Version Detection (this time for dcom98.exe)

2004-12-18 Thread Paul Vriens
Hi, one of the first things I normally do after a fresh wine install is installing dcom98. This wasn't a problem before (use the correct overrides). Just tell me if I don't need this (anymore). Installing dcom98 with the current version checking is a different ballgame. Just running it with

Re: Version Detection

2004-12-18 Thread Robert Shearman
Florian Goth wrote: Well, I also have a problem with the Windows Version, while trying to install a Windows Media Player. I have set the Windows Version in the config file to Win95 . The First Problem is, that I can't Install WMP 6.4. It says that a Version for Win2000 will be available

Re: out-of-process COM design

2004-12-18 Thread Robert Shearman
Bill Medland wrote: On December 17, 2004 01:56 pm, Mike Hearn wrote: On Fri, 17 Dec 2004 13:34:53 -0800, Bill Medland wrote: Well, it gets me past the illegal memory reference; I can start looking at what else failed now. In case you aren't already aware, Rob and I are doing a lot

Re: out-of-process COM design

2004-12-18 Thread Robert Shearman
Mike Hearn wrote: On Fri, 17 Dec 2004 10:49:45 -0800, Bill Medland wrote: Does anyone know anything about this? e.g. when starting a new thread where does the apartment get initialized? It's supposed to get initialized in the call to CoInitialize[Ex] however the _LocalServerThread never

Re: out-of-process COM design

2004-12-18 Thread Mike Hearn
On Sat, 2004-12-18 at 13:13 +, Robert Shearman wrote: That patch is very hackish and needlessly complicated. This patch accomplishes the same task in fewer lines (note that this is not the best solution for the problem, I am working on that): Index: compobj.c

Version Problems

2004-12-18 Thread Florian Goth
BTW, I have a CVS-Wine from friday evening. First occurence: trace:ver:GetFileVersionInfoA (c: \\windows\\system\\SHDOCVW.DLL,0,size=848,data=0x40432bd8) trace:ver:VERSION_GetFileVersionInfo_PE Lc:\\windows\\system\\SHDOCVW.DLL trace:ver:print_vffi_debug structversion=1.0, fileversion=5.50.0.0,

Re: out-of-process COM design

2004-12-18 Thread Bill Medland
On December 18, 2004 05:03 am, Robert Shearman wrote: Bill Medland wrote: On December 17, 2004 01:56 pm, Mike Hearn wrote: On Fri, 17 Dec 2004 13:34:53 -0800, Bill Medland wrote: Well, it gets me past the illegal memory reference; I can start looking at what else failed now. In case you

Re: out-of-process COM design

2004-12-18 Thread Mike Hearn
On Sat, 2004-12-18 at 07:46 -0800, Bill Medland wrote: 0013:trace:ole:listener_thread Process listener thread starting on (\\.\pipe\WINE_OLE_StubMgr_00100011) ... 0009:fixme:ole:PIPE_GetNewPipeBuf Could not open named pipe \\.\pipe\WINE_OLE_StubMgr_00100014, le is 2 Well,

Re: Message Notify

2004-12-18 Thread Duane Clark
M.hearn did not write: A virus It appears to me that you have not used this email address (m.hearn.at.signal.QinetiQ.com) for a long time, at least not for sending to this list. If it is no longer in use, would you mind unsubscribing it to eliminate at least this one source of viruses?

Re: out-of-process COM design

2004-12-18 Thread Bill Medland
On December 18, 2004 08:10 am, Mike Hearn wrote: On Sat, 2004-12-18 at 07:46 -0800, Bill Medland wrote: 0013:trace:ole:listener_thread Process listener thread starting on (\\.\pipe\WINE_OLE_StubMgr_00100011) ... 0009:fixme:ole:PIPE_GetNewPipeBuf Could not open named pipe

Re: out-of-process COM design

2004-12-18 Thread Robert Shearman
Mike Hearn wrote: On Sat, 2004-12-18 at 07:46 -0800, Bill Medland wrote: 0013:trace:ole:listener_thread Process listener thread starting on (\\.\pipe\WINE_OLE_StubMgr_00100011) ... 0009:fixme:ole:PIPE_GetNewPipeBuf Could not open named pipe

Re: out-of-process COM design

2004-12-18 Thread Mike Hearn
On Sat, 18 Dec 2004 07:46:42 -0800, Bill Medland wrote: If I combine it with Rob's CoInitializeEx patch rather than Mike's then it executes but still fails, as follows: Try this patch. It's a modified form of Robs: Index: dlls/ole32/rpc.c

Re: out-of-process COM design

2004-12-18 Thread Mike Hearn
On Sat, 18 Dec 2004 08:45:46 -0800, Bill Medland wrote: 0018:trace:ole:CoMarshalInterface Using standard marshaling 0018:trace:ole:CoMarshalInterface Calling IMarshal::MarshalInterace 0018:trace:ole:StdMarshalImpl_MarshalInterface (...,{---c000-0046},...) wine:

Re: Message Notify

2004-12-18 Thread Mike Hearn
On Sat, 18 Dec 2004 08:44:46 -0800, Duane Clark wrote: It appears to me that you have not used this email address (m.hearn.at.signal.QinetiQ.com) for a long time, at least not for sending to this list. If it is no longer in use, would you mind unsubscribing it to eliminate at least this one

Re: [AppDB] big AppDB refactoring

2004-12-18 Thread tony_lambregts
Jonathan Ernst wrote: This patch is a big refactoring of the AppDB. Some files have been moved and renamed, others were simply deleted and many where fixed and improved. No functional differences (apart the fixed global vars). *The configuration (config.inc.php) has to be updated on the live

Re: [AppDB] big AppDB refactoring

2004-12-18 Thread Jonathan Ernst
Hello, I certainly agree that I could have separated apidb-appdb changes from the rest (but replacing it is trivial and is functionnaly equivalent), but I can't seriously make one patch for each file moved as it'll require to patch every dependent files for each move. The files in / import files

AppDB update (refactoring and new ideas)

2004-12-18 Thread Jonathan Ernst
Hello, I made a huge patch that (IMHO) cleans up the code structure of the AppDB and as a side effect, fixes most remaining global vars bugs. If this patch can be added tonight I'll then improve and fix the screenshot code (it works, but sometimes there are problems with backslashing the image

Re: [AppDB] big AppDB refactoring

2004-12-18 Thread Chris Morgan
I'd feel bad if this issue hadn't come up a few times in the past. Sending in large patches that do multiple things is silly. Even worse is that these are fundamental changes to where things are located but we haven't even decided there is a problem with how things are now or even whether

Loading a .dll.so from current directory

2004-12-18 Thread Frank Richter
Hi, I would like to load a .dll.so from the current directory, and I wonder what's the best way to accomplish this... I tried to set WINEDLLPATH, but it doesn't seem to have an effect (the .dll.so is still only tried to be loaded from /usr/lib, as I can see from the trace:module output). The