On Sat, 1 Dec 2007, Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
> This change of mine is obvious since InExt and OutExt are DWORD, thus
> unsigned, and thus always greater or equal zero so my patch should be
> fine in any case.
>
> However, looking at the else-part of the if-statement, I have some
> doubts this is work
I sent these patches to wine-patches, but they have not been applied.
gdiplus: added the ProfileNotFound status
code. [0001-gdiplus-added-the-ProfileNotFound-status-code.patch]
30/12/2007
include: added the new Vista theme schema
headers.[0001-include-added-the-new-Vista-theme-
"Austin English" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Also, marking bugs as having insufficient information to fix advises the
>> reporter that the project
>> needs more information to help or troubleshoot.
>
> Maybe add a resolution of NEEDMOREINFO?
There is no need to add one more reason for a bug re
Reece Dunn wrote:
> On 31/12/2007, Guillaume B. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Stefan Dösinger wrote:
>>
>> > Am Montag, 31. Dezember 2007 10:25:15 schrieb Vijay Kiran Kamuju:
>> >> > So the problem is that the interace
>> >> > {2a8af120-e9de-4132-aaa5-4bdda5f325b8} is not supported by the
>> >> >
Am Dienstag, 1. Januar 2008 21:53:02 schrieb H. Verbeet:
> Unless you actually want to test the exact return value, you should
> use SUCCEEDED / FAILED. Some of the tests do get this wrong,
> unfortunately.
I usually test against the exact return value(D3D_OK) in the ok() statements,
and SUCCEEDED
On Tuesday 01 January 2008 21:25:02 Clarence Risher wrote:
> Because I like to nitpick, does your 2007 count include any commits to
> your local tree that arent actually submitted/accepted?
>
> On Jan 1, 2008 7:37 AM, Hans Leidekker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > $ for y in {2002..2007}; do \
On 02/01/2008, Alexander Dorofeyev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Stefan Dösinger wrote:
> > You can also try to QueryInterface old IDirect3DDevice* versions from
> > IDirect3DDevice7, but I think this doesn't work as the COM theory says on
> > Windows. I haven't yet tested the restrictions and imple
Jan Zerebecki wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 31, 2007 at 06:49:56PM -0600, Austin English wrote:
>
>> On Dec 31, 2007 6:42 PM, James McKenzie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>> I agree. If you cannot find the application or a demo version to work
>>> with, how can you fix the
>>> bug. Logs and other
On Jan 1, 2008 9:33 AM, Jan Zerebecki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> We could add flags for "needs more information" and perhaps one
> for "reproducible bug report with enough initial information".
>
> (A flag is something that can be requested to be set and can then
> be granted or denied by someone
On 31/12/2007, Guillaume B. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Stefan Dösinger wrote:
>
> > Am Montag, 31. Dezember 2007 10:25:15 schrieb Vijay Kiran Kamuju:
> >> > So the problem is that the interace
> >> > {2a8af120-e9de-4132-aaa5-4bdda5f325b8} is not supported by the current
> >> > Wine implementatio
On Mon, 2007-12-31 at 14:27 +0100, Stefan Dösinger wrote:
> Am Sonntag, 30. Dezember 2007 19:49:16 schrieb Rob Wilderspin:
> > Greetings,
> >
> > I'm wondering if I can help anyone with the investigation of bug 8236,
> > as I've recently acquired Dungeon Siege 2 and it's unplayable because of
> >
Stefan Dösinger codeweavers.com> writes:
> Am Mittwoch, 26. Dezember 2007 22:35:16 schrieb Günther Brammer:
> > +memset(&locked_desc, 1, sizeof(locked_desc));
> > +locked_desc.dwSize = sizeof(locked_desc);
> > +
> > hr = IDirectDrawSurface_Lock(surface, rect, &
Stefan Dösinger wrote:
> You can also try to QueryInterface old IDirect3DDevice* versions from
> IDirect3DDevice7, but I think this doesn't work as the COM theory says on
> Windows. I haven't yet tested the restrictions and implemented them because I
> haven't seen a game yet that depends on the
On 01/01/2008, Stefan Dösinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It is likely that Alexandre was waiting for an OK from me or Henri. He is the
> only committer, but when someone he doesn't know sends a patch he usually
> waits for the OK from someone who is maintaining the part of Wine. I think I
> forg
On Sat, Dec 29, 2007 at 09:11:17AM -0700, Vitaliy Margolen wrote:
> Where did our buzilla admins go? 3 weeks and nothing is changing!
I'd assume you mean the category changes to bugzilla (I just sent
a mail regarding that), otherwise please help me out on what I
missed.
Jan
I think I will be able to do the changes next weekend.
If no one objects until Friday, I'll assume that everyone is fine
with the changes as proposed in this thread.
I'll furthermore assume that I can modify the descriptions of
categories as I see fit (I explained in a previous mail on this
topic
Am Mittwoch, 2. Januar 2008 02:16:13 schrieb Alexander Dorofeyev:
> OK, thanks a lot. Regarding vertex structure - I'm afraid I can't reuse
> struct vertex/nvertex, because I need a very specific format for this test
> (D3DFVF_XYZRHW | D3DFVF_DIFFUSE). I could probably reuse sVertexT from
> fogtest
On Mon, Dec 31, 2007 at 06:49:56PM -0600, Austin English wrote:
> On Dec 31, 2007 6:42 PM, James McKenzie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I agree. If you cannot find the application or a demo version to work
> > with, how can you fix the
> > bug. Logs and other helpers go a long way. Maybe an int
OK, thanks a lot. Regarding vertex structure - I'm afraid I can't reuse struct
vertex/nvertex, because I need a very specific format for this test
(D3DFVF_XYZRHW | D3DFVF_DIFFUSE). I could probably reuse sVertexT from fogtest,
but then I'll also have to set specular, that I don't really need. I loo
On Mon, Dec 31, 2007 at 05:49:14PM -0700, James McKenzie wrote:
> Austin English wrote:
> > On Dec 31, 2007 6:10 PM, Maarten Lankhorst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> The situation isn't improved by the fact that bugs are reopened by those
> >> persons after minimal additions. Perhaps we should hav
Am Dienstag, 1. Januar 2008 11:19:50 schrieb Alexander Dorofeyev:
> OK, I'll see what I can do with the test. Speaking of tests, I submitted
> test for zero vertex rhw case (as suggested by H.Verbeet to avoid future
> regressions), but I think it didn't get accepted. Perhaps, you can look
> through
$ for y in {2002..2007}; do \
n=$( git log | grep ^Date: | grep $y | wc -l ); \
echo "Number of commits in $y: $n"; \
done
Number of commits in 2002: 3094
Number of commits in 2003: 3283
Number of commits in 2004: 3851
Number of commits in 2005: 6006
Number of commits in 2006: 8431
Number of
22 matches
Mail list logo
