wine-devel March 2017

wine-devel@winehq.org

74 participants
199 discussions

Re: [PATCH 2/2] user32: scrollbars are vertical by default
by Nikolay Sivov 05 Mar '17

05 Mar '17

On 04.03.2017 23:29, Kees Beets wrote: > Fixes https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=38029 > > Changed calculation of boolean vertical so that default is true. > > Tested on Ubuntu 16.04. > > Signed-off-by: kbeets68(a)gmail.com > --- > dlls/user32/scroll.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/dlls/user32/scroll.c b/dlls/user32/scroll.c > index 4b572e5..202fac8 100644 > --- a/dlls/user32/scroll.c > +++ b/dlls/user32/scroll.c > @@ -252,7 +252,7 @@ static BOOL SCROLL_GetScrollBarRect( HWND hwnd, INT nBar, RECT *lprect, > > case SB_CTL: > GetClientRect( hwnd, lprect ); > - vertical = ((wndPtr->dwStyle & SBS_VERT) != 0); > + vertical = ((wndPtr->dwStyle & SBS_HORZ) == 0); > break; > > default: > Hi, this doesn't look right, SBS_HORZ is 0, which makes 'vertical' always 1.

2 1

Re: GSOC 2017 - Resource/Dialog Editor
by Austin English 05 Mar '17

05 Mar '17

On Mar 3, 2017 3:16 AM, "Joseph-Eugene Winzer" <ml999(a)openmailbox.org> wrote: On 03/02/2017 10:45 PM, Austin English wrote: > On Thu, Mar 2, 2017 at 1:58 PM, Joe <ml999(a)openmailbox.org> wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> First of all, congrats for getting picked for another GSoC! >> Wine made my transition to Linux way easier and with more and more >> applications being supported the year of the desktop can come :) >> >> My name is Joseph Winzer and I am a bachelor math/CS student looking >> forward >> to contribute to open source in this year's GSoC. >> The 'Resource/Dialog Editor' project caught my eye as I remember a few >> years >> back digging through executables out of curiousity. Last time I looked >> for a >> resource editor it was either bundled with other software (Visual Studio, >> PellesC) or as mentioned in the project description bundled up with adware >> like ResEdit. >> I want to change that by contributing to Wine with an open source >> standalone >> editor anyone can use free of charge. >> Equipped with my Petzold, MSDN and the help of the community I am sure I >> will be able to realize this project. >> >> >> Looking forward working with you guys :) >> > > Hi Joseph, > > Thanks for your interest. Could you describe your experience with > C/Wine a bit? Have you thought about how you would implement/design > the resource editor at all? Could you share your plans? > > Thanks for your reply. So far, I experienced Wine exclusively from a user perspective, using it mostly for running games and apps I didn't find a substitute on Linux. I compiled Wine a few times when certain milestones were reached like improved D3D9 or bugfixes for certain apps. I did grep for stubs once in a while, browsed through the GDI implementation but wasn't confident enough to contribute. OK. Note that contributing a patch is a requirement of applicants. Patches related to the project are highly encouraged, but not required. I read more code than I wrote myself and most of it has been C or C-style C++. WinAPI-wise, I remember writing small games like connect four or apps where I tried to use what I had recently learned. I also did some reverse engineering for writing trainers or just for the fun of it. That has been awhile, though. What did you reverse engineer? If it's Microsoft code, or if you've seen Microsoft code, you're (in general) ineligible to contribute to Wine. More recently I looked at quake, tuxpaint, util-linux, .. whatever caught my interest. Concerning the technical aspects of implementing the editor, I haven't given it much thought yet. MSDN et al provide enough documentation to tackle the task and problems can be dealt with once they come up (I assume in my naivete). Design-wise it depends on what the Wine community expects it to be but personally I imagined ResEdit trimmed to reading out and altering resources with dialog creation on top. From there it can be extended in whatever direction the community sees fit. The rough sketch would be as follows: * Establishing bare bones UI (sidebar for items, main window as viewer) * Read PE compatible file resources * Export resources * Modify resources (substitute images, edit items) * Refining UI for editing/viewing This covers the basic functionality of the resource viewer. The Dialog Editor provides rendering of dialog elements what would complement part of the resource viewer and exporting as .rc. My estimate is that the dialog editor will be the biggest part of the project with parsing resources, dialog rendering, layout, .. Overall the planning and focus of the project depends on what the community expects it to be and if there is an immediate use case it can cover in Wine or thought of as a general tool. OK. Sorry for the wall of text but I hope I could describe to you my idea I have for it. Of course, in the official application the gaps for the implementation will be filled but getting feedback from the community first makes planning also easier for me. IMO walls of text are good. I'd rather see more text than brief descriptions that show a lack of thought/research ;) -- -Austin GPG: 14FB D7EA A041 937B

