> ok() is for calls never expected to fail, broken() is for broken API
> implementations and should never be used for Wine.
Noted.
> What's the source of info you have used for that?
It was on a comment to that post:
http://blogs.msdn.com/oldnewthing/archive/2005/04/29/412577.aspx
It seems to
"Koro" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> As for the broken() and ok() I must admit it was my first test case, so
> I tried to look at the other functions and do the same, I may have been
> totally wrong. If you could enlighten me on proper broken/ok use, i'd be
> happy.
ok() is for calls never expe
"Anton Rudnev" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> RtlAddVectoredHandler is never fail.
> vectored_handler_added store adress of handler for DLL_PROCESS_DETACH-case.
> If vectored_handler_added is null then handler is not been added at
> DLL_PROCESS_ATTACH-case.
This shouldn't happen.
> If handler not
Austin English wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 11, 2008 at 5:02 PM, James Hawkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> On Sat, Oct 11, 2008 at 4:45 PM, Austin English <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>> Very true. Where it would help is with knowing what apps people are
>>> running. Many people might try Win
> Then you shouldn't mark it as broken(), or expect a failure, but
> either send the fix 1st, or mark this as todo_wine.
I actually sent the fix first, but somehow, (at least if I rely on the
newsgroup) it ended up appearing a lot later than this actual test case.
As for the broken() and ok() I
On Sat, Oct 11, 2008 at 5:02 PM, James Hawkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 11, 2008 at 4:45 PM, Austin English <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> Very true. Where it would help is with knowing what apps people are
>> running. Many people might try Wine, and never get it to work, then
>>
On Sat, Oct 11, 2008 at 4:45 PM, Austin English <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Very true. Where it would help is with knowing what apps people are
> running. Many people might try Wine, and never get it to work, then
> give up without filing a bug. Conversely, some people might have it
> work perfe
On Sat, Oct 11, 2008 at 10:19 AM, Zachary Goldberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 11, 2008 at 4:12 AM, Kai Blin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On Saturday 11 October 2008 03:11:38 Austin English wrote:
>>
>>> Can we get back to the original discussion and decide how we want to
>>> collect
Am 11.10.2008 um 16:30 schrieb Jeremy White:
> But the key point was that he immediately and *emotionally* was
> grabbed by the value of Wine.
He grabbed _a_ value of Wine, but not the one making Wine unique,
standing out of the crowd of countless competitive technology.
Perhaps he even gr
On Sat, Oct 11, 2008 at 4:12 AM, Kai Blin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Saturday 11 October 2008 03:11:38 Austin English wrote:
>
>> Can we get back to the original discussion and decide how we want to
>> collect Wine usage statistics?
>
> The only viable proposal I saw was an opt-in in winecfg.
You just jumped in and said most of the things I was going to say. :(
I would like to mention that my options are limited, as sugar
integration goes. I can theoretically change the environment the
programs run in to fit in better, but I can't change the windows
programs that users will ultimately
Hi Markus,
> Judging by the photoshopped image you put an an Windows-like desktop
> designed for adults into a desktop designed for childs. Now, if you'd
> at least hide the original (sugar) desktop you'd re-gain precious
> screen space and wouldn't have to explain the childs when to use
>
"Anton Rudnev" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> --- a/dlls/ntoskrnl.exe/ntoskrnl.c
> +++ b/dlls/ntoskrnl.exe/ntoskrnl.c
> @@ -886,14 +886,20 @@ NTSTATUS WINAPI PsSetCreateProcessNotifyRoutine(
> PCREATE_PROCESS_NOTIFY_ROUTINE
> BOOL WINAPI DllMain( HINSTANCE inst, DWORD reason, LPVOID reserved )
>
"Koro" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Is there a Windows version where CreateDialogIndirectParam fails?
>
> It's not supposed to fail in Windows using the template that is passed
> to it. But it fails in WINE without my patch.
Then you shouldn't mark it as broken(), or expect a failure, but
eith
> Is there a Windows version where CreateDialogIndirectParam fails?
It's not supposed to fail in Windows using the template that is passed
to it. But it fails in WINE without my patch.
> What exactly this code is supposed to test? So far it doesn't test
> anything related to the font size.
As I
Am 11.10.2008 um 03:03 schrieb Vincent Povirk:
> Getting Wine to actually work in that environment was harder than
> anticipated, and taking a desktop that (in my opinion) is good for
> Wine generally and dropping it into sugar did not produce something
> that works well in sugar.
Judging by the
"Koro" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> +static INT_PTR CALLBACK messageBoxFontDlgWinProc (HWND hDlg, UINT uiMsg,
> WPARAM wParam,
> +LPARAM lParam)
> +{
> +return (uiMsg == WM_INITDIALOG);
> +}
> +
> +static void test_MessageBoxFontTest(void)
> +{
> +/* Define a dialog that sets 0x7f
On Saturday 11 October 2008 03:11:38 Austin English wrote:
> Can we get back to the original discussion and decide how we want to
> collect Wine usage statistics?
The only viable proposal I saw was an opt-in in winecfg.
Cheers,
Kai
--
Kai Blin
WorldForge developer http://www.worldforge.org/
W
18 matches
Mail list logo
