Re: search path redux - if office 2007 always uses a private riched20, why does wine interpose its own global one?
On Fri, Feb 27, 2009 at 8:32 PM, Dan Kegel wrote: > Hmm. So making riched20 prefer native would break apps > that use msftedit, if native riched20 but no native msftedit is present? > Yes. Although I haven't heard of this being an issue with people using winetricks. > > Does this mean that our msftedit is doing things differently than > the native one? Yes, native is like a newer version of riched20, not a wrapper like builtin msftedit. Of course this may change, since riched32 used to be a complete implementation, but was later turned into a wrapper around riched20. In order to do this the same way as native msftedit we would probably need to recompile the riched20 code using a version macro to select different behaviour for different parts of the code. This is seperate from 1.0 emulation which msftedit also allows, despite it's actually inconsistency with riched32 on it's improvements to riched20 (e.g. improvement in table implementation). However, distinguishing between different version didn't seem popular when I proposed the idea before, so I am waiting until this inconsistency actually causes problems for any applications. Either way, I don't think it would be much worse than the way things are for both dlls to prefer native. I am not opposed to any of the ideas proposed for fixing the bug (whether it is checking if it is loaded from the system32 directory, using a heuristic based on version of the dll, or having riched20 prefer native). What matters is what Julliard prefers, so I am just trying to provide any relevant knowledge.
Re: appdb issue: can't search for apps platinum on 1.0.x!
On Sat, Feb 28, 2009 at 2:50 AM, Dan Kegel wrote: > On Fri, Feb 27, 2009 at 2:30 PM, Ben Klein wrote: >> I think that properly educating new users is more valuable than >> telling them "click on this magic link that does it for you". > > That only works for most users if the things you're trying to teach > them are extremely simple and usable. Having to type anything > beyond a single simple URL - and possibly a simple package name - > is a serious roadblock. It's also a question of usefulness. What does a user gain from learning how to add a repository manually? That's part of the installation procedure. Doing it manually serves no purpose. The rest of the installation is also a magic link to a package that puts all kinds of files on your system and runs configuration scripts. Remco
Lost disc 1 of WP Office 2002 :-(
I went to the trouble of buying a copy of WordPerfect Office 2002 a while ago, and just tried installing it again - but I seem to have lost disc 1. Anyone have a copy they're not using anymore? I have disc 2 and a serial number, just no disc 1 :-(
Re: appdb issue: can't search for apps platinum on 1.0.x!
On Fri, Feb 27, 2009 at 2:30 PM, Ben Klein wrote: >> Their reply is probably "well, then do another stable release. >> Our policy is that we prefer to bundle only stable releases." > > We should at least try! From what I've seen, Ubuntu like bleeding-edge > stuff that likes to break other things, like pulseaudio. > > Maybe their problem is with the 2-week release cycle. How many > releases would there be between Ubuntu releases? 6 months, 13 releases > of Wine. Still, isn't it worth contacting the Ubuntu Wine package > maintainer to get their viewpoint? Scott, that's you, right? Can you speak to that? > Unfortunately, new users of Linux systems, particularly Debian-based > distros, are often confused by package management in general. My > brother, who really is a whiz with Windows systems, couldn't work out > how to get new software into Ubuntu. He thought that because > individual developers didn't provide binary packages, he had to > compile everything. I tried to teach him how to use synaptic, and he > said "This is stupid. It should be like MacOSX where you just download > a package and it's installed." Ubuntu tries to make this simple by putting the Add/Remove link right on the main Applications menu. New users still get tripped up by misunderstandings - see the amazing clusterf*ck at http://blogs.computerworld.com/updating_software_in_linux_three_strikes_and_youre_out I know exactly what confused him, and most users won't run into it, but hopefully Ubuntu and Linux in general can improve to handle even that kind of user. > I think that properly educating new users is more valuable than > telling them "click on this magic link that does it for you". That only works for most users if the things you're trying to teach them are extremely simple and usable. Having to type anything beyond a single simple URL - and possibly a simple package name - is a serious roadblock. I think that clicking on a single link to add the Wine repo to the package manager strikes a good balance between simplicity and explainability. - Dan
Re: appdb issue: can't search for apps platinum on 1.0.x!
On Fri, Feb 27, 2009 at 2:37 PM, Remco wrote: > On Fri, Feb 27, 2009 at 11:06 PM, Dan Kegel wrote: >> In fact, it's common practice for repos like rpmfusion.org to >> have a tiny package that just adds themselves to your software >> sources. (See http://rpmfusion.org/Configuration ) >> Scripts are right out, though. It has to be a package, >> because you can't run a script with a single mouse click. > > The WineHQ-provided .deb and .rpm packages themselves could add the > WineHQ repo as part of their installation routine. There is no need > for a tiny separate package. That's an attractive scenario, but I have run into violent objections from admins when I discuss it. They want the two operations separated out into separate packages; it's simply too surprising to have a simple package that installs an app *also* add a new repository. Now, maybe Wine's a special case, and admins won't complain about it. But I wouldn't bet money on that. - Dan
Re: search path redux - if office 2007 always uses a private riched20, why does wine interpose its own global one?
