This is the mail archive of the
cygwin-xfree@cygwin.com
mailing list for the Cygwin XFree86 project.
Re: XWin 4.3.0-50 crashes with -multiwindow (ping Earle)
Earle,
Earle F. Philhower III wrote:
Howdy Harold,
At 12:00 AM 3/26/2004 -0500, Harold wrote:
Nope, not going to beat you to it. This issue is what I was referring
to when I said that Earle should probably look at the PixmapBytePad
patch to make sure it was complete. :)
There's a saying I've learned from my verification engineers: If you
don't test it, it won't work!
WinXP doesn't list 24bpp mode anymore, VICE doesn't compile under cygwin
w/o work, and I'm not likely to shell out $$M to buy an Oracle DB. :)
To top it off, freedesktop's CVS /tmp disk is out of space so CVS isn't
working. Ouch!
I did some unit-testing of the undocumented BitsPerPixel() macro, and it
seems to be what's needed. Changing line 74 to
> effXBPP = BitsPerPixel(pixmap->drawable.depth);
will set it to 32 when given a 24-bpp drawable, giving a pixel stride of
4 bytes as desired. It also doesn't break any of the 1-, 16-, or 32-bit
icons that I was able to test (the return values of BPP() match expected
there too), but I still have no 24-bpp icons to try.
I'll try the commit again tomorrow morning, but if Fabrizio wants to
beat up his local copy before then and report back it'd be appreciated!
Okay, sounds good to me.
Also, I think you mentioned that 1 bit pixmaps were messed up. If
that is still the case, it is because the GDI DIB 1 bit bitmap has a
reversed byte order. So, you'll have to swap the byte order for 1 bit
pixmaps when you convert them. Give that a try and let me know if it
works... ping me as soon as you look into it cause I'm really
wondering if that will fix it.
This was way back when I was first writing it, IIRC. I don't think I've
seen any 1-bit icon problems or heard of any (except for the complaint
that xcalc's scaled icon was ugly) since. If someone has a specific
problem I'll look into it, but 1-bit is working 100% AFAIK...
Huh... okay. I thought the xcalc icon problem was probably due to byte
ordering, but if it is just scaling then my suggestion obviously has
nothing to do with it. I was going to suggest writing a super-duper
anti-aliasing icon scaler, but it would seem like a waste of effort for
1 bit icons. There are so many other things that would not be a waste
of effort...
Harold