On 10/6/07, Vitaliy Margolen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Also, please consider reading the FreeNode rules. I do not beleave you have
> requested permission from each person before publishing this log. Please
> make sure that you do that now, or I will have to request FreeNode stuff to
> k-line you
Tsukasa wrote:
> Vitamin banned me today - you can see the full log here. Also I was
> about to say at the end there, if redhat automounts usb sticks.
> http://pastebin.com/mb489dc
>
> I think what really pissed him off was that I asked for help identifying
> a bug in Loki in #winehackers origi
On Wed, 3 Oct 2007, Alexandre Julliard wrote:
> This can't happen. If there's no ret instruction in the entry point
> we'll have much bigger problems than an out of range access...
Fair point, I guess you're right. How about the following patch then?
Gerald
Index: relay16.c
Vitamin banned me today - you can see the full log here. Also I was about to
say at the end there, if redhat automounts usb sticks.
http://pastebin.com/mb489dc
I think what really pissed him off was that I asked for help identifying a
bug in Loki in #winehackers originally. I asked in the user cha
haven't built wine in a while, and ran into this on Solaris 10:
actctx.c:76: error: `version' defined as wrong kind of tag
gmake[2]: *** [actctx.o] Error 1
gmake[2]: Leaving directory `/export/src/wine/100607/wine/dlls/ntdll'
gmake[1]: *** [ntdll] Error 2
gmake[1]: Leaving directory `/export/src/
Ok, here one on my wish-list:
All apps that currently fail on wine due to shdocvw/mshtml disfunctionality.
Almost all of these apps start fine using ies4linux. I did quite a lot of
testing of demo's, and many of them fail because of this (in most cases you
just end up with a white screen). Actua
On 10/6/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2680
>
>
> Roderick Colenbrander <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> changed:
>
>What|Removed |Added
>
>
Awhile ago I sent a few patches in to cleanup some HTML and CSS on
WineHQ. I didn't continue with writing more patches since it seemed
like we didn't have a clear idea of what direction we wanted to pursue.
I am more than happy to help with a rewrite or update of the site, but
as long as we hav
Jeremy White wrote:
> So, in a radical break from tradition, we're trying to
> accomplish something useful at Wineconf.
>
> Specifically, we're making 'make test' work for everyone,
> not just Alexandre.
>
> Maarten Lankhorst is maintaining a tree of all of our
> test related patches.
>
> So, fo
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=6155 also holds up quite a few
apps (some listed at http://wiki.winehq.org/IoCompletionPorts). Fixing
it would make Wine feel a lot more 1.0ish to me.
-J,
Klaus Layer wrote:
> On Saturday 06 October 2007 13:41:43 Dan Kegel wrote:
>
>> At Wineconf 2007, I
So, in a radical break from tradition, we're trying to
accomplish something useful at Wineconf.
Specifically, we're making 'make test' work for everyone,
not just Alexandre.
Maarten Lankhorst is maintaining a tree of all of our
test related patches.
So, for those that want to play, the thing to
Hi Marcus,
Marcus Meissner wrote:
> Hi,
>
> sometime we have failure cases where we
> still return S_OK.
>
> I am not sure this is a good idea.
>
NULL is a valid return value of these function, so it's fine to return
S_OK here (also you've changed non-error code paths).
Thanks,
Jacek
On 10/6/07, Jesse Allen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > http://wiki.winehq.org/WineReleaseCriteria
>
> Can find get a timeline for the feature freeze and the 1.0 release?
As the wiki page says, we hope to have a "final" list of bugs
by the end of the year. There have been some murmurings about
try
On 10/6/07, Dan Kegel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> At Wineconf 2007, I was appointed to be the guy who decides
> (with Alexandre's approval) what bugs are 1.0 bugs and what aren't.
> So I've started adjusting the "Target Release" fields on a few
> bugs in Bugzilla.
