On 10/23/2009 12:03 AM, Juan Lang wrote:
--Juan
Wouldn't it be cleaner to change the use of the hardcoded c:\deadbeef.dbf?
And yes, I should have done that when I wrote that piece ;)
--
Cheers,
Paul.
This patch makes some tests (like urlmon's url test) to crash if Gecko isn't
installed (dereference of NULL window->nswindow in update_window_doc called
by HTMLWindow_Create(nswindow==NULL) called by HTMLDocument_Create)
On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 4:09 PM, Eric Pouech wrote:
> 0 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
The winmm win16/32 separation has finally collapsed in on itself and
this is the resulting Einstein-Rosen bridge.
--
Steven Edwards
"There is one thing stronger than all the armies in the wo
Alexandre Julliard wrote:
> Charles Davis writes:
>
>> Alexandre Julliard wrote:
>>> Charles Davis writes:
>>>
Or, maybe not. I could be totally wrong about that. Maybe what you
really want is for me to get an FD from mountmgr so I can talk to it at
will. I don't know.
W
Charles Davis writes:
> Alexandre Julliard wrote:
>> Charles Davis writes:
>>
>>> Or, maybe not. I could be totally wrong about that. Maybe what you
>>> really want is for me to get an FD from mountmgr so I can talk to it at
>>> will. I don't know.
>>>
>>> We can even add the FD to mountmgr's r
Alexandre Julliard wrote:
> Charles Davis writes:
>
>> Or, maybe not. I could be totally wrong about that. Maybe what you
>> really want is for me to get an FD from mountmgr so I can talk to it at
>> will. I don't know.
>>
>> We can even add the FD to mountmgr's run loop (via a CFFileDescriptor
>
Stefan Leichter writes:
> Am Thursday 22 October 2009 15:45:34 schrieb Alexandre Julliard:
>> Stefan Leichter writes:
>> > --- wine-git/dlls/ntdll/ntdll.spec 2009-10-08 19:00:17.0 +0200
>> > +++ wine-build/dlls/ntdll/ntdll.spec 2009-08-27 14:23:39.0
>> > +0200
>> > @@ -623
Am Thursday 22 October 2009 15:45:34 schrieb Alexandre Julliard:
> Stefan Leichter writes:
> > --- wine-git/dlls/ntdll/ntdll.spec 2009-10-08 19:00:17.0 +0200
> > +++ wine-build/dlls/ntdll/ntdll.spec2009-08-27 14:23:39.0
> > +0200
> > @@ -623,6 +623,7 @@
> > # @ stub RtlG
Charles Davis writes:
> Or, maybe not. I could be totally wrong about that. Maybe what you
> really want is for me to get an FD from mountmgr so I can talk to it at
> will. I don't know.
>
> We can even add the FD to mountmgr's run loop (via a CFFileDescriptor
> object), or if you prefer, we can
Charles Davis wrote:
> Alexandre Julliard wrote:
>> Charles Davis writes:
>>
>>> Oh, I see. You mean I should open a handle to mountmgr with
>>> NtOpenFile(). That's what I thought. Now I just need to figure out the
>>> right IOCTL. Maybe I need to make one up. And I still don't know how to
>>> sp
Alexandre Julliard wrote:
> Charles Davis writes:
>
>> Oh, I see. You mean I should open a handle to mountmgr with
>> NtOpenFile(). That's what I thought. Now I just need to figure out the
>> right IOCTL. Maybe I need to make one up. And I still don't know how to
>> specify the correct device to
Charles Davis writes:
> Oh, I see. You mean I should open a handle to mountmgr with
> NtOpenFile(). That's what I thought. Now I just need to figure out the
> right IOCTL. Maybe I need to make one up. And I still don't know how to
> specify the correct device to mountmgr. (The answer is "depends
On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 7:28 AM, Nikolay Sivov wrote:
> Dan, do I need something special to
> build current valgrind? Is there any special gcc/binutils requirements?
