On Mon, 22 Nov 2004, Hans Leidekker wrote:
[...]
Right, that's a very old version from 2001. Since then the number of APIs
has nearly doubled:
[...]
I'm sure we will be needing many of those newer APIs. Is there any
chance for you to upgrade your lcms.h to 1.13?
A better solution would probably be
I managed to get past configure and then have a compile error due to a
missing header file: intrinsic.h
Configure should be checking for this file, like it checks for flex and
bison and such. The package I needed to install was libxt-dev
I'm on Ubuntu at the moment, but this should be true for a
The Debian packages have gotten rather out of date, and it looks like
Ove's not going to be making them any more. I took the initiative and
decided to try making one myself. I'm polishing off a new Debian
package now.
Some major things I noticed:
1) There were a lot of old hacks in the package
"Alexander Yaworsky" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> http://migusoft.ru/misc/trace.bz2
>
> with added ERR()s, see attachment
>
> I cut the tail of log just before the first err:listbox. Note that
> there are two listboxes on the form. Both are initialized ok,
> wrong things begin after WM_KEYDOWN.
T
"Dimitrie O. Paun" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> No, please don't specify a glibc version-release. The real fix here
> is to have Wine compiled with epoll support run on a system without
> epoll.
No, that's only fixing a symptom. glibc simply doesn't support running
on an older version than what
Scott Ritchie wrote:
However, I'm not sure if this means the wine binary package should
depend on them, since it's compiled in. So, should I make libicu28 a
dependancy for wine?
ICU is compiled statically. There is no runtime dependency on libicu. It
is an exception, however.
The general rule
On Tuesday 23 November 2004 11:32, Scott Ritchie wrote:
> 4) What I didn't find is a standard list of packages that aren't
> strictly required for wine (like libxt-dev and flex), but that wine can
> benefit from. A good example would be the alsa development files.
> These are all things that sho
On Tuesday 23 November 2004 10:21, Francois Gouget wrote:
> > I'm sure we will be needing many of those newer APIs. Is there any
> > chance for you to upgrade your lcms.h to 1.13?
>
> A better solution would probably be to check for one of the newer APIs
> in configure.ac (or the LCMSICCPROFILE
On Mon, 22 Nov 2004, Mike Hearn wrote:
>
> this is where signals are converted to SEH exceptions (w-exceptions as
> Eric called them):
>
> dlls/ntdll/signal_i386.c
Looks like it clears TF there already:
if (context->EFlags & 0x100)
{
context->EFlags &= ~0x100;
I have been trying to track a problem in gdiobj.c where I had a handle
of 0x107e. In GDI_GetObjPtr the handle & 2 is said to indicate a GDI
Heap handle. From everything else I have read, that bit is supposed to
indicate a Moveable handle. Is there something special about GDI
handles that I sho
On Mon, 22 Nov 2004, Eric Pouech wrote:
>
> For the linux folks, here a small comparison of what happens in the working
> (old) case and in the non-working (new) case:
>
> In both case
>
> - Wine gets a first SIGTRAP (in it's sig_trap handler)
> + Wine converts it into a Windows excepti
On Tue, 23 Nov 2004, Hans Leidekker wrote:
[...]
* Alsa: http://sourceforge.net/projects/alsa (Linux only)
This library gives sound support to the Windows environment.
* JACK: http://jackit.sourceforge.net
Similar to Alsa, it allow Wine to use the JACK audio server.
I would add NAS
On Tue, 23 Nov 2004, Hans Leidekker wrote:
On Tuesday 23 November 2004 10:21, Francois Gouget wrote:
I'm sure we will be needing many of those newer APIs. Is there any
chance for you to upgrade your lcms.h to 1.13?
A better solution would probably be to check for one of the newer APIs
in configure.
On Mon, 22 Nov 2004 21:39:32 -0500, Vincent Béron wrote:
> I'm 99% positive that the problem is: users didn't update their
> distribution.
