if you see things that are bad in the attached code,
so that I'll fix it before submitting a patch.
I think you probably want to pass a valid HINSTANCE to DialogBox, to do
this you should
start your program with WinMain() instead of main().
Ivan.
As requested, I'm trying to make a new uninstaller using a dialog
instead of a window.
It's my first windows program and I have something working but there are
still some issues.
If someone could help with some of the following problems, I'd be very
thanfull.
1) Stran
"Jonathan Ernst" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Next I'll change the window to a dialog if I can.
Thanks.
> -wc.lpszClassName = appname;
> +wc.lpszClassName = sAppname;
>
> if (!RegisterClass(&wc)) exit(1);
> -hWnd = CreateWin
"Jonathan Ernst" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> This time I didn't translate the WINE_ERR messages and translated another
> messagebox.
It would be better to not touch WINE_ERR lines at all then.
> Changelog:
> - localization of uninstaller
> +/* We l
"Jonathan Ernst" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Changelog:
> - localization of uninstaller
You should not localize WINE_ERR messages, encoding of strings
might be incompatible in Wine and underlying system.
Also, is it possible to use normal dialog for uninstaller'
On Thu, Dec 09, 2004 at 08:08:00AM -0600, Alexandre Julliard wrote:
> Log message:
> Janitorial: C booleans must not be compared against TRUE.
Thank you!
--
Dimi.
Mike McCormack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> ChangeLog:
> * handle quoting on the command line in uninstaller
Is there any reason we can't use argv[] here instead?
--
Alexandre Julliard
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sat, 4 Oct 2003, Dimitrie O. Paun wrote:
> On October 3, 2003 10:56 pm, Pavel Roskin wrote:
> > Everything if fine. I put the latest mkwine here
> > http://www.red-bean.com/~proski/wine/
>
> Very nice indeed -- I really hope that we can eventually
> get our Makefiles in a state where this scri
On Sat, 4 Oct 2003, Dimitrie O. Paun wrote:
> On October 3, 2003 10:56 pm, Pavel Roskin wrote:
> > Everything if fine. I put the latest mkwine here
> > http://www.red-bean.com/~proski/wine/
>
> Very nice indeed -- I really hope that we can eventually
> get our Makefiles in a state where this scri
Yes. Would be intersting to get these to compile on Windows as
well, by doing something reasonable where we need Wine stuff.
Maybe we at least get them to build, if not run (avitools, winedbg,
wineconsole should also be able to run on Windows).
as a target:
+ winedbg should be compilable on windows
On October 3, 2003 10:56 pm, Pavel Roskin wrote:
> Everything if fine. I put the latest mkwine here
> http://www.red-bean.com/~proski/wine/
Very nice indeed -- I really hope that we can eventually
get our Makefiles in a state where this script is not
needed anymore. BTW, since you've studied a bi
On Fri, 3 Oct 2003, Dimitrie O. Paun wrote:
> On Fri, 3 Oct 2003, Pavel Roskin wrote:
>
> > That's great news! Hopefully I'll be able to exclude wrc from the script
> > to compile Wine programs on Windows. The new patch goes to wine-patches.
>
> You should be able to use windres/rc instead of wr
On Fri, 3 Oct 2003, Pavel Roskin wrote:
> That's great news! Hopefully I'll be able to exclude wrc from the script
> to compile Wine programs on Windows. The new patch goes to wine-patches.
You should be able to use windres/rc instead of wrc on Windows now.
Please let us know if that is still n
On Fri, 3 Oct 2003, Dimitrie O. Paun wrote:
> On Fri, 3 Oct 2003, Pavel Roskin wrote:
>
> > I drew an icon more appropriate for the uninstaller. Also, the bin2res
> > tag has been added to make it easier to replace of the icon later.
>
> Please see the latest changes rel
Hi,
On Fri, Oct 03, 2003 at 04:55:17PM -0400, Pavel Roskin wrote:
> Hello!
>
> programs/uninstaller uses the icon from WineMine. I'm not an artist, but
> I drew an icon more appropriate for the uninstaller. Also, the bin2res
> tag has been added to make it easier to repla
On Fri, 3 Oct 2003, Pavel Roskin wrote:
> I drew an icon more appropriate for the uninstaller. Also, the bin2res
> tag has been added to make it easier to replace of the icon later.
Please see the latest changes relating to the BINRES tags --> the resources
are commented out, and we
Philipp Wollermann wrote:
Why not fix HeapReAlloc first and see which apps crash? ;-)
it's not a matter of knowing which apps break, but which APIs would break...
Anyway, fixing this seems to be a task I could do, so, if someone could give
me instructions on how to do it ...
cd wine
find . -name
> > HeapReAlloc() would crash on Windows 2000 is the original pointer is
> > NULL. This causes the Andreas Mohr's uninstaller to crash.
>
> there's lot of code which relies on HeapReAlloc would allocate a block
> if the block to reallocate is NULL (as realloc does in stdl
Pavel Roskin wrote:
Hello!
HeapReAlloc() would crash on Windows 2000 is the original pointer is NULL.
This causes the Andreas Mohr's uninstaller to crash.
there's lot of code which relies on HeapReAlloc would allocate a block
if the block to reallocate is NULL (as realloc does in std
94 matches
Mail list logo
