Hi,
While running your changed tests on Windows, I think I found new failures.
Being a bot and all I'm not very good at pattern recognition, so I might be
wrong, but could you please double-check?
Full results can be found at
http://testbot.winehq.org/JobDetails.pl?Key=1972
Your paranoid android.
Ben Klein:
> Any cases where -O0 and -O2 give different results for backtraces are
> > bugs in the gcc optimisation code, not in Wine.
And this was excatly one of the reasons, why use -O0. I do not want to
report gcc bugs in wine's bugzilla.
> Speed of code execution is an issue primarily with la
Hi,
While running your changed tests on Windows, I think I found new failures.
Being a bot and all I'm not very good at pattern recognition, so I might be
wrong, but could you please double-check?
Full results can be found at
http://testbot.winehq.org/JobDetails.pl?Key=1969
Your paranoid android.
Hi,
While running your changed tests on Windows, I think I found new failures.
Being a bot and all I'm not very good at pattern recognition, so I might be
wrong, but could you please double-check?
Full results can be found at
http://testbot.winehq.org/JobDetails.pl?Key=1970
Your paranoid android.
08.05.2010 9:10, Henry Blum wrote:
---
dlls/kernel32/process.c |2 +-
1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
diff --git a/dlls/kernel32/process.c b/dlls/kernel32/process.c
index 9a1f2f5..6dcad8f 100644
--- a/dlls/kernel32/process.c
+++ b/dlls/kernel32/process.c
@@ -2657,7 +2657,7
On 5/7/10 11:10 PM, Henry Blum wrote:
> -if (status != STATUS_SUCCESS)
> +if (status != STATUS_SUCCESS || (access & PROCESS_VM_WRITE))
According to this, opening a process and specifying the PROCESS_VM_WRITE
access right causes OpenProcess() to fail.
Why do you need this? And what about pr
On Mon, 3 May 2010, Nikolay Sivov wrote:
> Bitmap are useless after this change.
I'll submit a patch which has this fixed. Interestingly, at least on
my FreeBSD-based tester, test results did _not_ regress either way.
Gerald
On Mon, 3 May 2010, Jacek Caban wrote:
> On 5/2/10 9:16 PM, Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
>> IActiveScriptSite_OnStateChange is described to return S_OK upon
>> success, so instead of ignoring its return value and unconditionally
>> returning S_OK it strikes me that we should return its result instead.
> I
2010/5/9 Sir Gallantmon (ニール・ゴンパ) :
> On Sat, May 8, 2010 at 1:42 PM, Alexandre Julliard
> wrote:
>>
>> Folks,
>>
>> The 64-bit support is now more or less complete, and we have most of the
>> fancy new icons, so it's time to think about the next stable release.
>
> What do you mean by the 64-bit
On 9 May 2010 06:21, wrote:
> Hi Marcus,
>
>> > * better backtraces for bug reports
>>
>> -O2 works like a charm there too, at least for me.
>
> I think i read that somewhere and if i understood that correctly, my
> conclusion at that time was, that -02 optimizes the code, so it can
> "omit some"
Vincent Povirk wrote:
Actually, when I read through the report, it broke in 1.0-rc4 but worked in
0.9.52. That is one old bug and aggravating too.
You're right, so it didn't work in 1.0.
That's.. that might actually be worse.
Vincent:
This should be on the 1.2 todo list. This real
On Sat, May 8, 2010 at 8:43 PM, Erich Hoover wrote:
> On Sat, May 8, 2010 at 7:16 PM, Vincent Povirk
> wrote:
>>
>> While we're linking to bug lists, this one seems most interesting to me:
>> http://bit.ly/bfOHK5
>>
>> That's the list of major regressions introduced since 1.0-rc1.
>> ...
>
> What
On Sat, May 8, 2010 at 7:16 PM, Vincent Povirk wrote:
> While we're linking to bug lists, this one seems most interesting to me:
> http://bit.ly/bfOHK5
>
> That's the list of major regressions introduced since 1.0-rc1.
