> GetVersionEx() is used in GlobalMemoryStatus() also, after these are in I'll
> pull it out and make it static, and then just do it once and use it for
> both.
Okay, thanks.
Unrelated nit on patch 3/3:
+lpmemex->ullTotalVirtual =
min((ULONG_PTR)si.lpMaximumApplicationAddress-(ULONG_PTR)si.l
On 06/06/2011 11:02 AM, Juan Lang wrote:
Ha! Quite right, thanks!
If that's what you want, then an easier check is to use GetVersion()
rather than GetVersionEx. (GetVersion()& 0x8000) is true under
Win9x, false under any NT version. See many checks like this in e.g.
kernel32.
--Juan
GetV
> Ha! Quite right, thanks!
If that's what you want, then an easier check is to use GetVersion()
rather than GetVersionEx. (GetVersion() & 0x8000) is true under
Win9x, false under any NT version. See many checks like this in e.g.
kernel32.
--Juan
On 06/06/2011 10:50 AM, Juan Lang wrote:
In NT4 mode:
(osver.dwMajorVersion>= 5) is FALSE.
(osver.dwPlatformId != VER_PLATFORM_WIN32_WINDOWS) is TRUE.
(osver.dwMajorVersion>= 5 || osver.dwPlatformId !=
VER_PLATFORM_WIN32_WINDOWS) is TRUE.
Right?
Ah, right. Wrong with this comment, sorry about t
> In NT4 mode:
> (osver.dwMajorVersion>= 5) is FALSE.
> (osver.dwPlatformId != VER_PLATFORM_WIN32_WINDOWS) is TRUE.
> (osver.dwMajorVersion>= 5 || osver.dwPlatformId !=
> VER_PLATFORM_WIN32_WINDOWS) is TRUE.
> Right?
Ah, right. Wrong with this comment, sorry about that. But my
original comment r
On 06/06/2011 10:45 AM, Juan Lang wrote:
I'm removing part of the comment because it no longer applies. We're not
just using the XP behavior for everything anymore, now we're using the 9x
behavior when it's appropriate.
When is it appropriate, and when not? I don't know, and your patch
doesn't
> I'm removing part of the comment because it no longer applies. We're not
> just using the XP behavior for everything anymore, now we're using the 9x
> behavior when it's appropriate.
When is it appropriate, and when not? I don't know, and your patch
doesn't explain that. See below for more on
On 06/06/2011 10:23 AM, Juan Lang wrote:
Hi Adam,
perhaps I'm just being obtuse, but I don't see how Dmitry's comment
has been addressed for this patch. I'm confused by the commit comment
("Emulate Win9x if appropriate") and the change itself:
/* Win98 returns only the swapsize in ullTota
Hi Adam,
perhaps I'm just being obtuse, but I don't see how Dmitry's comment
has been addressed for this patch. I'm confused by the commit comment
("Emulate Win9x if appropriate") and the change itself:
/* Win98 returns only the swapsize in ullTotalPageFile/ullAvailPageFile,
WinXP re
On 06/03/2011 03:37 AM, Dmitry Timoshkov wrote:
Adam Martinson wrote:
The stuff in that block is for win2k+ mode only. Win9x doesn't add
[Total|Avail]Phys to [Total|Avail]PageFile. If wine is in win9x mode it
should behave like win9x, or it confuses old apps. This is needed for
the 2nd patc
Adam Martinson wrote:
> The stuff in that block is for win2k+ mode only. Win9x doesn't add
> [Total|Avail]Phys to [Total|Avail]PageFile. If wine is in win9x mode it
> should behave like win9x, or it confuses old apps. This is needed for
> the 2nd patch, IIRC removing the photoshop 4 hack in
On 06/02/2011 09:21 PM, Charles Davis wrote:
On 6/2/11 2:46 PM, Adam Martinson wrote:
On 06/02/2011 03:10 PM, Dmitry Timoshkov wrote:
Adam Martinson wrote:
+osver.dwOSVersionInfoSize = sizeof(osver);
+GetVersionExW(&osver);
+
...
+if (osver.dwMajorVersion>= 5)
Once again, tha
On 6/2/11 2:46 PM, Adam Martinson wrote:
> On 06/02/2011 03:10 PM, Dmitry Timoshkov wrote:
>> Adam Martinson wrote:
>>
>>> +osver.dwOSVersionInfoSize = sizeof(osver);
>>> +GetVersionExW(&osver);
>>> +
>> ...
>>> +if (osver.dwMajorVersion>= 5)
>> Once again, that's wrong way of detectin
On 06/02/2011 03:10 PM, Dmitry Timoshkov wrote:
Adam Martinson wrote:
+osver.dwOSVersionInfoSize = sizeof(osver);
+GetVersionExW(&osver);
+
...
+if (osver.dwMajorVersion>= 5)
Once again, that's wrong way of detecting win9x, or please try to explain
better how the patch does what
Adam Martinson wrote:
> +osver.dwOSVersionInfoSize = sizeof(osver);
> +GetVersionExW(&osver);
> +
...
> +if (osver.dwMajorVersion >= 5)
Once again, that's wrong way of detecting win9x, or please try to explain
better how the patch does what the subject describes, and for which app
it
On 05/31/2011 12:09 PM, Dmitry Timoshkov wrote:
Adam Martinson wrote:
+if (osver.dwMajorVersion>= 5)
That's a wrong check for win9x.
It's not, it's a check for win2k and later, the stuff in that block
isn't done for win9x.
Adam Martinson wrote:
> +if (osver.dwMajorVersion >= 5)
That's a wrong check for win9x.
--
Dmitry.
17 matches
Mail list logo