I don't think there are any special tool requirements (other than
possibly "don't use binutils-gold", but that's true for wine as w
Alexandre Julliard wrote:
> Charles Davis writes:
>
>> Now I just need to figure out how to do that. I read the headers and
>> source, and figured out a QUERY_UNIX_DRIVE won't work because it needs a
>> drive letter, and NTDLL isn't supposed to know about drive letters.
>> Maybe we can use the de
On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 1:42 AM, Scott Ritchie wrote:
> Heard a report that the gdiplus verb no longer works because the files
> to be downloaded have been moved.
It was. Powerpoint Viewer 2003 was taken offline, and redirected to
2007, which doesn't bundle it. This was fixed in SVN a week or two
Hi, Nikolay
> You need to include patched configure.ac as well with new
> WINE_CONFIG_MAKEFILE entry.
Are you shure what the changes in configure.ac needed?
Andrey Turkin wrote in list below:
> No you don't need to (most patches do add some subset of autogenerated
> files for some reason but i
> You need to include patched configure.ac as well with new
> WINE_CONFIG_MAKEFILE entry.
Are there other troubles in these patches?
--
Best regards,
Ilya Shpigor.
On 10/22/2009 04:40 PM, Juan Lang wrote:
Hi Paul,
This one introduces some failures on some boxes. Are they indeed missing
the needed Verisign root certificate as stated in the logs?
No, that warning is spurious in this case. Austin and I introduced
competing patches for this one, where my w
Hi Paul,
>> This one introduces some failures on some boxes. Are they indeed missing
>> the needed Verisign root certificate as stated in the logs?
No, that warning is spurious in this case. Austin and I introduced
competing patches for this one, where my warning was intended to warn
only in the
Dan Kegel wrote:
I added suppressions for a few frequent spurious warnings and reran,
the updated results are in
http://kegel.com/wine/valgrind/logs/2009-10-21-19.42.log
and broken out by test in
http://kegel.com/wine/valgrind/logs/2009-10-21-19.42/
Please send me the suppression record for any
Charles Davis writes:
> Now I just need to figure out how to do that. I read the headers and
> source, and figured out a QUERY_UNIX_DRIVE won't work because it needs a
> drive letter, and NTDLL isn't supposed to know about drive letters.
> Maybe we can use the device name by doing something simil
Alexandre Julliard wrote:
Ilya Shpigor writes:
+/* Parse options */
+for(i = 0; i < argc; i++)
+{
+if (argv[i][0] == '/')
+{
+for(j = 0; j < sizeof(sFlags) / sizeof(sFlags[0]); j++)
+if (!strcmpiW(argv[i], sFlags[j].wFlag))
+
It varies. I got a leakfix in yesterday, for instance.
On Oct 22, 2009 5:51 AM, "Ben Klein" wrote:
2009/10/22 Dan Kegel :
> 2) Fixing leaks in test code is usually pretty safe, and > it's easier to
get Alexandre to accept ...
I thought AJ didn't like leak fixes in the tests.
Alexandre Julliard wrote:
> Charles Davis writes:
>
>> Charles Davis wrote:
>>> Alexandre Julliard wrote:
That sort of thing should most likely be integrated with the
diskarbitration stuff in mountmgr.