On Fri, Feb 27, 2009 at 3:02 PM, Dylan Smith wrote: >> Say, have we considered making riched20 prefer native? >> That makes the app work, too. > > A couple of things to note, in case they are relevant: > 1. msftedit currently uses the native version by default > 2. builtin msftedit will not work with native riched20, since the classes > native msftedit loads are instead loaded by builtin riched20, and msftedit > just loads riched20 Hmm. So making riched20 prefer native would break apps that use msftedit, if native riched20 but no native msftedit is present? Does this mean that our msftedit is doing things differently than the native one? - Dan
Revoking my gpg key 0x4C40A6D9 (Was: Re: mcicda: Compare a file handle with INVALID_HANDLE_VALUE instead of NULL.)
How embarrassing! Having to revoke my new (9 days old) gpg key 0x4C40A6D9. Yes, that was a big part of the passphrase for that key in the CC field ... -BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux) Comment: A revocation certificate should follow iH4EIBECAD4FAkmocts3HQJTZW50IHBhcnQgb2YgdGhlIHBhc3NwaHJhc2UgdG8g YSBwdWJsaWMgbWFpbGluZyBsaXN0LgAKCRAiLf+YTECm2emfAJ4lg1KaduK1eDw6 gASivxMpRHxZpgCeLaO+C3Vn2XVFCoH3WaxHAO5xZV0= =zhsP -END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK- /me hangs head in shame michael Michael Stefaniuc wrote: > --- > dlls/mcicda/mcicda.c |2 +- > 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/dlls/mcicda/mcicda.c b/dlls/mcicda/mcicda.c > index 79f3bae..81dc18f 100644 > --- a/dlls/mcicda/mcicda.c > +++ b/dlls/mcicda/mcicda.c > @@ -463,7 +463,7 @@ static DWORD MCICDA_Open(UINT wDevID, DWORD dwFlags, > LPMCI_OPEN_PARMSW lpOpenPar > /* now, open the handle */ > root[0] = root[1] = '\\'; root[2] = '.'; root[3] = '\\'; root[4] = > drive; root[5] = ':'; root[6] = '\0'; > wmcda->handle = CreateFileW(root, GENERIC_READ, FILE_SHARE_READ, NULL, > OPEN_EXISTING, 0, 0); > -if (wmcda->handle != 0) > +if (wmcda->handle != INVALID_HANDLE_VALUE) > return 0; > > the_error: >
Re: appdb issue: can't search for apps platinum on 1.0.x!
2009/2/28 Dan Kegel : >>> Another way around this, as Scott Ritchie pointed out, is >>> to arrange for what's in Ubuntu to be less stale. However, >>> there are only two ways to do that: either do a stable >>> release more often (which is difficult, and which Alexandre >>> doesn't seem inclined to do), or get Ubuntu to accept an >>> unstable snapshot into their stable repository (which I think >>> they are not inclined to do). >> >> Maybe someone should tell them that 1.0.1 is "broken" compared to >> latest development release. This isn't untrue - 1.1.15 has better >> success with a lot of apps. > > Their reply is probably "well, then do another stable release. > Our policy is that we prefer to bundle only stable releases." We should at least try! From what I've seen, Ubuntu like bleeding-edge stuff that likes to break other things, like pulseaudio. Maybe their problem is with the 2-week release cycle. How many releases would there be between Ubuntu releases? 6 months, 13 releases of Wine. Still, isn't it worth contacting the Ubuntu Wine package maintainer to get their viewpoint? >>> Yet another way to show that we care about Ubuntu >>> users would be to make it drop-dead simple for >>> the average user to add the Wine repository and get >>> the latest wine. The current download instructions are >>> really too complicated. We need instructions that are >>> no more complicated than >>> >>> First: >>> Click *here* to add WineHQ's repository >>> >>> Then: >>> Do Applications / 'Add / Remove', and choose Wine >> >> The instructions were like this at one point: download this script, >> run it, go to Add/Remove. Again, I think it's unproductive to hide >> information from the users. > > And it's even more unproductive if your instructions are so > long that users can't or won't follow them. > > I'm trying to introduce rank beginners to Wine, and > anything beyond "Click Add/Remove, then choose Wine" > is stretching it. I can see their eyes glaze over. I think you're assuming too much of your target audience, but that's just me. >> At least with the current instructions >> they can see *exactly* what's going on, and they don't have to worry >> about manual editing or the user-unfriendly command-line ... > > The current instructions tell them to manually edit > their software sources. It's too much typing for them. If you can present a better way of adding Scott's repository into their list, then please do. A little copy-and-paste won't hurt them. >> I'd also think the average user might be sceptical of an all-in-one >> script that changes the configuration of their system. "Why is this >> thing asking for my password? What is it doing? Can I really trust >> it?" etc. etc. > > In fact, it's common practice for repos like rpmfusion.org to > have a tiny package that just adds themselves to your software > sources. (See http://rpmfusion.org/Configuration ) > Scripts are right out, though. It has to be a package, > because you can't run a script with a single mouse click. Maybe this is not a bad idea: provide a package with the correctly configured /etc/apt/sources.list.d/foobar that also registers the GPG key with apt. It's certainly possible! The only problem would be for distro upgrades (say between Ubuntu 8.10 and 9.04) where the name of the repository changes. But with good instructions, this should be trivial. > I think it's important for us to focus on usability of installation. > Thinking like developers has got us a long ways; now we also > have to think like users. Unfortunately, new users of Linux systems, particularly Debian-based distros, are often confused by package management in general. My brother, who really is a whiz with Windows systems, couldn't work out how to get new software into Ubuntu. He thought that because individual developers didn't provide binary packages, he had to compile everything. I tried to teach him how to use synaptic, and he said "This is stupid. It should be like MacOSX where you just download a package and it's installed." I'm sure I don't need to go into the benefits of centralised package management for Linux-like systems on this thread ... I think that properly educating new users is more valuable than telling them "click on this magic link that does it for you".
