similar to: IOPL not enabled

Hi, on a dual boot laptop I have winXP and Debian sid/squeeze x86_64 installed. Wine is version 1.0.1. WinXP partition is NTFS and mounted read-only under Debian. I have used winecfg to attach the NTFS partition to my drive E: and use winefile to navigate to the microsoft office 11 binaries on E:. Both winword.exe and excel.exe reports the famous IOPL not enabled message. I have not installed any

With this patch, x86 and x86-64 share ioport.c, fixing LTP iopl and ioperm testcase failures (on both). We found an iopl testcase failing even on x86 xenlinux. Now x86-64 xenlinux should have the same results regarding the LTP testcases (as far as we tested). Signed-off-by: Li B Xin <li.b.xin@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Jun Nakajima <jun.nakajima@intel.com> Jun --- Intel Open Source

Being a new Ubuntu 10.10 user, I am trying to get Wine to work in order to access some of my previous WIN XP programs. When I try to use Outlook (from which it is still difficult to migrate to an appropriate Linux Prog), I always get the "IOPL not enabled" message. I have tried the fix with adding the gdiplus in libraries and changing it. But there is no effect. If the

It doesn't look like iopl() is working. I'm taking an exception on every IO instruction. inl(0xde04) = 00000100 eip:765e eax:0100 ebx:0000 ecx:0320 edx:de04 esi:03f5 edi:0087 ebp:0000 esp:6b62 cs:c000 ss:c000 es:0000 ds:c000 fs:0000 gs:0000 eflags:00000246 exception: code at 0x000c7661: 66 ef 5a 59 66 58 9d c3 53 bb 02 00 e8 5e ff 5b c3 53 bb 05 00 e8 55 ff 5b c3 53

Hi Josh, On Tue, Oct 22, 2013, at 3:35, Josh Triplett wrote: > On the vast majority of modern systems, no processes will use the > userspsace I/O syscalls, iopl and ioperm. Add a new config option, > CONFIG_X86_IOPORT, to support configuring them out of the kernel > entirely. Since these syscalls only exist to support rare legacy > userspace programs, X86_IOPORT does not depend

Hi Josh, On Tue, Oct 22, 2013, at 3:35, Josh Triplett wrote: > On the vast majority of modern systems, no processes will use the > userspsace I/O syscalls, iopl and ioperm. Add a new config option, > CONFIG_X86_IOPORT, to support configuring them out of the kernel > entirely. Since these syscalls only exist to support rare legacy > userspace programs, X86_IOPORT does not depend

> > This isn't unreasonable but there are drivers with userspace helpers that > > use iopl/ioperm type functionality where you should be doing a SELECT of > > X86_IOPORT. The one that comes to mind is the uvesa driver. From a quick > > scan it may these days be the only mainstream one that needs the select > > adding. > > Should kernel drivers really

> > This isn't unreasonable but there are drivers with userspace helpers that > > use iopl/ioperm type functionality where you should be doing a SELECT of > > X86_IOPORT. The one that comes to mind is the uvesa driver. From a quick > > scan it may these days be the only mainstream one that needs the select > > adding. > > Should kernel drivers really

On Sun, 2 Nov 2014 09:33:01 -0800 Josh Triplett <josh at joshtriplett.org> wrote: > On the vast majority of modern systems, no processes will use the > userspsace IO syscalls, iopl and ioperm. Add a new config option, > CONFIG_X86_IOPORT, to support configuring them out of the kernel > entirely. Most current systems do not run programs using these > syscalls, so X86_IOPORT

On Sun, 2 Nov 2014 09:33:01 -0800 Josh Triplett <josh at joshtriplett.org> wrote: > On the vast majority of modern systems, no processes will use the > userspsace IO syscalls, iopl and ioperm. Add a new config option, > CONFIG_X86_IOPORT, to support configuring them out of the kernel > entirely. Most current systems do not run programs using these > syscalls, so X86_IOPORT

On the vast majority of modern systems, no processes will use the userspsace IO syscalls, iopl and ioperm. Add a new config option, CONFIG_X86_IOPORT, to support configuring them out of the kernel entirely. Most current systems do not run programs using these syscalls, so X86_IOPORT does not depend on EXPERT, though it does still default to y. In addition to saving a significant amount of

On the vast majority of modern systems, no processes will use the userspsace IO syscalls, iopl and ioperm. Add a new config option, CONFIG_X86_IOPORT, to support configuring them out of the kernel entirely. Most current systems do not run programs using these syscalls, so X86_IOPORT does not depend on EXPERT, though it does still default to y. In addition to saving a significant amount of

This patch series makes it possible to compile out the userspace IO system calls, iopl and ioperm. The first patch does some 32/64 unification in copy_thread to make subsequent changes easier. The second patch simplifies the complex calculation of the TSS segment limit, which also makes it easier to change in the last patch. Patches 3-9 introduce helpers to make it easier to compile out IO.

This patch series makes it possible to compile out the userspace IO system calls, iopl and ioperm. The first patch does some 32/64 unification in copy_thread to make subsequent changes easier. The second patch simplifies the complex calculation of the TSS segment limit, which also makes it easier to change in the last patch. Patches 3-9 introduce helpers to make it easier to compile out IO.

Hello, I tried lunch something but the anwer was "can't find apps" (I used absolute path too) [serge@rex wineserver-rex]$ wine /windows/ProgramFiles/Office/winword.exe Invoking /opt/wine/bin/wine.bin /windows/ProgramFiles/Office/winword.exe ... Wine failed with return code 2 /usr/bin/wine: line 516: 1046 Compl?t? tail -f $log_name Deleting /tmp/wine.log.Vv4t6C

I have a problem with file locking on different platforms. System environment: Samba Server 2.2.3.a on Red Hat 7.3 Some Windows 2000 Clients with MS-Office 2000 and OpenOffice 1.0.1 Some Red Hat 8.0 Clients with Open Office 1.0.1 The Linux Clients mounts the Samba Shares with smbmount: smbmount //<Server/shares> $HOME/path -o

Well I hate to say it, but I'm back again with new problems in WinWord. I haven't touched the setup since August when everything was working ok, however I have been doing package updates, which included updates to wine1.3. Today when I tried to open up winword, I get the following pasted below)... I tried uninstalling and reinstalling Office2003 (typical install), and I confirmed in

High dears, I just do my first step on wine on SuSE8.2 and Wine 20030508, installed from new rpm for SuSE. First I have installed the Office2000 with that command: Office2000 Prem> wine --dll cabinet=n --debugmsg +loaddll setup.exe hat it seems to be work: I have got the messages "restart your Computer". After that I start wine notepad only to see if wine is still working

In order to start an application (e.g. Word), I have to type the following command line (which is very long) : wine .wine/drive_c/Program\ Files/Microsoft\ Office/OFFICE11/WINWORD.EXE How to proceed if I want to change my system (Debian Etch) so that I only need to type a short command line like : wine WINWORD.EXE [Question] Many thanks in advance :D

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Hi, I have a strange problem with samba 3.0.14a. One of my users is experiencing a lot of temporary files created by winword 2003. Winword does delete the temp files under any other userid. The only difference I know of is that the problematic user was created after the automatic switch from samba 2.2.8a to 3.0.14a (during an upgrade from debian woody