1 0

some source files are not listed at dl.winehq.org/wine/source/2.x/
by version2013＠openmailbox.org 04 Mar '17

04 Mar '17

https://dl.winehq.org/wine/source/2.x/ wine-2.2 and wine-2.3 are not listed. If I manually type the expected filename in the url, then I can download them.

4 4

Re: regedit/tests: Add some line concatenation tests
by Alexandre Julliard 03 Mar '17

03 Mar '17

Hugh McMaster <hugh.mcmaster(a)outlook.com> writes: > Signed-off-by: Hugh McMaster <hugh.mcmaster(a)outlook.com> > --- > programs/regedit/tests/regedit.c | 24 ++++++++++++++++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 24 insertions(+) This fails here: ../../../tools/runtest -q -P wine -T ../../.. -M regedit.exe -p regedit.exe_test.exe.so regedit && touch regedit.ok regedit.c:484: Test succeeded inside todo block: Reg value shouldn't exist: Multi-Line2 regedit.c:496: Test succeeded inside todo block: Reg value shouldn't exist: Multi-Line4 Makefile:174: recipe for target 'regedit.ok' failed make[1]: *** [regedit.ok] Error 2 -- Alexandre Julliard julliard(a)winehq.org

1 0

Re: ntdll: Don't modify LockCount in RtlLeaveCriticalSection if section is not acquired.
by Sebastian Lackner 03 Mar '17