> Over the next month or so, I'd
On Saturday 06 October 2007 13:41:43 Dan Kegel wrote:
> At Wineconf 2007, I was appointed to be the guy who decides
> (with Alexandre's approval) what bugs are 1.0 bugs and what aren't.
> So I've started adjusting the "Target Release" fields on a few
> bugs in Bugzilla.
> Over the next month or so,
Here's a grep that's handy when looking at the output of 'make test':
egrep '__test|make.*ok|Backtrace'
This shows which .ok file failures and crashes occur,
and also makes it easy to see which dll's they're in.
--
Wine for Windows ISVs: http://kegel.com/wine/isv
Louis Lenders wrote:
> Maybe it's an idea to say "if a bug includes at least 5 duplicates
>(so 5 apps suffering from the same bug) it can be automatically
> boosted to the 1.0 target release". I was especially thinking of bug #7380.
> ( http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=7380 )
That's not a ba
Dan Kegel kegel.com> writes:
>
> At Wineconf 2007, I was appointed to be the guy who decides
> (with Alexandre's approval) what bugs are 1.0 bugs and what aren't.
> So I've started adjusting the "Target Release" fields on a few
> bugs in Bugzilla.
> Over the next month or so, I'd like Wine devel
Kai Blin wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> I'd like to have a wine-sspi or wine-secur32 category for bugzilla.
>
>
I can add this. Which one do you want? Also when adding this, I need a
brief description of what the component is. Just a one line summary.
Dan Kegel wrote:
> We're sorting through bugzilla fixing the target milestones
> for important bugs, and it would be useful to have a 1.1
> milestone (to go along with the existing 0.9 and 1.0 milestones).
>
No problem, it is done.
On 10/6/07, EA Durbin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > http://wiki.winehq.org/WineReleaseCriteria
>
> I still have a whole slew of older applications(about 30-40 of them) that
> won't work because of just 3 bugs.
> http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3743
> http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?i
> Date: Sat, 6 Oct 2007 04:41:43 -0700> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]> To:
> wine-devel@winehq.org> Subject: Wine 1.0 bugs, release criteria> > At
> Wineconf 2007, I was appointed to be the guy who decides> (with Alexandre's
> approval) what bugs are 1.0 bugs and what aren't.> So I've started adjusti
Hi folks,
I'd like to have a wine-sspi or wine-secur32 category for bugzilla.
Cheers,
Kai
--
Kai Blin
WorldForge developer http://www.worldforge.org/
Wine developerhttp://wiki.winehq.org/KaiBlin
Samba team member http://www.samba.org/samba/team/
--
Will code for cotton.
pgpKTB8vn
At Wineconf 2007, I was appointed to be the guy who decides
(with Alexandre's approval) what bugs are 1.0 bugs and what aren't.
So I've started adjusting the "Target Release" fields on a few
bugs in Bugzilla.
Over the next month or so, I'd like Wine developers to nominate important
bugs for 1.0 by
On Saturday 06 October 2007 04:13:18 am Huw Davies wrote:
> Nice ;-/
>
> The new Tahoma doesn't contain any TrueType hinting instructions, so there
> are several sets of bitmaps that get used at small font sizes. It's
> possible winecfg is trying to use a font size for which we don't have a
> bitm
Chris Robinson wrote:
> On Wednesday 03 October 2007 04:15:17 am Huw Davies wrote:
>> ---
>> fonts/.gitignore |1 +
>> fonts/Makefile.in |3 +-
>> fonts/tahoma.sfd |10850
>> + 3 files changed,
>> 10853 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>>
We're sorting through bugzilla fixing the target milestones
for important bugs, and it would be useful to have a 1.1
milestone (to go along with the existing 0.9 and 1.0 milestones).
Can the bugzilla admins create this, please?
Thanks,
Dan
--
Wine for Windows ISVs: http://kegel.com/wine/isv
27 matches
Mail list logo
