Used to say here... Don't teach old eagle to fly :) Same way i shouldn't
teach developer how to write patch and for which bug. For this reason
(as i said before) i can live without BISECTED.
> Personally, I mostly ignore the "regression" keyword.
That's OK if you have a proprietary system of wor
Maarten Lankhorst wrote:
> On 23-05-10 01:57, Dan Kegel wrote:
> > I think it's a good idea. 'regression' isn't as strong as 'bisected'.
> >
> > Unless there are objections, I'll add the keyword on Monday.
> >
> I think I'll object. I don't see any point in the bisected tag that
> regressio
I'm starting to wonder about the use cases for both of those keywords.
Personally, I mostly ignore the "regression" keyword. As a developer
looking for bugs to work on, I've found it not very useful. At a given
point in time, most regression bugs are not easier, more severe, or
more important than
I'm not convinced direct linking will work better on Mac OS X, unless
you ship libpng and libjpeg with Wine.
And libgnutls (plus prereqs libgpg-error & libgcrypt). And libgphoto2,
libexif, libtiff, libgsm, libjbig... - there's a laundry list of
libraries that are required for a full-featured
On Sat, May 22, 2010 at 6:55 PM, Maarten Lankhorst
wrote:
> Hi Dan,
>
> On 23-05-10 01:57, Dan Kegel wrote:
>>
>> I think it's a good idea. 'regression' isn't as strong as 'bisected'.
>>
>> Unless there are objections, I'll add the keyword on Monday.
>>
>
> I think I'll object. I don't see any po
Hi Dan,
On 23-05-10 01:57, Dan Kegel wrote:
I think it's a good idea. 'regression' isn't as strong as 'bisected'.
Unless there are objections, I'll add the keyword on Monday.
I think I'll object. I don't see any point in the bisected tag that
regression doesn't already cover. As far as I
>> but this isn't going to happen of course for obvious reasons (some
>> reporters don't bother to respond in months). If no test was performed
>>> a developer will see a report anyway, searching for a module of
>> interest.
>
> I still think that REGRESSION != BISECTED, but i don't argue or enfor
Thanks for everybody who advised. I have filed the two bugs under:
[Bug 22813] wine's loader does not check invalid image size
[Bug 22812] mt creates corrupted executables
In a nutshell, just before running mt, wine and vista generates very similiar
executables (differing by 4 bytes, two about t
I think it's a good idea. 'regression' isn't as strong as 'bisected'.
Unless there are objections, I'll add the keyword on Monday.
On Sat, May 22, 2010 at 3:41 PM, Louis Lenders
wrote:
>
> Nikolay Sivov codeweavers.com> writes:
> >
> > I believe developer's attention doesn't depend on bug state
> > (confirmed/uncofirmed) at all.
>
> I'm not sure about that, my experience is that some developers do care about
> regressions an
On Fri, 21 May 2010, Steven Edwards wrote:
> On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 1:28 PM, Marcus Meissner wrote:
> >
> > No static linking either, its the nightmare of security maintainers ;)
> >
> Good point. Direct Linking then. I am just in favor of changing it to
> something other than the status quo beca
Louis Lenders wrote:
Nikolay Sivov codeweavers.com> writes:
I believe developer's attention doesn't depend on bug state
(confirmed/uncofirmed) at all.
I'm not sure about that, my experience is that some developers do care about
regressions and some don't (actually i thin
Nikolay Sivov codeweavers.com> writes:
> >
> I believe developer's attention doesn't depend on bug state
> (confirmed/uncofirmed) at all.
I'm not sure about that, my experience is that some developers do care about
regressions and some don't (actually i think that they missed the bug repor
On 5/23/2010 01:22, wy...@volny.cz wrote:
Actually a "regression" keyword supposes to mean exactly
the same. It just happens that it's added every time someone decided
to add it. IMO it should be added only when regression
test results are available
I wouldn't like it eithe
> > Compare this with regressions which are bisected
> > (aka "bug served on silver tray"), so saves a lot of time. And of
> > > > course such a keyword would help in dev's triage what to fix first.
> >
> Actually a "regression" keyword supposes to mean exactly
> the same. It just happens that it
On 5/23/2010 00:50, wy...@volny.cz wrote:
Wolfram Sang wrote:
I noticed that Wylda uses "--private keyword: bisected"
when appropriate. IMHO this could be useful as a real keyword, e.g.
if you search for bugs you'd like to try tackling. Has this been
considered alre
> Wolfram Sang wrote:
>
> > I noticed that Wylda uses "--private keyword: bisected"
> > when appropriate. IMHO this could be useful as a real keyword, e.g.
