Raphael [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Wednesday 16 March 2005 19:57, Alexandre Julliard wrote:
This is wrong, comments should have already been taken into account
when PARSER_string_substW is called. The right fix is to make
GenFormStrWithoutPlaceHolders16 properly split the line like the
Michael Ost [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
This should start allocating memory from below 0x4000, to windows
processes after the area between 0x4000, to 0x8000, is full,
right?
That would be nice, but unfortunately it's not what it does. Also even
if it worked it wouldn't help for
--- Mike McCormack [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I've noticed that STI.DLL uses the
IStiDeviceControl
interface, which is defined by the STIUSD.H file I
haven't got (it might be part of the Windows DDK
or
something). Any idea where to find it?
I can't see any definition of
The last patch I sent didn't have a full enough path to
dlls/x11drv/clipboard.c
On Wed, 2005-03-16 at 14:15 -0700, Ron Jensen wrote:
Stefan,
You are smarter than me! I completely missed this function. I
believe
the error is because *visual is 0. I replaced visual with
On Wed, Mar 16, 2005 at 10:59:09PM +0800, Dmitry Timoshkov wrote:
I'd like to suggest to add the following janitorial projects for Wine:
1. Fix Wine to be compilable by a 64-bit compiler
2. Fix wrong assumptions in Wine about endianess.
I'd say go for it.
--
Dimi.
Hi,
there are enough rooms left in the hotel. Please use WineConf as keyword.
See you in Stuttgart
Hans-Ulrich Schmid
Wirtschaftsförderung Region Stuttgart GmbH
Stuttgart Region Economic Development Corporation
FIR_st - Forum IT-Region Stuttgart
Friedrichstr. 10
70174 Stuttgart
Brian Vincent wrote:
I
PS - still looking for ideas for the agenda, if you have any, let me
know. Also let me know if you'd like to present something.
Apart from all of Wine, I'm always interested in the conformance
testing. I believe it's crucial in speeding up Wines' development.
For each bug
Mike Hearn wrote:
On Wed, 16 Mar 2005 12:12:47 +0900, Mike McCormack wrote:
We only implement the first 4.
Some of those are only needed by Explorer/the shell though, I doubt it's
necessary to implement them to run the apps (unless you want to run
Explorer of course :)
Yes, probably,
Paul Millar wrote:
On Thursday 17 March 2005 10:33, Jakob Eriksson wrote:
Apart from all of Wine, I'm always interested in the conformance
testing. I believe it's crucial in speeding up Wines' development.
For each bug found, it is often a good idea to write an automatic
regression test.
Brian Vincent wrote:
PS - still looking for ideas for the agenda, if you have any, let me
know. Also let me know if you'd like to present something.
Will anyone demo CXtest? I think it would be great.
http://www.cxtest.org/
regards,
Jakob
On Thursday 17 March 2005 10:33, Jakob Eriksson wrote:
Apart from all of Wine, I'm always interested in the conformance
testing. I believe it's crucial in speeding up Wines' development.
For each bug found, it is often a good idea to write an automatic
regression test.
Yes, although that's a
Damjan Jovanovic wrote:
I'll see if I can get it from the ReactOS people. Does
anyone else on this mailing list have the Windows DDK
around and a spare stiusd.h they want to share?
Are you planning to write an STI mini-driver or just trying to load one?
I don't think you'll have much success
Jakob Eriksson wrote:
Maybe one could script something up so that a commit to
tests CVS would not be *possible* without a confirmed test
pass on Windows 95, NT, 2000 and XP.
That would be very hard to do and mostly pointless for drivers.
Ivan.
Juan Lang [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
This is getting big enough I might as well float a patch by.
ChangeLog: start of implementation of IPropertyStorage
This breaks the tests:
storage32.c:481: Test failed: failed to create property set storage
storage32.c:489: Test failed: failed to create
Will anyone demo CXtest? I think it would be great.
http://www.cxtest.org/
I think that's one of those topics that Brian is holding in reserve;
we'll be more than happy to demo it.
Jer
Hi,
On Thu, Mar 17, 2005 at 08:35:25AM -0600, Jeremy White wrote:
Will anyone demo CXtest? I think it would be great.
http://www.cxtest.org/
I think that's one of those topics that Brian is holding in reserve;
we'll be more than happy to demo it.