03 Mar '17

On 03.03.2017 18:48, Jacek Caban wrote: > Signed-off-by: Jacek Caban <jacek(a)codeweavers.com> > --- > dlls/ntdll/critsection.c | 6 ++++- > dlls/ntdll/tests/rtl.c | 59 > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > 2 files changed, 64 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > 0001-ntdll-Don-t-modify-LockCount-in-RtlLeaveCriticalSecti.diff > > > diff --git a/dlls/ntdll/critsection.c b/dlls/ntdll/critsection.c > index e2eb364..e405b08 100644 > --- a/dlls/ntdll/critsection.c > +++ b/dlls/ntdll/critsection.c > @@ -665,7 +665,11 @@ BOOL WINAPI RtlIsCriticalSectionLockedByThread( RTL_CRITICAL_SECTION *crit ) > */ > NTSTATUS WINAPI RtlLeaveCriticalSection( RTL_CRITICAL_SECTION *crit ) > { > - if (--crit->RecursionCount) interlocked_dec( &crit->LockCount ); > + if (--crit->RecursionCount) > + { > + if (crit->RecursionCount > 0) interlocked_dec( &crit->LockCount ); > + else ERR( "section %p is not acquired\n", crit ); > + } > else > { > crit->OwningThread = 0; > diff --git a/dlls/ntdll/tests/rtl.c b/dlls/ntdll/tests/rtl.c > index 43c26bd..4b6ee35 100644 > --- a/dlls/ntdll/tests/rtl.c > +++ b/dlls/ntdll/tests/rtl.c > @@ -98,6 +98,9 @@ static NTSTATUS (WINAPI *pRtlCompressBuffer)(USHORT, const UCHAR*, ULONG, PUCHA > static BOOL (WINAPI *pRtlIsCriticalSectionLocked)(CRITICAL_SECTION *); > static BOOL (WINAPI *pRtlIsCriticalSectionLockedByThread)(CRITICAL_SECTION *); > static NTSTATUS (WINAPI *pRtlInitializeCriticalSectionEx)(CRITICAL_SECTION *, ULONG, ULONG); > +static NTSTATUS (WINAPI *pRtlInitializeCriticalSection)(CRITICAL_SECTION *); > +static NTSTATUS (WINAPI *pRtlEnterCriticalSection)(RTL_CRITICAL_SECTION *); > +static NTSTATUS (WINAPI *pRtlLeaveCriticalSection)(RTL_CRITICAL_SECTION *); > > static HMODULE hkernel32 = 0; > static BOOL (WINAPI *pIsWow64Process)(HANDLE, PBOOL); > @@ -151,6 +154,9 @@ static void InitFunctionPtrs(void) > pRtlIsCriticalSectionLocked = (void *)GetProcAddress(hntdll, "RtlIsCriticalSectionLocked"); > pRtlIsCriticalSectionLockedByThread = (void *)GetProcAddress(hntdll, "RtlIsCriticalSectionLockedByThread"); > pRtlInitializeCriticalSectionEx = (void *)GetProcAddress(hntdll, "RtlInitializeCriticalSectionEx"); > + pRtlInitializeCriticalSection = (void *)GetProcAddress(hntdll, "RtlInitializeCriticalSection"); > + pRtlEnterCriticalSection = (void *)GetProcAddress(hntdll, "RtlEnterCriticalSection"); > + pRtlLeaveCriticalSection = (void *)GetProcAddress(hntdll, "RtlLeaveCriticalSection"); Those functions should not require dynamic loading. The *Ex function is only loaded dynamically because it was introduced in later Windows versions. > } > hkernel32 = LoadLibraryA("kernel32.dll"); > ok(hkernel32 != 0, "LoadLibrary failed\n"); > @@ -2094,6 +2100,58 @@ static void test_RtlInitializeCriticalSectionEx(void) > RtlDeleteCriticalSection(&cs); > } > > +static void test_RtlLeaveCriticalSection(void) > +{ > + RTL_CRITICAL_SECTION cs; > + NTSTATUS