That is a bad problem but should not surprise us. The volume and size of
updates shipped by Red Hat/Fedora is typically so large that dialup users
especially i
On Tuesday 23 November 2004 14:07, Francois Gouget wrote:
> What I meant is that we should check for one of these new APIs that we
> need, and if we don't find it we should just do as if lcms.h was
> missing.
Yes of course, I meant that too, and we should do that. But you presented
this as a be
On Tue, 23 Nov 2004 12:13:22 +0100, Alexandre Julliard wrote:
> No, that's only fixing a symptom. glibc simply doesn't support running
> on an older version than what it was compiled against; the problem is
> not limited to epoll, it can potentially happen with any symbol. The
> right way to build
On Tue, 23 Nov 2004 02:32:08 -0800, Scott Ritchie wrote:
> The Debian packages have gotten rather out of date, and it looks like
> Ove's not going to be making them any more. I took the initiative and
> decided to try making one myself. I'm polishing off a new Debian
> package now.
Cool! While
Hi all,
Last month I moved, as did my ip address. Since then, I don't seem to
get any messages from the wine devel mailing list, although I am still
subscribed. I don't know whom to send this to, but can somebody (the
admin of the list) please try to find out what is the problem? Thanx,
Robert
Tom wrote:
I hope this patch looks better. :)
If anything is incorrect just let me know.
FYI, please don't use # in patch filenames. Sometimes that's
a comment character, and it gives us shell programmers
the willies.
- Dan
--
Trying to get a job as a c++ developer? See
http://kegel.com/academy/
Hi,
On Tue, Nov 23, 2004 at 03:21:13PM +0100, Robert van Herk wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Last month I moved, as did my ip address. Since then, I don't seem to
> get any messages from the wine devel mailing list, although I am still
> subscribed. I don't know whom to send this to, but can somebody (th
On Tue, Nov 23, 2004 at 02:07:51PM +, Mike Hearn wrote:
> Cool! While you're at it could you please combine them altogether so the
> packaging matches the upstream sources? Last time I checked the Debian
> packages were split into tons of little packages which is wrong and led to
> strange brea
On Tue, Nov 23, 2004 at 02:32:08AM -0800, Scott Ritchie wrote:
> Now, this leads to the question: is it worth even having a package
> maintainers guide? If so, who wants to update it?
Well, it would be great if you'd use the experience you gathered
doing the .deb packages to update the guide. Rea
[...]
> However under both Windows 95 and Windows XP this does not seem to be the
> case. Under Windows, the following holds true, but fails under Wine
> GetStockObject(BLACK_BRUSH) != CreateSolidBrush(RGB(0,0,0))
>
> This issue currently breaks applications making calls to SetSysColors as
> stock
Dan Kegel wrote:
FYI, please don't use # in patch filenames.
In the future i'll use a -
Thanks,
Tom
Sometimes that's
a comment character, and it gives us shell programmers
the willies.
- Dan
On Tue, 23 Nov 2004, Mike Hearn wrote:
[...]
Cool! While you're at it could you please combine them altogether so the
packaging matches the upstream sources? Last time I checked the Debian
packages were split into tons of little packages which is wrong and led to
strange breakages. Just one package
On Tue, 23 Nov 2004 19:14:00 +0100, Francois Gouget wrote:
> Having lots of packages is the Debian way. So I see nothing wrong with
> having wine, libwine, libwine-dev, wine-doc, libwine-alsa, libwine-arts,
> libwine-capi, libwine-cil, libwine-jack, libwine-nas, libwine-twain.
Well, it may be th
Hi all,
I am trying to implement the Browse button in the winecfg application,
that would allow people to browse for a directory to use as their
virtual c drive. In order to do so, I though I'd use the
SHBrowseForFolder function from shlobj.h (see
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?u
On Tue, Nov 23, 2004 at 10:47:47AM -0500, Dimitrie O. Paun wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 23, 2004 at 02:32:08AM -0800, Scott Ritchie wrote:
> > Now, this leads to the question: is it worth even having a package
> > maintainers guide? If so, who wants to update it?
