Shachar Shemesh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:I THINK, though I need to test that, that this code is only reached if it is already known that this is not Windows 98. I can test that. In any case, this doesn't really matter.
My existing patch is in DOSFS_GetFullName, which is called by
GetFileAttributes. Another thing, however, is that I'm begining to
doubt whether it is indeed used for what you said it is. It seems that
calling "GetFileAttributesW" on Windows 98 returns 120 (function not
implemented). This casts a great doubt on whether that is indeed the
purpose of calling "GetFileAttributesW".
Why? I think it makes even more sense, obviously if the function is not implemented in Win98 then it will never return the proper error code, so it's a good detection mechanism. What other purpose do you think this would serve?
What do you mean by "delayed imports". When I defined, proper, the entire spec as actual functions, I got conflicts when I tried to define GetProcAddress. In any case, even then I'm going to need to call GetProcAddress (yes, I guess I can use the same strange macros to do that, or call the native NT function. I'd rather not do that, however).Because I don't seem to be able to define a function calledI don't see why not, unless maybe if you are using delayed imports,
"GetProcAddress" in a winelib dll.
but you shouldn't need that. How exactly are you defining it?
These problems are apparent in the experimental patch I sent (http://www.winehq.org/hypermail/wine-devel/2003/11/0098.html).
Shachar
-- Shachar Shemesh Open Source integration & consulting Home page & resume - http://www.shemesh.biz/