status; > + > + pRtlInitializeCriticalSection(&cs); > + > + status = pRtlEnterCriticalSection(&cs); > + ok(!status, "RtlEnterCriticalSection failed: %x\n", status); > + todo_wine > + ok(cs.LockCount == -2, "expected LockCount == -2, got %d\n", cs.LockCount); Some of these tests seem to fail on XP (see testbot). > + ok(cs.RecursionCount == 1, "expected RecursionCount == 1, got %d\n", cs.RecursionCount); > + ok(cs.OwningThread == ULongToHandle(GetCurrentThreadId()), "unexpected OwningThread\n"); > + > + status = pRtlLeaveCriticalSection(&cs); > + ok(!status, "RtlLeaveCriticalSection failed: %x\n", status); > + ok(cs.LockCount == -1, "expected LockCount == -1, got %d\n", cs.LockCount); > + ok(cs.RecursionCount == 0, "expected RecursionCount == 0, got %d\n", cs.RecursionCount); > + ok(!cs.OwningThread, "unexpected OwningThread %p\n", cs.OwningThread); > + > + /* > + * Trying to leave a section that wasn't acquired modifies RecusionCount to an invalid values, Should this be "invalid value" ? > + * but doesn't modify LockCount so that an attempt to enter the section later will work. > + */ > + status = pRtlLeaveCriticalSection(&cs); > + ok(!status, "RtlLeaveCriticalSection failed: %x\n", status); > + ok(cs.LockCount == -1, "expected LockCount == -1, got %d\n", cs.LockCount); > + ok(cs.RecursionCount == -1, "expected RecursionCount == -1, got %d\n", cs.RecursionCount); > + ok(!cs.OwningThread, "unexpected OwningThread %p\n", cs.OwningThread); > + > + /* and again */ > + status = pRtlLeaveCriticalSection(&cs); > + ok(!status, "RtlLeaveCriticalSection failed: %x\n", status); > + ok(cs.LockCount == -1, "expected LockCount == -1, got %d\n", cs.LockCount); > + ok(cs.RecursionCount == -2, "expected RecursionCount == -1, got %d\n", cs.RecursionCount); Copy and paste error in the ok message. > + ok(!cs.OwningThread, "unexpected OwningThread %p\n", cs.OwningThread); > + > + /* entering section fixes RecursionCount */ > + status = pRtlEnterCriticalSection(&cs); > + ok(!status, "RtlEnterCriticalSection failed: %x\n", status); > + todo_wine > + ok(cs.LockCount == -2, "expected LockCount == -2, got %d\n", cs.LockCount); > + ok(cs.RecursionCount == 1, "expected RecursionCount == 1, got %d\n", cs.RecursionCount); > + ok(cs.OwningThread == ULongToHandle(GetCurrentThreadId()), "unexpected OwningThread\n"); > + > + status = pRtlLeaveCriticalSection(&cs); > + ok(!status, "RtlLeaveCriticalSection failed: %x\n", status); > + ok(cs.LockCount == -1, "expected LockCount == -1, got %d\n", cs.LockCount); > + ok(cs.RecursionCount == 0, "expected RecursionCount == 0, got %d\n", cs.RecursionCount); > + ok(!cs.OwningThread, "unexpected OwningThread %p\n", cs.OwningThread); Please delete the critical section after the test to avoid leaks. > +} > + > START_TEST(rtl) > { > InitFunctionPtrs(); > @@ -2125,4 +2183,5 @@ START_TEST(rtl) > test_RtlDecompressBuffer(); > test_RtlIsCriticalSectionLocked(); > test_RtlInitializeCriticalSectionEx(); > + test_RtlLeaveCriticalSection(); > } > > >

