Re: [ros-dev] [ros-diffs] [jimtabor] 37436: - Fixes bug 3864. While I was at it I fixed most of the gdi max bit max info sizes too. - Added notes for the SEH abuse in win32k dibobj.c. - Tested WinMerge 2.10.2, AbiWord 2.4.1, Firefox 1.5.0.3 and wine

[Aleksey Bragin]

Thanks a lot, we're not only 2 people working on the project - in  
case someone has a desire to remove it.. I would give him this to  
read :-)


On Nov 19, 2008, at 7:35 PM, James Tabor wrote:

>   Hi,
>
>  Well the code subroutines have safeguards placed in them. We know this
>  due to research and trial studies. These safeguards are located in
>  target and most called functions.
>
>  A good example of an emulation hack that I have seen is this:
>
>  if(!bmi){
>     if(bits) *bits = NULL;
>     return NULL;
>  }
>
>  Taken from wine (Do I need to post copyright notice for this too Mr.
>  Edwards?), function CreateDIBSection.
>
>  This is a behavioral hack to emulate the correct test case results for
>  this function.
>
>   UINT
>   FASTCALL
>   DIB_BitmapMaxBitsSize( PBITMAPINFO Info, UINT ScanLines )
>    {
>        UINT MaxBits = 0;
>
>      if (!Info) return 0;
>
>  UINT
>  FASTCALL
>  DIB_BitmapBitsSize( PBITMAPINFO Info )
>  {
>    UINT Ret;
>
>    if (!Info) return 0;
>
>  These are magnificently correct and create an one byte allocated space
>  with RtlAllocateHeap as it should and pass the one byte pointer to
>  kernel space since this is also correct behavior for most these
>  related kernel space functions. Zero bytes are copied and the kernel
>  functions with defaults settings and it passes or fails in kernel
>  space. Which is why we are correcting kernel space function behavior.
>
>  I am very surprised you did not know this,,,, read the code train,,,
>  James
>
>  puzzled, B^/