>>> Really? I guess I could do it that way. But then how are
>>> IOCTL_SCSI_GET_
Ilya Shpigor writes:
> +/* Parse options */
> +for(i = 0; i < argc; i++)
> +{
> +if (argv[i][0] == '/')
> +{
> +for(j = 0; j < sizeof(sFlags) / sizeof(sFlags[0]); j++)
> +if (!strcmpiW(argv[i], sFlags[j].wFlag))
> +{
> +
Stefan Leichter writes:
> --- wine-git/dlls/ntdll/ntdll.spec2009-10-08 19:00:17.0 +0200
> +++ wine-build/dlls/ntdll/ntdll.spec 2009-08-27 14:23:39.0 +0200
> @@ -623,6 +623,7 @@
> # @ stub RtlGetFirstRange
> # @ stub RtlGetFrame
> @ stdcall RtlGetFullPathName_U(wstr long pt
Stefan Leichter writes:
> --- wine-git/dlls/user32/Makefile.in 2009-07-03 22:00:44.0 +0200
> +++ wine-build/dlls/user32/Makefile.in2009-10-04 10:53:16.0
> +0200
Don't resend the same patch every day, that will only get you
ignored. Anyway this should wait until user is
Charles Davis writes:
> Charles Davis wrote:
>> Alexandre Julliard wrote:
>>> That sort of thing should most likely be integrated with the
>>> diskarbitration stuff in mountmgr.
>>>
>> Really? I guess I could do it that way. But then how are
>> IOCTL_SCSI_GET_ADDRESS clients supposed to get the a
Ben Klein wrote:
> 2009/10/22 Dan Kegel :
>> 2) Fixing leaks in test code is usually pretty safe, and
>> it's easier to get Alexandre to accept simple patches to tests,
>> so start with those if you don't have many patches under your belt.
>
> I thought AJ didn't like leak fixes in the tests.
He d
2009/10/22 Dan Kegel :
> 2) Fixing leaks in test code is usually pretty safe, and
> it's easier to get Alexandre to accept simple patches to tests,
> so start with those if you don't have many patches under your belt.
I thought AJ didn't like leak fixes in the tests.
Another fortnight, another winetricks.
Eleven new verbs and spices, and a few bugfixes.
Updates since 20091015:
* Fix vc2005express verb (interactive mode) to work on windows
* Add mingw and mingw-gdb (hey, we support cygwin. Equal time!)
* Add cmake. Based on a patch by Mathieu Malaterre
* Upda
I added suppressions for a few frequent spurious warnings and reran,
the updated results are in
http://kegel.com/wine/valgrind/logs/2009-10-21-19.42.log
and broken out by test in
http://kegel.com/wine/valgrind/logs/2009-10-21-19.42/
Please send me the suppression record for any warnings that are
2009/10/22 Nikolay Sivov :
> Makefile.in and congifure.ac aren't autogenerated, but Makefile and
They're generated by tools/make_makefiles.
Ilya Shpigor wrote:
Hi, Nikolay
You need to include patched configure.ac as well with new
WINE_CONFIG_MAKEFILE entry.
Are you shure what the changes in configure.ac needed?
Yes.
Andrey Turkin wrote in list below:
No you don't need to (most patches do add some subset of autoge
Ilya Shpigor wrote:
Hi, Ilya.
You need to include patched configure.ac as well with new
WINE_CONFIG_MAKEFILE entry.
Charles Davis wrote:
> Alexandre Julliard wrote:
>> Charles Davis writes:
>>
>>> Here's a new version of my patch that's slightly less complicated. I
>>> didn't get a response last time, so I'm sending it again. Please,
>>> someone review my patch. I won't send it to wine-patches until I know I
>>
On 10/22/2009 09:07 AM, Paul Vriens wrote:
On 10/21/2009 03:28 AM, Juan Lang wrote:
--Juan
Hi Juan,
This one introduces some failures on some boxes. Are they indeed missing
the needed Verisign root certificate as stated in the logs?
Which certificate is that btw? The tests fail on my NT4 bo
Charles Davis writes:
> Here's a new version of my patch that's slightly less complicated. I
> didn't get a response last time, so I'm sending it again. Please,
> someone review my patch. I won't send it to wine-patches until I know I
> have this right (yes, I am a bit of a perfectionist).
>
> To
On 10/21/2009 03:28 AM, Juan Lang wrote:
--Juan
Hi Juan,
This one introduces some failures on some boxes. Are they indeed missing
the needed Verisign root certificate as stated in the logs?
Which certificate is that btw? The tests fail on my NT4 box where I see
several Verisign root certi
39 matches
Mail list logo