3 3

Re: ntdll: Don't modify LockCount in RtlLeaveCriticalSection if section is not acquired.
by Marvin 03 Mar '17

03 Mar '17

Hi, While running your changed tests on Windows, I think I found new failures. Being a bot and all I'm not very good at pattern recognition, so I might be wrong, but could you please double-check? Full results can be found at https://testbot.winehq.org/JobDetails.pl?Key=29096 Your paranoid android. === wxppro (32 bit rtl) === rtl.c:2113: Test failed: expected LockCount == -2, got 0 rtl.c:2129: Test failed: expected LockCount == -1, got -2 rtl.c:2136: Test failed: expected LockCount == -1, got -3 ntdll:rtl has unreported failures

1 0

Re: [PATCH 2/2] ntdll: Fix NtFlushBuffersFile() for files with FILE_APPEND_DATA access.
by Paul Gofman 03 Mar '17

03 Mar '17

Sorry for introducing that in f7d40d45da7a1bc0accd58bca6d6da4e34861937. I just verified that server_get_unix_fd() returns success if to request FILE_APPEND_DATA for handles created with (read/)write access. I also checked that requesting FILE_APPEND_DATA gets no error if using it with a usb serial port. Is it anything bad to just use FILE_APPEND_DATA instead of FILE_WRITE_DATA in server_get_unix_fd()? If its not that I am missing something why it should not be done like that, I can add test for serial port. On 03/03/2017 06:21 PM, Józef Kucia wrote: > This fixes a regression introduced by commit > f7d40d45da7a1bc0accd58bca6d6da4e34861937. > > Signed-off-by: Józef Kucia <jkucia(a)codeweavers.com> > --- > dlls/ntdll/file.c | 2 ++ > dlls/ntdll/tests/file.c | 1 - > 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/dlls/ntdll/file.c b/dlls/ntdll/file.c > index 3f38c6f..e2cfe7f 100644 > --- a/dlls/ntdll/file.c > +++ b/dlls/ntdll/file.c > @@ -3418,6 +3418,8 @@ NTSTATUS WINAPI NtFlushBuffersFile( HANDLE hFile, IO_STATUS_BLOCK* IoStatusBlock > int fd, needs_close; > > ret = server_get_unix_fd( hFile, FILE_WRITE_DATA, &fd, &needs_close, &type, NULL ); > + if (ret == STATUS_ACCESS_DENIED) > + ret = server_get_unix_fd( hFile, FILE_APPEND_DATA, &fd, &needs_close, &type, NULL ); > > if (!ret && type == FD_TYPE_SERIAL) > { > diff --git a/dlls/ntdll/tests/file.c b/dlls/ntdll/tests/file.c > index 5e7e1ee..09bf688 100644 > --- a/dlls/ntdll/tests/file.c > +++ b/dlls/ntdll/tests/file.c > @@ -4441,7 +4441,6 @@ static void test_flush_buffers_file(void) > ok(hfile != INVALID_HANDLE_VALUE, "could not open temp file, error %d.\n", GetLastError()); > > status = pNtFlushBuffersFile(hfile, &io_status_block); > - todo_wine > ok(status == STATUS_SUCCESS, "expected STATUS_SUCCESS, got %#x.\n", status); > > CloseHandle(hfile);

2 1

GSOC 2017 - Resource/Dialog Editor
by Joe 03 Mar '17

03 Mar '17

Hi, First of all, congrats for getting picked for another GSoC! Wine made my transition to Linux way easier and with more and more applications being supported the year of the desktop can come :) My name is Joseph Winzer and I am a bachelor math/CS student looking forward to contribute to open source in this year's GSoC. The 'Resource/Dialog Editor' project caught my eye as I remember a few years back digging through executables out of curiousity. Last time I looked for a resource editor it was either bundled with other software (Visual Studio, PellesC) or as mentioned in the project description bundled up with adware like ResEdit. I want to change that by contributing to Wine with an open source standalone editor anyone can use free of charge. Equipped with my Petzold, MSDN and the help of the community I am sure I will be able to realize this project. Looking forward working with you guys :)

3 2

Re: [PATCH 1/2] ws2_32/tests: Rework WSAStringToAddress tests
by Marvin 03 Mar '17

03 Mar '17

Hi, While running your changed tests on Windows, I think I found new failures. Being a bot and all I'm not very good at pattern recognition, so I might be wrong, but could you please double-check? Full results can be found at https://testbot.winehq.org/JobDetails.pl?Key=29078 Your paranoid android. === w2008s64 (64 bit sock) === ws2_32:sock returned an error (3221225477) despite having no failures ws2_32:sock has no test summary line (early exit of the main process?)

2 1

Re: [PATCH] ws2_32: Turn SIO_GET_EXTENSION_FUNCTION_POINTER into a table
by Sebastian Lackner 02 Mar '17

02 Mar '17

On 02.03.2017 06:38, Bruno Jesus wrote: > From: Bruno Jesus <bjesus(a)codeweavers.com> > > I could not find any better way to avoid compilation warning than using a typedef for the function pointer. If there is a better way I'm all ears. > > Signed-off-by: Bruno Jesus <bjesus(a)codeweavers.com> > --- > dlls/ws2_32/socket.c | 94 +++++++++++++++++++++++----------------------------- > 1 file changed, 41 insertions(+), 53 deletions(-) It works fine here without any typedefs: --- a/dlls/ws2_32/socket.c +++ b/dlls/ws2_32/socket.c @@ -4945,10 +4945,8 @@ INT WINAPI WSAIoctl(SOCKET s, DWORD code, LPVOID in_buff, DWORD in_size, LPVOID if (found) { - typedef void (*func_ptr)(void); - TRACE("-> got %s\n", guid_funcs[i].name); - *(func_ptr *)out_buff = guid_funcs[i].func_ptr; + *(void **)out_buff = guid_funcs[i].func_ptr; break; } What kind of compiler warning do you get?

2 1

Jump to page:

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

2001

wine-devel March 2017