Nice stuff!
Will you have decided by
On Thursday 17 March 2005 11:54, Jakob Eriksson wrote:
Maybe one could script something up so that a commit to
tests CVS would not be *possible* without a confirmed test
pass on Windows 95, NT, 2000 and XP.
That'd be the best thing since sliced bread.
CVS supports doing some server-side
Ivan Leo Puoti wrote:
Jakob Eriksson wrote:
Maybe one could script something up so that a commit to
tests CVS would not be *possible* without a confirmed test
pass on Windows 95, NT, 2000 and XP.
That would be very hard to do and mostly pointless for drivers.
Sometimes hard is worthwile. At
On Thursday 17 March 2005 11:51, Jakob Eriksson wrote:
Paul Millar wrote:
[writing tests]'s a rather weary job, which no one enjoys doing
:^/
I do! Maybe I have a condition, but I really love doing it! :-)
Long may that continue!
[...]
[separate CVS tree]
This makes sense. Winetest
Paul Millar wrote:
On Thursday 17 March 2005 11:51, Jakob Eriksson wrote:
Paul Millar wrote:
[writing tests]'s a rather weary job, which no one enjoys doing
:^/
I do! Maybe I have a condition, but I really love doing it! :-)
Long may that continue!
Thanks, I hope so too! :-)
A bit OT, well kinda.
I'm trying to stabilize offscreen rendering in DirectX 9, I know Jason was
thinking of doing a demo.
Is there going to be another wine release before wine conf so I can merge
DirectX and do you still plan to do a demo Jason, if so what are you time-lines
for something
On Thu, 17 Mar 2005, Jakob Eriksson wrote:
Ouch. Of course, should have thought of that. Maybe we
need a patch penguin?
CVS actually handles 'vendor branches' fairly nicely. It should be
possible for Jakob (or whoever else decides to be the 'test penguin') to
maintain his own 'testing' CVS
Robert Reif wrote:
Use real names for wave device also.
Please disregard this patch. I will present a better one shortly.
IStiDeviceControl are probably part of the Windows DDK
(Device Driver Kit), and that you get separately from
Microsoft (for a ridiculous price).
It's a free CD. You pay only for shipping. If you want, I've got two of those
and can transfer one of them to be taken care of by the wine folks. As
The current CVS version has a regression in the animate control, causing
a deadlock, most probably in WM_DESTROY handler, in the app I'm testing
Wine with.
trace:message:SPY_ExitMessage (0x10038) L{SysAnimate32} message
[0047] WM_WINDOWPOSCHANGED returned
Paul Millar wrote:
On Thursday 17 March 2005 11:54, Jakob Eriksson wrote:
Maybe one could script something up so that a commit to
tests CVS would not be *possible* without a confirmed test
pass on Windows 95, NT, 2000 and XP.
That'd be the best thing since sliced bread.
CVS supports doing some
C. Scott Ananian wrote:
On Thu, 17 Mar 2005, Jakob Eriksson wrote:
Ouch. Of course, should have thought of that. Maybe we
need a patch penguin?
CVS actually handles 'vendor branches' fairly nicely. It should be
possible for Jakob (or whoever else decides to be the 'test penguin')
to maintain
anyone know why this patch hasn't been accepted?
http://www.winehq.org/hypermail/wine-patches/2005/03/0328.html
Tom
On Thu, Mar 17, 2005 at 10:31:24PM +0100, Krzysztof Foltman wrote:
The current CVS version has a regression in the animate control, causing
a deadlock, most probably in WM_DESTROY handler, in the app I'm testing
Wine with.
We should just get rid of the thread and the critical section
Actually, I think the test is just the wrong way round. It should read
if (STGM_SHARE_MODE(grfMode) != STGM_SHARE_EXCLUSIVE)
I screwed it up in the following commit:
http://cvs.winehq.org/cvsweb/wine/dlls/ole32/storage32.c.diff?r1=1.71r2=1.72f=h
Mike
Troy Rollo wrote:
StgOpenStorage was failing
30 matches
Mail list logo
