Wine Traffic #27 For 24�Jan�2000
Table Of Contents
This is the twenty seventh release of the Wine's kernel cousin
publication. It's main goal is to distribute widely what's
going on around Wine (the Un*x windows emulator).
WineHQ is still having some trouble after the upgrade 2 weeks
ago. Most of the servers are up and running, even the NNTP got back
its posted articles; however the NNTP server is no longer
updated. This is worked upon, but, unfortunately, not yet done.
Mailing List Stats For This Week
We looked at 117 posts in 514K.
There were 39 different contributors.
27 posted more than once.
25 posted last week too.
The top posters of the week were:
- 15 posts in 38K by Alexandre Julliard <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- 12 posts in 112K by Ulrich Weigand <email@example.com>
- 8 posts in 16K by Bertho Stultiens <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- 7 posts in 15K by Ove Kaaven <email@example.com>
- 7 posts in 14K by Juergen Schmied <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Full Stats
Wine license change
Archive Link: "License change"
After the discussions held early December
of last year (wn19991206_20.html#0)
regarding changing Wine's license, Alexandre
Julliard proposed the following changes:
So, if you're a developer, do drop a note to Alexandre.
As a remainder (and for the layers who may (by mistake ?) read this
news letter), here's the proposed license:
Now that the holiday season is over and that the Y2K apocalypse is
safely behind us, I'd like to proceed with the license change. The
discussion we had a few weeks ago leads me to the conclusions that:
- most developers do not care much
- nobody seems opposed to a change
- there is a consensus that an existing license is better that
inventing a new one
- the X11 license is preferred over the FreeBSD one, because of
ambiguity with the different BSD licenses
So I propose that we switch to the X11 license.
I've included a copy of the license below, and I ask all
(if your name is in the AUTHORS file you are a developer) to please
send me a private email stating whether you can accept it or not; even
if you don't give a d*mn about the license, please drop me a mail
saying just that. Thanks.
PS: the final wording of the copyright line may be a bit different,
maybe making reference to the AUTHORS file; we'll probably also
include the license text in every source file. But these are
implementation details that we can discuss once the license itself is
PPS: I don't need individual agreements from people working on behalf
of Corel, since Corel is the copyright holder on their code. I will
need an agreement from Corel Corporation itself though.
Copyright (c) 1993-2000 The Wine Project
Permission is hereby granted, free of charge, to any person obtaining a copy
of this software and associated documentation files (the "Software"), to deal
in the Software without restriction, including without limitation the rights
to use, copy, modify, merge, publish, distribute, sublicense, and/or sell
copies of the Software, and to permit persons to whom the Software is
furnished to do so, subject to the following conditions:
The above copyright notice and this permission notice shall be included in
all copies or substantial portions of the Software.
THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED "AS IS", WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR
IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY,
FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE AND NONINFRINGEMENT. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE
COPYRIGHT HOLDERS BE LIABLE FOR ANY CLAIM, DAMAGES OR OTHER LIABILITY, WHETHER
IN AN ACTION OF CONTRACT, TORT OR OTHERWISE, ARISING FROM, OUT OF OR IN
CONNECTION WITH THE SOFTWARE OR THE USE OR OTHER DEALINGS IN THE SOFTWARE.
Address space separation has started
Archive Link: "Address space separation"
Alexandre Julliard,�J�rg Mayer,�Michael Veksler,�CodeWeavers,�,�G�rard Patel,�Peter Ganten
The long awaited work on address space separation has started. This
internal enhancement to Wine would provide a separate address space
(in Unix term) for every Windows process running under Wine.
Here are a few reasons to put this in place:
Alexandre Julliard sent a first patch (based on his work at
CodeWeavers on behalf of Corel) and asked for some further
testings. This was only the first step to provide full address space
separation. So far, Alexandre's patch provides the following features:
- security: under Windows 9x and NT, a process cannot directly
access the memory of another process.
- runnability: some DLLs do not have relocation records. This is
fine when a single process occupies the address space, but is
problematic when two different processes try to load at the same
address two DLLs (the address being hardwired in each DLL). Only one
of the two DLLs can be loaded. This is the source of the (in)famous
FATAL: Need to relocate foo.dll, but no relocation
records present (). Try to run that file directly !
