Hello,
please do not apply the previous patch, i did something very stupid. Use
the attached patch instead (makes also better use of the C99 style
return value).
bye
michael
On Wed, Dec 26, 2001 at 01:09:06AM +0100, Michael Stefaniuc wrote:
[snip]
I did a short check with
Hi,
As some of you might remember I'm the lead developer of the Odin project. (project
for OS/2 with the same goals as Wine). Odin is partly based on Wine code. The
core dlls (gdi32, user32, kernel32) + some special dlls (winmm, directx, winsock)
use some Wine code, but is basically incompatible
Hi,
Here are the bug fixes I promised. There are more, but I can post those at a later
time.
- controls\button.c
CB_Paint, line 806
hBrush = SendMessageW( GetParent(hwnd), WM_CTLCOLORSTATIC, hDC, (LPARAM)hwnd );
if (!hBrush) /* did the app forget to call defwindowproc ? */
Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2001 12:51:22 +0100
X-Agent-Group:
X-Agent-Format: 0 0 0 0 0 50 0 0 1 0 * 0
Hi,
This patch makes a two of my programs fail with the subject error
message:
| ChangeSet ID: 1008789390367047399282455
| CVSROOT: /opt/cvs-commit
| Module name: wine
| Changes by:
On Wed, Dec 26, 2001 at 12:08:46PM +1000, Mike McCormack wrote:
Hi Francois,
I think the best way to handle UNC pathes is to do it properly; Wine
should talk SMB/NBT directly to other machines on the network, not
through Linux's VFS layer.
This approach would give high level of
On Sun, Dec 23, 2001 at 12:11:25PM -0500, Dimitrie O. Paun wrote:
It looks like we're running an old version of CVS on the server, as it
complains it does not understand
#cvs up -C
[johnydog@napalm wine]# cat CVS/Root
:pserver:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:/home/wine
[johnydog@napalm wine]# cvs
On Wed, 26 Dec 2001 12:28:09 +0100 (CET), you wrote:
For more information about Odin you can visit http://odin.netlabs.org (some
information is outdated though).
There you can find out where to download the sources (cvs).
I have one silly question about this. The cvs server address is
[EMAIL
Andreas Mohr wrote:
I guess we really should change our development
model from trying tons of
programs to *systematically* testing functions and
Windows mechanisms now.
If we can show everyone where stuff is failing, it
might be a lot easier
to attract new people.
I *completely* support this
C Unit test frameworks I found after a quick search:
http://check.sourceforge.net/
http://people.codefactory.se/~spotty/cunit/
http://freshmeat.net/projects/autounit/
C++:
http://sourceforge.net/projects/cppunit/
Thanks,
Andriy Palamarchuk
__
Do
On Wed, 26 Dec 2001 17:25:50 +0100, Rein Klazes wrote:
For more information about Odin you can visit http://odin.netlabs.org (some
information is outdated though).
There you can find out where to download the sources (cvs).
I have one silly question about this. The cvs server address is
[EMAIL
On Wed, Dec 26, 2001 at 10:07:20AM -0800, Andriy Palamarchuk wrote:
Andreas Mohr wrote:
I guess we really should change our development
model from trying tons of
programs to *systematically* testing functions and
Windows mechanisms now.
If we can show everyone where stuff is failing, it
--- Andreas Mohr [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Dec 26, 2001 at 10:07:20AM -0800, Andriy
Palamarchuk wrote:
Andreas Mohr wrote:
[... skipped ...]
- it would be better if the suite print summary
information and information about failed tests
only
Yep. Current output is something
Robert Baruch [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
So anyway, if we implemented this internal function (in C), then in theory
it wouldn't be much of a big deal to code LdrAccessResource in assembly.
Although it will raise a few eyebrows, we can always put in a comment
similar to the one that will go in
Andreas Mohr [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I attached a preview of the posting I intend to post on *tons* of Windows
devel newsgroups (Call For Volunteers). That way we might actually get
hold of hundreds of Windows developers helping us implement a complete
test suite (complete tests of up to
Rein Klazes [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Both programs use native win98 commctrl,comctl32 dll's. One of them is
CDmage, available at http://cdmage.cjb.net
Any suggestions?
Does this help?
Index: memory/heap.c
===
RCS file:
On Wed, Dec 26, 2001 at 10:26:27AM -0800, Andriy Palamarchuk wrote:
C Unit test frameworks I found after a quick search:
http://check.sourceforge.net/
http://people.codefactory.se/~spotty/cunit/
http://freshmeat.net/projects/autounit/
C++:
http://sourceforge.net/projects/cppunit/
Seen on
I wholeheartedly agree with you.
I think that both approaches (application oriented, and API oriented)
are necessary.
* We need the application oriented approach because this makes Wine
useful to people now. But maybe we should focus more on specific
applications: getting a few
On 26 Dec 2001 12:46:33 -0800
Alexandre Julliard [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But unlike EXC_CallHandler there is no good reason to do that, except
to work around Shrinker stupidity. And for all we know there might be
20 more similar tests (and if not, they may be added in the next
Shrinker
18 matches
Mail list logo
