This is the 100th 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).
Wow, 100 issues. Of course if you're really keeping count you'll notice we skipped a few back in the spring. I've got to thank Eric Pouech for writing almost all of those. He did a fantastic job for a long time.
In the news the past few weeks was an announcement about KDE's Konqueror gaining ActiveX support via Wine. This is quite amazing considering Malte Starostik announced the project only a few weeks ago on the wine-devel list. There are several patches not yet committed to the wine CVS that allow this to work. Also of note, in the press release it says that using the native mscvrt DLL is needed rather than the built-in one. To that, Jon Griffiths noted that he's working on making Wine's builtin DLL have the needed functionality.
For more info, check out the press release over at Linux Today: http://linuxtoday.com/news_story.php3?ltsn=2001-07-10-003-20-PR-KE-MS.
Bill Medland wanted to about where to find [Windows].BorderWidth, namely
if it was still supposed to be found in the [Windows] section of the
config or if Tweak.Layout was supposed to be used instead.
No one replied, but Bill looked up the info and posted the
answer for anyone wondering,
In Windows 95 a load of configuration information moved from win.ini (esp
the [windows] section) to the registry. Now (when the edits are added to
the cvs) information should come from the [windows] section of win.ini if
the winelook is WIN31 and from the registry in general otherwise, with the
Tweak.Layout overriding both.
Bill went on to submit a bunch of patches to clean up window drawing.
One of which concerning framing Alexandre noted,
Actually I have hacked your patch a bit when committing it (hope you
don't mind ;-), with the idea of phasing out the Tweak.Layout
stuff. So now the values come from the registry for Win95, and from
win.ini (plus some hard-coded values) for Win3.1.
Patrik Stridvall posted a lengthy patch with documentation fixes, of
which Alexandre did not apply all of it since parts weren't correct.
After exchanging some mail, Patrik asked,
I think that we need to move the solution of this problem one step
up the "ladder" and discuss the more general problem:
How should we store the information needed to generate
the spec files in the source, especially concerning
the forwards and stubs?
Alexandre, partly in reference to a another question, replied:
Well, it's a more general problem, namely that the spec files can reference functions that are not implemented directly in the dll.
You also have for instance:
@ cdecl strcpy(ptr str) strcpy
in MSVCRT, and strcpy is clearly not implemented there since it's in the C library. So you cannot assume that only the functions contained in the dll can be used in the spec files, it is legal for the spec file to reference external functions.
You'll need a file somewhere that specifies all the entries that cannot be determined automatically from the source. You simply cannot build a 100% correct spec file based only on the function comments. And you definitely do not want to need to parse KERNEL source files (like the ones in memory/) to build the USER spec file.
Patrik thought the best solution might be to create a .spec.in file that looks like the spec files but supports configure-like substitutions that could be determined from the source. Automatically generated spec files prevent storing redundant like C function declarations that can be figured out. However, like Alexandre mentioned, it's possible for spec files to reference external functions that aren't part of the DLL. One of the solutions is to store the information in comments in the source files and then extracting it to create the spec files. After exchanging more mail, Alexandre mentioned:
IMO, this is true if we can make the generator work purely on the source code, so that you can give it the unmodified source of a Windows dll and it spits out the spec file. If you need to add comments before each and every exported function, then I don't see much advantage to parsing the source. You might as well put all the information in the comment (or leave it in the current spec file for that matter).
Basically, if the source parsing allows doing more than we do now (like build spec files for new dlls) it's worthwhile; if all it does is generate the existing spec files some other way I don't think there's much point. After all, we have the spec files already, and they are not going to change much.
Another use of the source parser could be to generate more detailed debugging information for +relay; but in this case I'd say it should go to a completely different file, used by some external relay dumping program. I don't want all the extra debug information to clutter up the spec files.
Patrik and Alexandre exchanged more mail about how to parse out the needed information and Patrik began formulating a tool that could be used to gather it. In the meantime he asked that a patch of his be applied that would let winapi_check know where external functions are located. Alexandre considered the patch a kludge and didn't accept it.
Lionel Ulmer posted a message about handling X errors:
When discussing with Ove yesterday on #WineHQ about the handling of X errors, he told me about an idea of his : using exceptions to handle X errors.
This way, when we have to explicitely handle X errors (as we will need to do for XVidmode and XDGA2 due to some (stupidly done IMHO :-) ) security fixes in XFree 4.x), we could do that using exceptions.
He went on to post some code as a quick work-around. Alexandre replied with:
The main problem with that is that I don't think you can jump out of Xlib without corrupting its state. Also you'd need to properly unlock the tsx11 lock in case of exception, which will probably require an finally handler around each X call.
My idea was to have the following two functions:
void X11DRV_expect_error( unsigned char request, unsigned char error, XID id );
You'd call X11DRV_expect_error before doing an X call that can fail; then if an X error happens that matches what you expect, the X error handler will simply set a flag and ignore the error (if it doesn't match you get the standard error handling). Then after the call you use X11DRV_check_error to see if your error happened or not. Would this work for what you need?
