On Tue, 18 Nov 2008, Michael Karcher wrote:
> > Note that the IDL defines the VARIANT parameter as "optional". If the
> > filename is not specified, you should pass a NULL stream to
> > OleLoadPicture.
> How do I know? I think you shouldn't have told these detail. I might
> know what happens if I
2008/11/17 Michael Karcher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Am Montag, den 17.11.2008, 13:09 -0800 schrieb Jeremy Drake:
>> As far as the "standard OLE file stream object", if you know of one please
>> let me know. AFAIK, it is a pretty major oversight in the OLE IStream
>> APIs that there is not a function
Am Montag, den 17.11.2008, 13:09 -0800 schrieb Jeremy Drake:
> > Be sure to write your findings like (this is hypothetical, as I did not
> > look at your patches and the OlePicture stuff till now): "Loads an image
> > from a File. This is just like OleLoadPictureStream, but with a file
> > name ins
On Mon, 17 Nov 2008, Michael Karcher wrote:
> The best way to do this is (in my oppinion) submitting the testcase
> again, but without the implementation, and marking the test todo_wine. A
> bug might be useful, but wouldn't a mail that contains the testcase as
> patch and the description in the c
On Sun, 16 Nov 2008, Juan Lang wrote:
> Do you have a bug open? Sorry, I've forgotten. If not, please do open
> one. You can describe your findings there.
No, but a quick search on bugzilla for OleLoadPictureFile turned up bug
10156. A comment on that bug suggests changing the summary to
"Ole
On Thu, 13 Nov 2008, Juan Lang wrote:
> > Any feedback on the spec file or the debug trace?
>
> I'm afraid I don't know what substantive difference there is between
> looking at one small portion of the disassembly (to verify a function
> is being called) and learning something more substantial.
Hello Jeremy, Juan and rest of wine-devel
[sorry for shifting quotes around, this makes following my points easier
and in this case shouldn't forge you to seem to have said something you
didn't say]
> > And now that I know that, I certainly won't be doing it again.
> Thank you for your understanin
> And now that I know that, I certainly won't be doing it again.
Thank you for your understaning.
> Well, I still have an application that won't run under wine because this
> function is not implemented. So assuming *this* patch doesn't get in,
> what can I do to help get *a* patch in that imple
On Fr, 2008-11-14 at 21:17 +0100, Detlef Riekenberg wrote:
> On Mi, 2008-11-12 at 23:40 -0800, Jeremy Drake wrote:
> > if(!pOleLoadPictureFile || !pOleLoadPictureFileEx)
> Are there systems in the Wild that have
> OleLoadPictureFile, but are missing OleLoadPictureFile?
> In that case, you should
On Mi, 2008-11-12 at 23:40 -0800, Jeremy Drake wrote:
I have no Idea about that area, but the unicode API is
not implemented on win9x
(GetTempFileNameW, CreateFileW, DeleteFileW)
> if(!pOleLoadPictureFile || !pOleLoadPictureFileEx)
Are there systems in the Wild that have
OleLoadPictureFile, but
> Any feedback on the spec file or the debug trace?
I'm afraid I don't know what substantive difference there is between
looking at one small portion of the disassembly (to verify a function
is being called) and learning something more substantial. There are
certain kinds of reverse engineering t
On Wed, 12 Nov 2008, Austin English wrote:
> Can you add a testcase to show that this behavior is correct?
Yeah. I'll do that for the next version of the patch, as well as
implement OleLoadPictureFileEx.
Any feedback on the spec file or the debug trace?
Thanks,
Jeremy
--
If you cannot convin
On Wed, 12 Nov 2008, Juan Lang wrote:
> >> This patch implements OleLoadPictureFile based on the MSDN docs
> >> (http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms221680.aspx) and what I saw
> >> when stepping through in windbg on XP.
>
> Stop right there. Implementing stuff based on looking at disassemb
>> This patch implements OleLoadPictureFile based on the MSDN docs
>> (http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms221680.aspx) and what I saw
>> when stepping through in windbg on XP.
Stop right there. Implementing stuff based on looking at disassembly
is expressly not allowed here, sorry.
--Juan
On Wed, Nov 12, 2008 at 2:16 AM, Jeremy Drake <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I ran into a function that was not implemented when attempting to run a
> program I work on under wine.
>
> This patch implements OleLoadPictureFile based on the MSDN docs
> (http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms221680.
15 matches
Mail list logo