> ...
>
What criteria did you use to build that list? There's a bunch of rece
> Actually, when I read through the report, it broke in 1.0-rc4 but worked in
> 0.9.52. That is one old bug and aggravating too.
You're right, so it didn't work in 1.0.
That's.. that might actually be worse.
Vincent Povirk wrote:
While we're linking to bug lists, this one seems most interesting to me:
http://bit.ly/bfOHK5
That's the list of major regressions introduced since 1.0-rc1.
Bug 13891 in particular will make us look bad if it's not fixed before
1.2. A lot of apps (as I understand it, any a
Vincent Povirk wrote:
While we're linking to bug lists, this one seems most interesting to me:
http://bit.ly/bfOHK5
That's the list of major regressions introduced since 1.0-rc1.
Bug 13891 in particular will make us look bad if it's not fixed before
1.2. A lot of apps (as I understand it, any a
While we're linking to bug lists, this one seems most interesting to me:
http://bit.ly/bfOHK5
That's the list of major regressions introduced since 1.0-rc1.
Bug 13891 in particular will make us look bad if it's not fixed before
1.2. A lot of apps (as I understand it, any app that does it properly
Hi,
While running your changed tests on Windows, I think I found new failures.
Being a bot and all I'm not very good at pattern recognition, so I might be
wrong, but could you please double-check?
Full results can be found at
http://testbot.winehq.org/JobDetails.pl?Key=1960
Your paranoid android.
Hi,
While running your changed tests on Windows, I think I found new failures.
Being a bot and all I'm not very good at pattern recognition, so I might be
wrong, but could you please double-check?
Full results can be found at
http://testbot.winehq.org/JobDetails.pl?Key=1959
Your paranoid android.
On Sun, May 9, 2010 at 7:02 AM, Dan Kegel wrote:
> Tom Wickline wrote:
> >>
> http://bugs.winehq.org/buglist.cgi?bug_status=UNCONFIRMED&bug_status=NEW&bug_status=ASSIGNED&bug_status=REOPENED&product=Wine&target_milestone=1.2.0
> >
> > Three releases to fix 88 nasty bugs?
>
> The sad fact is that
Tom Wickline wrote:
>> http://bugs.winehq.org/buglist.cgi?bug_status=UNCONFIRMED&bug_status=NEW&bug_status=ASSIGNED&bug_status=REOPENED&product=Wine&target_milestone=1.2.0
>
> Three releases to fix 88 nasty bugs?
The sad fact is that it would take a lot more than that to fix them
all, and it proba
Le 08/05/2010 22:37, Nikolay Sivov a écrit :
On 5/9/2010 00:21, wy...@volny.cz wrote:
Hi Marcus,
* better backtraces for bug reports
-O2 works like a charm there too, at least for me.
I think i read that somewhere and if i understood that correctly, my
conclusion at that time was, that -02
On Sun, May 9, 2010 at 4:34 AM, Austin English wrote:
>
> It's the first link on the tasklist in bugzilla:
>
> http://bugs.winehq.org/buglist.cgi?bug_status=UNCONFIRMED&bug_status=NEW&bug_status=ASSIGNED&bug_status=REOPENED&product=Wine&target_milestone=1.2.0&order=bugs.bug_severity
>
> --
> -Aust
On 5/9/2010 00:21, wy...@volny.cz wrote:
Hi Marcus,
* better backtraces for bug reports
-O2 works like a charm there too, at least for me.
I think i read that somewhere and if i understood that correctly, my
conclusion at that time was, that -02 optimizes the code, so it can
On Sat, May 8, 2010 at 3:31 PM, James McKenzie
wrote:
> Alexandre Julliard wrote:
>>
>> Folks,
>>
>> The 64-bit support is now more or less complete, and we have most of the
>> fancy new icons, so it's time to think about the next stable release.
>>
>> Unless some major problems come up, 1.1.44 wi
Alexandre Julliard wrote:
Folks,
The 64-bit support is now more or less complete, and we have most of the
fancy new icons, so it's time to think about the next stable release.