Re: search path redux - if office 2007 always uses a private riched20, why does wine interpose its own global one?
On Fri, Feb 27, 2009 at 3:14 PM, Dan Kegel wrote: > Say, have we considered making riched20 prefer native? > That makes the app work, too. > A couple of things to note, in case they are relevant: 1. msftedit currently uses the native version by default 2. builtin msftedit will not work with native riched20, since the classes native msftedit loads are instead loaded by builtin riched20, and msftedit just loads riched20
Re: appdb issue: can't search for apps platinum on 1.0.x!
On Sat, Feb 28, 2009 at 12:11 AM, Ben Klein wrote: > 2009/2/28 Remco : >> Oh, I see. You mean that the package manager prefers the local >> repository if all else is equal. That's solvable by bumping the >> version number of the package that you download from the site. So, in >> 'pseudo-versions', the repository would have these: >> >> wine 1.15-0 >> wine 1.16-0 >> wine 1.17-0 >> >> While the site would provide these for download: >> >> wine 1.15-1 >> wine 1.16-1 >> wine 1.17-1 > > This would fix the problem, but would also mean twice as much space is > required to store the packages. If we're willing to deal with that, go > for it! > Well, I don't know if any package manager really does prefer a locally installed version, to the point that it actually replaces the package with exactly the same one. It would seem like a rather pointless feature. I just tested it on Ubuntu 8.10 by installing the 1.1.15 version from the site. I checked for updates, but Ubuntu tells me there are none available. So Ubuntu is cleared. ;) But if another package management system does work like that, some compromise would have to be made. It's either: * Extra space required, for the proposed solution, or * Less usability, like it is now, or * Extra CPU power required, if you were to bump the version on the server when the file is requested. Remco
Re: appdb issue: can't search for apps platinum on 1.0.x!
On Fri, Feb 27, 2009 at 11:06 PM, Dan Kegel wrote: > In fact, it's common practice for repos like rpmfusion.org to > have a tiny package that just adds themselves to your software > sources. (See http://rpmfusion.org/Configuration ) > Scripts are right out, though. It has to be a package, > because you can't run a script with a single mouse click. The WineHQ-provided .deb and .rpm packages themselves could add the WineHQ repo as part of their installation routine. There is no need for a tiny separate package. That would result in the simplest installation scenario imaginable: * Click here * Enter password After that, Wine will have been installed, and updates will start coming in. Remco
Re: appdb issue: can't search for apps platinum on 1.0.x!
2009/2/28 Remco : > On Fri, Feb 27, 2009 at 11:41 PM, Ben Klein wrote: >> Except that the first package would be technically outside of the >> repository, and would have the same version as the one in the >> repository. This COULD make the package manager think there's an >> update that needs to be downloaded when it doesn't. > > No, it's exactly the same package. The installer of every .deb package > just has an additional file "winehq.list" with the following contents: > > deb http://wine.budgetdedicated.com/apt intrepid main > > Which must be installed into /etc/apt/sources.list.d/. Also, the > scripting capabilities of .deb packages should make it possible to add > the authentication key. > > The same goes for .rpm and their respective updating mechanism. It's > like the packages sanitize their environment. Sorry, but I have worked with this situation, and whether or not the packages are identical does not change what I said before. The package manager can think that the version from the repository should replace the locally-installed version.
Re: appdb issue: can't search for apps platinum on 1.0.x!
2009/2/28 Remco : > On Sat, Feb 28, 2009 at 12:01 AM, Ben Klein wrote: >> Sorry, but I have worked with this situation, and whether or not the >> packages are identical does not change what I said before. The package >> manager can think that the version from the repository should replace >> the locally-installed version. >> > > Oh, I see. You mean that the package manager prefers the local > repository if all else is equal. That's solvable by bumping the > version number of the package that you download from the site. So, in > 'pseudo-versions', the repository would have these: > > wine 1.15-0 > wine 1.16-0 > wine 1.17-0 > > While the site would provide these for download: > > wine 1.15-1 > wine 1.16-1 > wine 1.17-1 This would fix the problem, but would also mean twice as much space is required to store the packages. If we're willing to deal with that, go for it!