Lionel thought it would work, but did see two potential problems.
He wasn't sure if error codes were standardized on all X servers.
He also didn't think it would be able to detect more than one kind of
error at the same time. To the former, Alexandre replied that they
were part of the X spec and they should be standard. To the
latter Alexandre replied,
I was thinking you could use a special value as a "wildcard" for the
error codes, in which case it wouldn't be tested for a match.
Lionel Ulmer submitted a patch to wine-patches that made sure user32.dll is always loaded before the x11drv.dll. He wrote:
I spent most of the day tracking an 'abort' in
SYSMETRICS_Initdue to the fact that the "DISPLAY" driver was not loaded.
I tracked this down to the fact that OpenGL32.DLL was the first library loaded by the application.
The problem is that when the loading of OpenGL32 happens, it first loads 'USER32'. When attaching 'USER32', it tries to reload 'X11DRV' (and fails as the 'recursion' lock is in place).
This means that when it calls
SYSMETRICS_Init, the 'DISPLAY' driver was not registered yet (as we did not yet attach to the X11 driver) => we get the abort.
This is more a problem of inter-dependencies of X11DRV and USER32 (as the former should NEVER be loaded before the latter)... But as I could not fix this problem, I prefered going 'around' the problem :-)
And thus the attached patch (I see it was already done for DDraw) :
Alexandre did apply the patch, but noted,
The dependencies between x11drv and user should certainly be fixed,
but the real problem is that opengl32 and ddraw import x11drv at all.
x11drv is an internal driver and should never be imported by any
dll. Anybody feeling like fixing that?
Lionel started figuring out how to go about recoding dlls/opengl32/wgl.c to not depend on x11drv. He decided there were two possible ways to go about calling the driver:
- one that is 'GDI' specific with the 'dc->funcs->pFUNC_NAME' sort of calls
- the other for 'USER' with 'USER_Driver.pFUNC_NAME'
Alexandre felt that he couldn't really do either. The GDI option
requires calling a function that isn't visible outside of GDI
and the USER option requires a reference to a global variable
that isn't visible outside of USER. But he added,
A possible way is to use the Escape
function and add a few
x11drv-specific escape codes. But first it would probably be a good
thing to check how opengl32 is implemented under Windows; I have no
idea how it works, but it probably needs some way to communicate with
the graphics driver, and we could use the same mechanism.
Lionel wasn't sure exactly how OpenGL was done on Windows,
Well, the only thing I know for sure about how OpenGL is done in Windows is
that you load one DLL (opengl32.dll). This DLL support the standard software
rendering mode but can also load an 'ICD' (by looking at the 'OpenGLdrivers'
key in the system registry) that is the driver specific to the card.
Travis Michielsen posted a message wondering how to go about changing display settings:
I was planning on implementing ChangeDisplaySettingsA soon but I'm not certain on how to do it.
I have been browsing the source tree and was following the methods used by DirectDraw and was considering a similar approach. While I was browsing the source, I was eventually lead to dlls/x11drv/xvidmode.c which contains most of the functions that I will probably need. But I still have a few concerns:
- Is the x11drv used for ddraw AND the gdi or just one?
- what is the best way to query if the video exists? without knowing syncs?
- and if i need to know syncs how do I find them?
Another question I have is about pixel depth. From what I understand, it is imposible to change the pixel format of the screen while X is running. However, it is possible to start more than one X server with different configs (and depth) which we could use if we have to but probably not a good idea. Of course another posibility is to emulate the pixel depth, but that would probably cause performance problems, especially when used by games. Anyone have any suggestions or should we just leave changing depths as unimplemented?
Lionel Ulmer replied:
My first question was : why implement it ? I would personnaly find VERY annoying to have any Windows app. change the size of my desktop window when I prefer running my applications 'windowed'.
Moreover, I would prefer you to handle first the 'Desktop' case :-) In that case, no need to use any X extension, you just have to resize the desktop window.
Depth changing is part of the new X extension called 'RandR' (Rotate and Resize). I do not know at all though when it will be available on 'normal' X servers (as it was mostly developped now for the iPAQ handheld to rotate the screen).
Keith Packard (the Render author (BTW how is the support of this extension progressing :-) ? )) and Jim Gettys are the main developpers of this extension.
So I would probably wait for this extension to be available before starting any code on ChangeDisplaySettings... And please consider having it optional :-)
Bill Medland was trying to keep track of what patches had been applied
in the cvs tree but realized he hadn't been doing it properly.
He asked how to go about diff'ing his current code against the
current cvs. Marcus Meissner replied first with,
To diff your current tree, use
Huw Davies added,
cvs diff -u' in the wine
toplevel directory. Or use
cvs diff -u dir/file1 dir/file2'
if you have only changed file1 and file2.
Too see other applied changes, subscribe to the wine-cvs
mailinglist, where those will be posted.
cvs diff will show you the differences between your
files and the files in the repository as of your last
cvs update. To perform a diff against a specific tag
cvs diff -r, so to diff against the current
head you can do
cvs diff -r HEAD