Hence, this patch doesn't solve the relocation of DLLs issue, but is a
first step towards its resolution. The following steps will likely
include using another Unix process while handling the CreateProcess
API, but also an in details review of all DLLs to see how they behave
with regard to separated address spaces ; sending messages across
processes has to be addressed as well.
Anyway, Alexandre's patch didn't generate bad reports (only G�rard
Patel found a badly behaving application, but which was due to
ddeml.dll not properly handling the different address spaces), so this
patch is expected to make its way to CVS soon.
J�rg Mayer pointed out some security/denial of services (DoS) issue:
Since the socket used for communicating with the wineserver is located
in /tmp, under a user's name (in fact his uid),
- the server is now always a separate program, that can accept
connections on a Unix socket in /tmp
- a newly started Wine will connect to an existing server if it
can find one running (on a per-user basis)
- the system heap is shared among all Wine sessions connected to
the same server.
This patch does not yet change the behavior with processes started
inside an existing Wine session through CreateProcess, so it shouldn't
break anything; but please test it anyway...
This is broken wrt security/DoS attacks. Creating
files in /tmp is a bad idea (tm). The first dos that came to my mind
immediately was to create a directory with your uid. So next time you
want to run wine, you fail. I'm sure in a more subtle way I could even
gain gain control over "your" socket. We already have a $HOME/.wine
directory. I think $HOME/.wine/run/ would be a good place for that
Alexandre agreed that /tmp was a bad place, but he feared that $HOME/
could be located on exotic file systems on which unix sockets
are badly handled. The first file system to think of is NFS, but lots
of people (Olivier Galibert, Peter Ganten to name a few) reported this
was working fine on lots of Unices. However, Michael Veksler reported
As a conclusion, Alexandre proposed the following solution:
I have AFS which definitely does not allow sockets/fifos. Nevertheless
It was possible to run applications that establish fifos in
$HOME/.somename/ by making $HOME/.somename link to /tmp/veksler/somename/.
The morale is: put it in $HOME/.wine/sockets/ and let the user
that is a directory or a link to the local file system. Requiring the
sysadmin to setup /var/...../user/ or to fight DOS attacks is not very
Maybe I should create the socket under /tmp with a
unique name and store a pointer to it in $HOME.
Merging wine and winelib startup code
Archive Link: "First try at Wine/WineLib merge"
Ulrich Weigand,�Alexandre Julliard,�,�Bertho Stultiens
Ulrich Weigand posted for review (this week has definitively been a
review one !) a first try at merging the wine and winelib startup code.
Among the issues, Ulrich noticed with is patch was that some
applications from programs/ in the CVS tree no longer link because
they were using the "libres hack". This hack was redefining one
different resource structure for each supported language; when used in
conjonction with Ulrich path, this lead to symbol's name
collision. Bertho Stultiens simply proposed to convert those programs
resources to the normal resource style (which allows several languages
to be supported in a single resource structure). Bertho also announced
that he was about to release a new version of wrc which would allow
to get rid of gcc preprocessing.
Alexandre Julliard and Ulrich discussed then some technical details
linked to the process/thread creation. Alexandre was also not willing
to have the first process being a 16 bit one (which Ulrich claimed as
required to be able to run native USER), and also to add 16 bit
application support for winelib applications.
The main points are:
- WineLib apps use a .spec file to define a normal PE header,
complete with resources and imports and main entry point (the special
LIBRES hack dies; winestub is no longer necessary)
- the main Wine executable does the same, in effect it becomes
itself just a normal WineLib app
- initialization of the initial thread/process shares much more
code with initialization of other threads, to remove special cases and
possible differences in 'environment'
In fact, implementing this last point even fixes some bugs in the
current WineLib setup:
- WineLib apps were always marked as 16-bit processes in the PDB
and TEB flags settings (influencing e.g. SendMessage() ...)
- WineLib apps were not executing on the correct thread stack
(leading to problems with exception dispatching)
- the wine debugger now works in WineLib as well
Sharon And Joy