Re: appdb issue: can't search for apps platinum on 1.0.x!
On Sat, Feb 28, 2009 at 12:01 AM, Ben Klein wrote: > Sorry, but I have worked with this situation, and whether or not the > packages are identical does not change what I said before. The package > manager can think that the version from the repository should replace > the locally-installed version. > Oh, I see. You mean that the package manager prefers the local repository if all else is equal. That's solvable by bumping the version number of the package that you download from the site. So, in 'pseudo-versions', the repository would have these: wine 1.15-0 wine 1.16-0 wine 1.17-0 While the site would provide these for download: wine 1.15-1 wine 1.16-1 wine 1.17-1 Remco
Re: appdb issue: can't search for apps platinum on 1.0.x!
2009/2/28 Alexandre Julliard : > Ben Klein writes: > >> I don't see a 1.0.2 being developed though. I'm sure there are still a >> lot of bugs that could be fixed in 1.0.1 - correct me if I'm wrong >> here. > > I don't see a lot of bugs that could be fixed by changes small enough to > go into the stable branch. If you do, please build a list and if there > are enough of them we can certainly do a 1.0.2. > >> But I based my statement on the fact that many users on #winehq >> have come in with a problem in 1.0.1, and upgrading to the latest >> available development version fixes their problem. > > Sure, if 1.0.1 doesn't work, then trying the tip is a good idea, but > that doesn't mean that everybody should do that. There are regressions > in the tip, and there's no reason to push users to upgrade unless they > clearly have trouble with 1.0.1. Now as this is *your* project, AJ, what do you think? Should stable branch be supported better by AppDB/bugzilla etc? At the moment, 1.0.1 is considered "too old" in some cases. The following quotes are from the start of this thread: 2009/2/26 Ben Klein : > 2009/2/26 Dan Kegel : >> Our currently released version is 1.0, but the appdb's >> browse feature acts as if that version no longer exists. >> This will seriously confuse newcomers who are using >> the 1.0.1 version (e.g. anybody who installs a fresh >> copy of Ubuntu!). >> >> To fix this, we should add 1.0 (or 1.0.1) back into the search box in >> http://appdb.winehq.org/objectManager.php?sClass=application > > Someone mentioned on another thread (or possibly on IRC, I don't > recall) that 1.0-series is too old to be of concern to us. We don't > want test data for 1.0.x; we don't want bug reports for 1.0.x unless > they're still apparent in the development version. Development has > stopped on 1.0.x. Maybe I'm wrong here, but that's what it looks like from current AppDB and bugzilla status.
Re: appdb issue: can't search for apps platinum on 1.0.x!
Ben Klein writes: > I don't see a 1.0.2 being developed though. I'm sure there are still a > lot of bugs that could be fixed in 1.0.1 - correct me if I'm wrong > here. I don't see a lot of bugs that could be fixed by changes small enough to go into the stable branch. If you do, please build a list and if there are enough of them we can certainly do a 1.0.2. > But I based my statement on the fact that many users on #winehq > have come in with a problem in 1.0.1, and upgrading to the latest > available development version fixes their problem. Sure, if 1.0.1 doesn't work, then trying the tip is a good idea, but that doesn't mean that everybody should do that. There are regressions in the tip, and there's no reason to push users to upgrade unless they clearly have trouble with 1.0.1. -- Alexandre Julliard julli...@winehq.org
Re: appdb issue: can't search for apps platinum on 1.0.x!
On Fri, Feb 27, 2009 at 11:41 PM, Ben Klein wrote: > Except that the first package would be technically outside of the > repository, and would have the same version as the one in the > repository. This COULD make the package manager think there's an > update that needs to be downloaded when it doesn't. > No, it's exactly the same package. The installer of every .deb package just has an additional file "winehq.list" with the following contents: deb http://wine.budgetdedicated.com/apt intrepid main Which must be installed into /etc/apt/sources.list.d/. Also, the scripting capabilities of .deb packages should make it possible to add the authentication key. The same goes for .rpm and their respective updating mechanism. It's like the packages sanitize their environment. Remco
Re: appdb issue: can't search for apps platinum on 1.0.x!
2009/2/28 Remco : > On Fri, Feb 27, 2009 at 11:06 PM, Dan Kegel wrote: >> In fact, it's common practice for repos like rpmfusion.org to >> have a tiny package that just adds themselves to your software >> sources. (See http://rpmfusion.org/Configuration ) >> Scripts are right out, though. It has to be a package, >> because you can't run a script with a single mouse click. > > The WineHQ-provided .deb and .rpm packages themselves could add the > WineHQ repo as part of their installation routine. There is no need > for a tiny separate package. > > That would result in the simplest installation scenario imaginable: > > * Click here > * Enter password > > After that, Wine will have been installed, and updates will start coming in. Except that the first package would be technically outside of the repository, and would have the same version as the one in the repository. This COULD make the package manager think there's an update that needs to be downloaded when it doesn't.
Re: appdb issue: can't search for apps platinum on 1.0.x!