Unless some major problems come up, 1.1.44 will be the last of the 1.1.x
series. The next release will be 1.2-rc1, whic
Hi Marcus,
> > * better backtraces for bug reports
>
> -O2 works like a charm there too, at least for me.
I think i read that somewhere and if i understood that correctly, my
conclusion at that time was, that -02 optimizes the code, so it can
"omit some" part of code and replace them by faster al
On Sat, May 8, 2010 at 1:42 PM, Alexandre Julliard wrote:
> Folks,
>
> The 64-bit support is now more or less complete, and we have most of the
> fancy new icons, so it's time to think about the next stable release.
>
> Unless some major problems come up, 1.1.44 will be the last of the 1.1.x
> ser
Folks,
The 64-bit support is now more or less complete, and we have most of the
fancy new icons, so it's time to think about the next stable release.
Unless some major problems come up, 1.1.44 will be the last of the 1.1.x
series. The next release will be 1.2-rc1, which will mark the beginning
of
On 5/8/2010 22:20, Nikolay Sivov wrote:
Fixes bug 1733.
Selected brush color should depend on current window color or other system
settings, it just inverts hdc colors.
(should -> shouldn't)
Hi,
While running your changed tests on Windows, I think I found new failures.
Being a bot and all I'm not very good at pattern recognition, so I might be
wrong, but could you please double-check?
Full results can be found at
http://testbot.winehq.org/JobDetails.pl?Key=1955
Your paranoid android.
On Sat, May 08, 2010 at 03:02:48PM +0200, wy...@volny.cz wrote:
>
> > Roderick:
> > Yeah the -O0 bug was reported on #winehackers yesterday
> > and will likely be fixed soon.
>
> Ah, ok :) I know you already test nearly everythink, but what about adding
> another test -O{0,1,2,s,...}
> a] before
On 5/7/10 11:47 PM, Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
On Mon, 3 May 2010, Jacek Caban wrote:
On 5/2/10 9:16 PM, Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
IActiveScriptSite_OnStateChange is described to return S_OK upon
success, so instead of ignoring its return value and unconditionally
returning S_OK it strikes me
This test passes on win2k & winxp, fails on wine.
That failure causes cdkey verification problems in "Earth 2160" as sold on
GOG.com:
Once the installation is finished, the installers generates a registry key
value based (among other things) on the ctime of installed directory.
Looked-up path has
> Roderick:
> Yeah the -O0 bug was reported on #winehackers yesterday
> and will likely be fixed soon.
Ah, ok :) I know you already test nearly everythink, but what about adding
another test -O{0,1,2,s,...}
a] before official release or
b] evening wine git update
> Compiling using -O2 (which is
Yeah the -O0 bug was reported on #winehackers yesterday and will
likely be fixed soon. Compiling using -O2 (which is what you should
use by default anyway unless you have very good reasons not to) should
work fine.
Roderick
On Sat, May 8, 2010 at 2:33 PM, wrote:
>
> Hi guys, i can't compile win
Hi guys, i can't compile wine-1.1.44 (1.1.43 is OK here like all the
ones before)... As i guess you would not release a wine, which can't
be compiled, than i suspect there could be a trouble in my system (Debian
Lenny 32bit). For this reason, i did not bother to fill a bug ;) as
it would be marked
On 5/8/10 1:07 PM, Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
The current code does not handle an error coming out of
nsIDOMHTMLBodyElement_SetText and actually discards whatever nsres
is set to.
Jacek, is a patch like this okay, should we just remove nsres, or
is it more complicated than that?
We can't mix ns
Hi,
While running your changed tests on Windows, I think I found new failures.
Being a bot and all I'm not very good at pattern recognition, so I might be
wrong, but could you please double-check?
Full results can be found at
http://testbot.winehq.org/JobDetails.pl?Key=1950
Your paranoid android.
39 matches
Mail list logo
