2009/4/21 Paul Vriens :
> Reece Dunn wrote:
>>
>> 2009/4/21 Jeremy White :
Sometimes "no feedback" means that you just dont know - is there
something wrong? Or maybe your patch wos not understood correctly? Or
there are doubts that what you did is right? Or what? It would be
>>>
2009/4/21 Paul Vriens :
> http://winehq.org/wwn/353#News:%20WineConf%202008
The best point: "Are the planets aligned in just the right way and
none of the above reject? Yes : ACCEPT". I guess there were some
problems with this point yesterday :)
--
Igor
Reece Dunn wrote:
2009/4/21 Jeremy White :
Sometimes "no feedback" means that you just dont know - is there
something wrong? Or maybe your patch wos not understood correctly? Or
there are doubts that what you did is right? Or what? It would be
better to have feedback like "are you serious?" than
2009/4/21 Jeremy White :
>> Sometimes "no feedback" means that you just dont know - is there
>> something wrong? Or maybe your patch wos not understood correctly? Or
>> there are doubts that what you did is right? Or what? It would be
>> better to have feedback like "are you serious?" than nothing
> Sometimes "no feedback" means that you just dont know - is there
> something wrong? Or maybe your patch wos not understood correctly? Or
> there are doubts that what you did is right? Or what? It would be
> better to have feedback like "are you serious?" than nothing at all :)
I've tried to upda
On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 2:44 AM, Igor Tarasov wrote:
> Hi!
>
> The reason of why I write this to you is simple: my patches have stuck
> again and I don't know what to do. But since this happening not with
> me only and not this happens regularly, I have thought about looking
> at the problem a bit
Hi!
The reason of why I write this to you is simple: my patches have stuck
again and I don't know what to do. But since this happening not with
me only and not this happens regularly, I have thought about looking
at the problem a bit wider.
Is there any code review system for patches that are sen
On 5/7/07, Bernard Ladenthin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hello,
sorry about the patch before, it was the false one.
This one is the right.
Your first patch was already committed, so you might want to send in
another patch fixing the mistake.
--
James Hawkins
On 30.12.2006 18:54, Marcus Meissner wrote:
>> +/***
>> + * OleIconToCursor (OLEAUT32.415)
>> + */
>> +HCURSOR WINAPI OleIconToCursor( HINSTANCE hinstExe, HICON hIcon)
>> +{
>> +FIXME("(%p,%p), (olepro32.dll), part
On Sat, Dec 30, 2006 at 04:49:27AM +0100, Bernard Ladenthin wrote:
> Hello,
> in the attachment is a small patch for the OleIconToCursor function.
> The function works with this. I hope i can help with this and get a
> response mail that this mail have received. I haven't any experiences
> with
> I haven't looked at the patch, but hey, what about run-time detecting of
> what exactly WM (and maybe its version) is running?
>
> Sounds like refactoring WM-dependent code into some WM driver, in a vein
> of some Sound-Output driver, idea of which was given by Eric Pouech, I
> believe.
How many
* On Wed, 12 Oct 2005, Stefan [iso-8859-1] D�singer wrote:
>
> > http://www.winehq.org/hypermail/wine-patches/2005/03/att-0504/01-x11drv.diff
>
> I think this patch is incorrect, it fixes some apps, but it breaks
> others
>
> One suggestion was to fix non-managed windows instead, but according
> Hi Stefan, did you ever get any comment on this patch,
> as why it hasn't been committed??
>
> http://www.winehq.org/hypermail/wine-patches/2005/03/att-0504/01-x11drv.dif
>f
>
> It seems as if it fixes quite a few bugs (e.g. Steam)
> . Was it ever discussed further? Regards Louis
No, it was not d
13 matches
Mail list logo