2009/2/28 Alexandre Julliard : > Ben Klein writes: > >> Maybe someone should tell them that 1.0.1 is "broken" compared to >> latest development release. This isn't untrue - 1.1.15 has better >> success with a lot of apps. >> >> Basically, someone should tell them that Wine's "stable" branch is >> just a code freeze, and has nothing to do with crash-resistant >> stability. > > That's not true, we spent a lot of time fixing regressions for 1.0, and > it's clearly higher quality than many of the development snapshots. Of > course some apps may work better in 1.1.15, but some are broken too. > > Saying 1.0.1 is too broken to be supported is silly, it was working just > fine 6 months ago, and it is still working fine for many apps. I don't see a 1.0.2 being developed though. I'm sure there are still a lot of bugs that could be fixed in 1.0.1 - correct me if I'm wrong here. But I based my statement on the fact that many users on #winehq have come in with a problem in 1.0.1, and upgrading to the latest available development version fixes their problem.
Re: appdb issue: can't search for apps platinum on 1.0.x!
Ben Klein writes: > Maybe someone should tell them that 1.0.1 is "broken" compared to > latest development release. This isn't untrue - 1.1.15 has better > success with a lot of apps. > > Basically, someone should tell them that Wine's "stable" branch is > just a code freeze, and has nothing to do with crash-resistant > stability. That's not true, we spent a lot of time fixing regressions for 1.0, and it's clearly higher quality than many of the development snapshots. Of course some apps may work better in 1.1.15, but some are broken too. Saying 1.0.1 is too broken to be supported is silly, it was working just fine 6 months ago, and it is still working fine for many apps. -- Alexandre Julliard julli...@winehq.org
Re: appdb issue: can't search for apps platinum on 1.0.x!
On Fri, Feb 27, 2009 at 1:46 PM, Ben Klein wrote: >> That's a fine attitude from the developer's point of view, >> but that means that Wine *doesn't care* about Ubuntu >> users who expect to be able to use Wine by doing >> "add/remove" in the system menu. >> >> And I think we do care. > > No more than any other distro, to be honest. What I meant was, I think we do care about users of distros that are shipping wine-1.0. I don't know how many do, but I suspect it's not just Ubuntu. >> Another way around this, as Scott Ritchie pointed out, is >> to arrange for what's in Ubuntu to be less stale. However, >> there are only two ways to do that: either do a stable >> release more often (which is difficult, and which Alexandre >> doesn't seem inclined to do), or get Ubuntu to accept an >> unstable snapshot into their stable repository (which I think >> they are not inclined to do). > > Maybe someone should tell them that 1.0.1 is "broken" compared to > latest development release. This isn't untrue - 1.1.15 has better > success with a lot of apps. Their reply is probably "well, then do another stable release. Our policy is that we prefer to bundle only stable releases." >> Yet another way to show that we care about Ubuntu >> users would be to make it drop-dead simple for >> the average user to add the Wine repository and get >> the latest wine. The current download instructions are >> really too complicated. We need instructions that are >> no more complicated than >> >> First: >> Click *here* to add WineHQ's repository >> >> Then: >> Do Applications / 'Add / Remove', and choose Wine > > The instructions were like this at one point: download this script, > run it, go to Add/Remove. Again, I think it's unproductive to hide > information from the users. And it's even more unproductive if your instructions are so long that users can't or won't follow them. I'm trying to introduce rank beginners to Wine, and anything beyond "Click Add/Remove, then choose Wine" is stretching it. I can see their eyes glaze over. > At least with the current instructions > they can see *exactly* what's going on, and they don't have to worry > about manual editing or the user-unfriendly command-line ... The current instructions tell them to manually edit their software sources. It's too much typing for them. > I'd also think the average user might be sceptical of an all-in-one > script that changes the configuration of their system. "Why is this > thing asking for my password? What is it doing? Can I really trust > it?" etc. etc. In fact, it's common practice for repos like rpmfusion.org to have a tiny package that just adds themselves to your software sources. (See http://rpmfusion.org/Configuration ) Scripts are right out, though. It has to be a package, because you can't run a script with a single mouse click. I think it's important for us to focus on usability of installation. Thinking like developers has got us a long ways; now we also have to think like users. - Dan
Re: appdb issue: can't search for apps platinum on 1.0.x!
