On Thursday, 1 August 2013 12:19 AM, Vincent Povirk wrote:
The problem is there are situations where patches are never reviewed and no
one is told why.
After some thought, it occurred to me that the said patches are being reviewed;
they just never have their status altered.
So, one possible
Hi all,
It's time to do another update of Wine Gecko, so I prepared a new beta
build. It's already on Sourceforge [1]. Until server-side support for
auto install of the package is committed [2], its manual installation is
required [3]. I attached a patch to Wine that is required for the new
Looks good, thanks.
This seems suspicious to me. You appear to be taking the namespace of
the class and assuming it's an assembly name.
Is there really no other information in the registry that could be
used to identify the assembly?
On 14/08/13 20:08, morphiend wrote:
-@ stub _chsize_s
+@ cdecl _chsize_s(long int64) msvcrt._chsize
+#@ stub _chsize_s
Oops..
Hi Vincent,
there's no more info in the registry. At this point we have the assembly
name and we know that it is not in GAC, so either it is in current
directory or it's absent.
That being said, I think this is the wrong place for this change. Method
get_file_from_strongname [1] is better suited
If we have the assembly name, then we should be using that to decide
on the filename to try in the application directory, not the
namespace.
On Wed, Aug 14, 2013 at 4:04 PM, Daniel Jeliński djelins...@gmail.com wrote:
That being said, I think this is the wrong place for this change. Method
get_file_from_strongname [1] is better suited for that purpose IMO.
Doing it that way is probably more correct, but it's also more
dangerous