I sat down for 15 minutes and revised it
On Tue, 23 Nov 2004 17:24:28 +0100, Robert van Herk wrote:
> I am trying to implement the Browse button in the winecfg application,
> that would allow people to browse for a directory to use as their
> virtual c drive.
Cool! Go for it!
> Then, at compile time I get:
>driveui.c:
On Tue, Nov 23, 2004 at 07:14:00PM +0100, Francois Gouget wrote:
> Having lots of packages is the Debian way. So I see nothing wrong with
> having wine, libwine, libwine-dev, wine-doc, libwine-alsa, libwine-arts,
> libwine-capi, libwine-cil, libwine-jack, libwine-nas, libwine-twain.
...and it cr
> I sat down for 15 minutes and revised it a bit. Open for comments.
Looks good to me. We may want to add a bit of a stronger warning
at the top (maybe?) that the config file is obsolete, and will go
away, so don't bother to customize or provide one. Right now it
seems that our possition is a bi
On Tue, 2004-11-23 at 13:25 +0200, Shachar Shemesh wrote:
> Scott Ritchie wrote:
>
> >However, I'm not sure if this means the wine binary package should
> >depend on them, since it's compiled in. So, should I make libicu28 a
> >dependancy for wine?
> >
> >
> ICU is compiled statically. There is
>Actually, a wine and wine-devel would be good, to match what we're
>doing with .rpm files. Reduces confusion. While you're at it, it
>would be nice to host them also on SF, so we have a one place that
>holds all the wine packages.
>
>--
>Dimi.
Well, I am condensing it down. Here's what I thin
> So perhaps it would be better to build the RPMs against "pure" installs of
> each distro, from the CDs?
As i think nobody wants buggy systems, this will mean using --force to install
RPMs of old headers. I've never heard of such an update breaking my RPMs so I
won't do any such thing without cons
On Tue, Nov 23, 2004 at 02:56:43PM -0800, Scott Ritchie wrote:
> wine : depends on libwine, contains the binaries for running windows programs
> libwine : contains everything needed to run windows applications
> libwine-dev : contains the files needed to compile windows applications with
> winelib
Le mar 23/11/2004 à 02:41, Shachar Shemesh a écrit :
> Vincent Béron wrote:
>
> >So all this boils down to is that RH shipped a glibc update which broke
> >backwards compatibility, with the same version number (glibc-2.3.2). A
> >Wine compiled on the newer version takes advantage of epoll support
Le mar 23/11/2004 à 05:32, Scott Ritchie a écrit :
> The Debian packages have gotten rather out of date, and it looks like
> Ove's not going to be making them any more. I took the initiative and
> decided to try making one myself. I'm polishing off a new Debian
> package now.
Are you (or plan to
"Robert Shearman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> +logpalette->palVersion = 1; /* FIXME: what should this be? */
All Microsoft and other samples I've seen initialize this filed to 0x300.
--
Dmitry.
"Alexander Yaworsky" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> recently i tried to install some application and it hung when i
> tried to select options.
> It uses listbox with ownerdraw items with checkboxes. When listbox
> is initially painted everything is ok. But when i try to select other
> item, an extra
Hi!
I've sent the message below to wine-users mailing list and nobody has replied
until now. So I subscribed do wine-devel and I'm posting the message here.
Of course I cannot distinguish whether this problem is important enough to be
fixed, but I think it's some problem with wine dlls so it can
On Tue, Nov 23, 2004 at 05:16:17PM -0500, Dimitrie O. Paun wrote:
> > I sat down for 15 minutes and revised it a bit. Open for comments.
>
> Looks good to me. We may want to add a bit of a stronger warning
> at the top (maybe?) that the config file is obsolete, and will go
> away, so don't bother
41 matches
Mail list logo