On Fri, Feb 27, 2009 at 1:46 PM, Ben Klein wrote: > 2009/2/28 Dan Kegel : > > On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 4:31 PM, Ben Klein wrote: > >> 2009/2/26 Dan Kegel : > >>> Our currently released version is 1.0, but the appdb's > >>> browse feature acts as if that version no longer exists. > >>> This will seriously confuse newcomers who are using > >>> the 1.0.1 version (e.g. anybody who installs a fresh > >>> copy of Ubuntu!). > >> > >> Someone mentioned on another thread (or possibly on IRC, I don't > >> recall) that 1.0-series is too old to be of concern to us. We don't > >> want test data for 1.0.x; we don't want bug reports for 1.0.x unless > >> they're still apparent in the development version. Development has > >> stopped on 1.0.x. > > > > That's a fine attitude from the developer's point of view, > > but that means that Wine *doesn't care* about Ubuntu > > users who expect to be able to use Wine by doing > > "add/remove" in the system menu. > > > > And I think we do care. > > No more than any other distro, to be honest. > > > Another way around this, as Scott Ritchie pointed out, is > > to arrange for what's in Ubuntu to be less stale. However, > > there are only two ways to do that: either do a stable > > release more often (which is difficult, and which Alexandre > > doesn't seem inclined to do), or get Ubuntu to accept an > > unstable snapshot into their stable repository (which I think > > they are not inclined to do). > > Maybe someone should tell them that 1.0.1 is "broken" compared to > latest development release. This isn't untrue - 1.1.15 has better > success with a lot of apps. > > Basically, someone should tell them that Wine's "stable" branch is > just a code freeze, and has nothing to do with crash-resistant > stability. > > > Yet another way to show that we care about Ubuntu > > users would be to make it drop-dead simple for > > the average user to add the Wine repository and get > > the latest wine. The current download instructions are > > really too complicated. We need instructions that are > > no more complicated than > > > > First: > > Click *here* to add WineHQ's repository > > > > Then: > > Do Applications / 'Add / Remove', and choose Wine > > The instructions were like this at one point: download this script, > run it, go to Add/Remove. Again, I think it's unproductive to hide > information from the users. At least with the current instructions > they can see *exactly* what's going on, and they don't have to worry > about manual editing or the user-unfriendly command-line ... > > I'd also think the average user might be sceptical of an all-in-one > script that changes the configuration of their system. "Why is this > thing asking for my password? What is it doing? Can I really trust > it?" etc. etc. Anyone coming from Vista would be used to UAC for program installs...
Re: appdb issue: can't search for apps platinum on 1.0.x!
2009/2/28 Dan Kegel : > On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 4:31 PM, Ben Klein wrote: >> 2009/2/26 Dan Kegel : >>> Our currently released version is 1.0, but the appdb's >>> browse feature acts as if that version no longer exists. >>> This will seriously confuse newcomers who are using >>> the 1.0.1 version (e.g. anybody who installs a fresh >>> copy of Ubuntu!). >> >> Someone mentioned on another thread (or possibly on IRC, I don't >> recall) that 1.0-series is too old to be of concern to us. We don't >> want test data for 1.0.x; we don't want bug reports for 1.0.x unless >> they're still apparent in the development version. Development has >> stopped on 1.0.x. > > That's a fine attitude from the developer's point of view, > but that means that Wine *doesn't care* about Ubuntu > users who expect to be able to use Wine by doing > "add/remove" in the system menu. > > And I think we do care. No more than any other distro, to be honest. > Another way around this, as Scott Ritchie pointed out, is > to arrange for what's in Ubuntu to be less stale. However, > there are only two ways to do that: either do a stable > release more often (which is difficult, and which Alexandre > doesn't seem inclined to do), or get Ubuntu to accept an > unstable snapshot into their stable repository (which I think > they are not inclined to do). Maybe someone should tell them that 1.0.1 is "broken" compared to latest development release. This isn't untrue - 1.1.15 has better success with a lot of apps. Basically, someone should tell them that Wine's "stable" branch is just a code freeze, and has nothing to do with crash-resistant stability. > Yet another way to show that we care about Ubuntu > users would be to make it drop-dead simple for > the average user to add the Wine repository and get > the latest wine. The current download instructions are > really too complicated. We need instructions that are > no more complicated than > > First: > Click *here* to add WineHQ's repository > > Then: > Do Applications / 'Add / Remove', and choose Wine The instructions were like this at one point: download this script, run it, go to Add/Remove. Again, I think it's unproductive to hide information from the users. At least with the current instructions they can see *exactly* what's going on, and they don't have to worry about manual editing or the user-unfriendly command-line ... I'd also think the average user might be sceptical of an all-in-one script that changes the configuration of their system. "Why is this thing asking for my password? What is it doing? Can I really trust it?" etc. etc. > That would compensate for the packages in Ubuntu's repo being stale. > - Dan
Re: appdb issue: can't search for apps platinum on 1.0.x!
On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 4:31 PM, Ben Klein wrote: > 2009/2/26 Dan Kegel : >> Our currently released version is 1.0, but the appdb's >> browse feature acts as if that version no longer exists. >> This will seriously confuse newcomers who are using >> the 1.0.1 version (e.g. anybody who installs a fresh >> copy of Ubuntu!). > > Someone mentioned on another thread (or possibly on IRC, I don't > recall) that 1.0-series is too old to be of concern to us. We don't > want test data for 1.0.x; we don't want bug reports for 1.0.x unless > they're still apparent in the development version. Development has > stopped on 1.0.x. That's a fine attitude from the developer's point of view, but that means that Wine *doesn't care* about Ubuntu users who expect to be able to use Wine by doing "add/remove" in the system menu. And I think we do care. Another way around this, as Scott Ritchie pointed out, is to arrange for what's in Ubuntu to be less stale. However, there are only two ways to do that: either do a stable release more often (which is difficult, and which Alexandre doesn't seem inclined to do), or get Ubuntu to accept an unstable snapshot into their stable repository (which I think they are not inclined to do). Yet another way to show that we care about Ubuntu users would be to make it drop-dead simple for the average user to add the Wine repository and get the latest wine. The current download instructions are really too complicated. We need instructions that are no more complicated than First: Click *here* to add WineHQ's repository Then: Do Applications / 'Add / Remove', and choose Wine That would compensate for the packages in Ubuntu's repo being stale. - Dan
Re: search path redux - if office 2007 always uses a private riched20, why does wine interpose its own global one?
On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 7:10 AM, Alexandre Julliard wrote:
> The version of the native dll, compared to the builtin. I could imagine
> a heuristic where if the major version of native is higher than builtin
> you default to native or something like that.
I've updated http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14980
with that hint.
Say, have we considered making riched20 prefer native?
That makes the app work, too.
- Dan
--- a/dlls/riched20/editor.c
+++ b/dlls/riched20/editor.c
@@ -2743,6 +2743,9 @@ BOOL WINAPI DllMain(HINSTANCE hinstDLL, DWORD
fdwReason, LPVOID lpvReserved
TRACE("\n");
switch (fdwReason)
{
+case DLL_WINE_PREATTACH:
+ return FALSE; /* prefer native version */
+
re: wine shirts
That's a nice, simple design, but something's missing. Oddly, the original drunken penguin shirts, or ripoffs thereof, seem to still be available at http://www.ixsoft.de/software/products/CWTSHIRTDP-L.html Original artwork is at ftp://wine.codeweavers.com/pub/wine/logos/ I would kind of like a shirt that had the penguin opening the bottle on the front (text: Support the Wine Project), and the drunken penguin on the back (text: I did my part, or something like that) but I'd have to think a bit more on the text. Other old links: Martin's design: http://cross-lfs.org/~mlankhorst/t-shirt.png Ismael Barros put some effort into this before: http://www.winehq.org/pipermail/wine-devel/2008-December/070894.html but nobody could think up good text. - Dan
Time to integrate win16 test suite?
Now that we support building 16 bit executables, it seems like a good time to think about integrating the 16 bit test suite, currently hibernating at http://win16test.googlecode.com Any takers?
Re: twain_32/tests: Link with twain_32.dll.
Francois Gouget wrote: > --- > > winetest can detect if twain_32.dll is there or not, and if it's missing > there's nothing to test anyway. Note that make_makefiles will need to be > run. This patch breaks make crosstest for me: [apevia:~/w/wine/dlls/twain_32/tests] make crosstest i586-mingw32msvc-gcc dsm.cross.o testlist.cross.o -o twain_32_crosstest.exe -L../../../dlls -L../../../dlls/twain_32 -L../../../dlls/user32 -L../../../dlls/gdi32 -L../../../dlls/kernel32 -ltwain_32 -luser32 -lgdi32 -lkernel32 /usr/lib/gcc/i586-mingw32msvc/4.2.1-sjlj/../../../../i586-mingw32msvc/bin/ld: cannot find -ltwain_32 collect2: ld returned 1 exit status make: *** [twain_32_crosstest.exe] Error 1 (it also breaks make test for me, but that may be operator error). But, what's more, I do not see the point. Twain_32 is not a Microsoft DLL; it is not present by default on most Windows systems. Further, the API specifications are quite clear: you're supposed to LoadLibrary Twain32, and all Twain applications I've tested do so. I don't see the benefit in making our test behave differently than the recommended behavior for this DLL. Cheers, Jeremy
Re: gdi32: Revert an unrelated part of 028617b90ba586bdb30723c700eea888c159ada7.
And, my patch [1/2] is wrong. Dmitry's patch is right.
Additionally, my patch [2/2] has to committed. Because of the other
problem. It's also my mistake.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17218#c18
2009-02-27 (Fri), 21:50 +0900, Byeongsik Jeon wrote:
> Yes!!! See the http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17218
>
> http://www.winehq.org/pipermail/wine-patches/2009-February/068752.html
>
> http://www.winehq.org/pipermail/wine-patches/2009-February/068753.html
>
>
>
> 2009-02-27 (Fri), 17:57 +0800, Dmitry Timoshkov wrote:
> > It was not a very nice idea to break bitmap fonts which request a custom
> > width (therefore a transformation) in a patch that pretended to do something
> > unrelated.
> > ---
> > dlls/gdi32/freetype.c |6 +++---
> > 1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/dlls/gdi32/freetype.c b/dlls/gdi32/freetype.c
> > index 6ca35c3..54bb999 100644
> > --- a/dlls/gdi32/freetype.c
> > +++ b/dlls/gdi32/freetype.c
> > @@ -4606,9 +4606,9 @@ DWORD WineEngGetGlyphOutline(GdiFont *incoming_font,
> > UINT glyph, UINT format,
> > }
> >
> > if(ft_face->glyph->format != ft_glyph_format_outline &&
> > - (needsTransform || format == GGO_NATIVE || format == GGO_BEZIER ||
> > - format == GGO_GRAY2_BITMAP || format ==
> > GGO_GRAY4_BITMAP ||
> > - format == GGO_GRAY8_BITMAP))
> > + (format == GGO_NATIVE || format == GGO_BEZIER ||
> > +format == GGO_GRAY2_BITMAP || format == GGO_GRAY4_BITMAP ||
> > +format == GGO_GRAY8_BITMAP))
> > {
> > TRACE("loaded a bitmap\n");
> > LeaveCriticalSection( &freetype_cs );
>
>
>
>
Re: msi: Add reinstall tests.
On Do, 2009-02-26 at 10:50 +0100, Hans Leidekker wrote: > +state = 0xdeadbee; > +action = 0xdeadbee; > +r = MsiGetFeatureState(hpkg, "one", &state, &action); > +ok( r == ERROR_UNKNOWN_FEATURE, "Expected ERROR_UNKNOWN_FEATURE, > got %d\n", r ); > +ok( state == 0xdeadbee, "Expected 0xdeadbee, got %d\n", state); > +ok( action == 0xdeadbee, "Expected 0xdeadbee, got %d\n", action); > + > +state = 0xdeadbee; > +action = 0xdeadbee; > +r = MsiGetFeatureState(hpkg, "two", &state, &action); > +ok( r == ERROR_UNKNOWN_FEATURE, "Expected ERROR_UNKNOWN_FEATURE, > got %d\n", r ); > +ok( state == 0xdeadbee, "Expected 0xdeadbee, got %d\n", state); > +ok( action == 0xdeadbee, "Expected 0xdeadbee, got %d\n", action); > + > +state = 0xdeadbee; > +action = 0xdeadbee; > +r = MsiGetFeatureState(hpkg, "three", &state, &action); > +ok( r == ERROR_UNKNOWN_FEATURE, "Expected ERROR_UNKNOWN_FEATURE, > got %d\n", r ); > +ok( state == 0xdeadbee, "Expected 0xdeadbee, got %d\n", state); > +ok( action == 0xdeadbee, "Expected 0xdeadbee, got %d\n", action); This is huge amount of almost the same code in that test. Please use tables. -- By by ... Detlef
Re: gdi32: Revert an unrelated part of 028617b90ba586bdb30723c700eea888c159ada7.
Yes!!! See the http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17218
http://www.winehq.org/pipermail/wine-patches/2009-February/068752.html
http://www.winehq.org/pipermail/wine-patches/2009-February/068753.html
2009-02-27 (Fri), 17:57 +0800, Dmitry Timoshkov wrote:
> It was not a very nice idea to break bitmap fonts which request a custom
> width (therefore a transformation) in a patch that pretended to do something
> unrelated.
> ---
> dlls/gdi32/freetype.c |6 +++---
> 1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/dlls/gdi32/freetype.c b/dlls/gdi32/freetype.c
> index 6ca35c3..54bb999 100644
> --- a/dlls/gdi32/freetype.c
> +++ b/dlls/gdi32/freetype.c
> @@ -4606,9 +4606,9 @@ DWORD WineEngGetGlyphOutline(GdiFont *incoming_font,
> UINT glyph, UINT format,
> }
>
> if(ft_face->glyph->format != ft_glyph_format_outline &&
> - (needsTransform || format == GGO_NATIVE || format == GGO_BEZIER ||
> - format == GGO_GRAY2_BITMAP || format ==
> GGO_GRAY4_BITMAP ||
> - format == GGO_GRAY8_BITMAP))
> + (format == GGO_NATIVE || format == GGO_BEZIER ||
> +format == GGO_GRAY2_BITMAP || format == GGO_GRAY4_BITMAP ||
> +format == GGO_GRAY8_BITMAP))
> {
> TRACE("loaded a bitmap\n");
> LeaveCriticalSection( &freetype_cs );
Wine shirt
I saw the previous Wine t-shirt, with the drunken penguin, but it wasn't really me and I don't think there are anymore anyways. For those of you who didn't know about it, I don't think it was advertised very well (maybe we should have had a products tab or links in World Wine News more regularly). I started playing with zazzle.com and ideas for a Wine shirt for myself. Here's what I have so far in case anyone cares or would like one too: http://www.zazzle.com/tuxg2_wine_t_shirt-235593182956669764 I plan on giving half of any profits to Wine through their donation page & use the rest to set up some Wine embroidery items (I'm thinking a hat & zip-up sweatshirt). After that I'll update the amount that goes to Wine. I thought it was a nice approach because it's print on demand and it's possible for people to customize with their own slogans instead of having to vote on one. Later, -J
Re: gdi32: Revert an unrelated part of 028617b90ba586bdb30723c700eea888c159ada7.
Am Freitag, den 27.02.2009, 17:57 +0800 schrieb Dmitry Timoshkov: > It was not a very nice idea to break bitmap fonts which request a custom > width (therefore a transformation) in a patch that pretended to do something > unrelated. It also "breaks" fake italic bitmap fonts, i.e. previously the fake italic transformation was just ignored, so roman characters were displayed, now WineEngGetGlyphOutline runs into this error case, breaking applications trying to use "MS Sans Serif" in italic. Regards, Michael Karcher