> > > > if you search for bugs you'd like to try tackling. Has this been
> > considered already?
> >
> There is a keyword 'regression', that
On Sat, May 22, 2010 at 9:44 AM, Andrew Nguyen wrote:
> On Sat, May 22, 2010 at 5:02 AM, Austin English
> wrote:
>> Changes from try 1:
>> Fix another typo.
>> Set LastError before checking it
>> Print LastError as a decimal
>> Don't check for INVALID_HANDLE_VALUE as a return value of
>> CreateT
Fools! With this patch, the WIC empire shall finally be complete.
Er, I mean, this is pretty cool. And thanks for the ICO decoder fix.
On Sat, May 22, 2010 at 11:01 AM, Damjan Jovanovic wrote:
> Changelog:
> * winemenubuilder: remove legacy PNG and XPM conversion code
>
> The patch may look frig
Hi Austin,
+SetLastError(0xdeadbeef);
ret = CertSaveStore(store, X509_ASN_ENCODING, CERT_STORE_SAVE_AS_STORE,
CERT_STORE_SAVE_TO_MEMORY, &blob, 0);
+todo_wine ok(ret && GetLastError() == CRYPT_E_NOT_FOUND,
"CertSaveStore failed. Expected CRYPT_E_NOT_FOUND, got %d\n",
GetLastErro
On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 10:25 PM, Steven Edwards wrote:
> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 4:17 PM, Steven Edwards wrote:
>> I've tried with other PNGs before that we've not generated. Take a
>> third party png, edit the Info.plist and change the icon entry to
>> instead of pointing at the icns file point
Hello,
On 22-05-10 17:15, Wolfram Sang wrote:
I noticed that Wylda uses "--private keyword: bisected" when appropriate.
IMHO this could be useful as a real keyword, e.g. if you search for bugs
you'd like to try tackling. Has this been considered already?
I don't think that keyword is needed,
Wolfram Sang wrote:
> I noticed that Wylda uses "--private keyword: bisected" when appropriate.
> IMHO this could be useful as a real keyword, e.g. if you search for bugs
> you'd like to try tackling. Has this been considered already?
There is a keyword 'regression', that should be enough.
--
Hi,
I noticed that Wylda uses "--private keyword: bisected" when appropriate.
IMHO this could be useful as a real keyword, e.g. if you search for bugs
you'd like to try tackling. Has this been considered already?
Regards,
Wolfram
On Sat, May 22, 2010 at 5:02 AM, Austin English wrote:
> Changes from try 1:
> Fix another typo.
> Set LastError before checking it
> Print LastError as a decimal
> Don't check for INVALID_HANDLE_VALUE as a return value of
> CreateThread, instead make sure serverThread is not NULL.
>
> --
> -Austi
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=2258
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=2254
Your paranoid android.
On Sat, May 22, 2010 at 2:17 AM, Dmitry Timoshkov
wrote:
> Austin English wrote:
>
>> alarmThread = CreateThread(NULL, 0, alarmThreadMain, (void *) 2, 0,
>> &alarmThreadId);
>> + ok(alarmThread != INVALID_HANDLE_VALUE, "CreateThread\n");
>
> CreateThread doesn't return INVALID_HANDLE
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=2251
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=2250
Your paranoid android.
Austin English wrote:
> ValidateRect( hwnd, &rc);
> ret = GetUpdateRect( child, &rc2, 0);
> +ok(!ret, "GetUpdateRect failed %08x\n", GetLastError());
> ok( rc2.left == 0 && rc2.top == 0 && rc2.right == 0 && rc2.bottom == 0,
> "Update rectangle %d,%d-%d,%d is not em
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=2243
Your paranoid android.
Austin English wrote:
> alarmThread = CreateThread(NULL, 0, alarmThreadMain, (void *) 2, 0,
> &alarmThreadId);
> +ok(alarmThread != INVALID_HANDLE_VALUE, "CreateThread\n");
CreateThread doesn't return INVALID_HANDLE_VALUE on failure. Clarifying
the error message and printing last e
Austin English wrote:
> ret=ReadFile(hFile, blackbox, size, &read, NULL);
> +ok(ret, "ReadFile failed: %08x\n", GetLastError());
Printing last error without prior setting it to 0xdeadfeef won't really
help. Also errors returned by GetLastError() are defined in decimal in
winerror.h.
--
Austin English wrote:
> @@ -3096,6 +3096,7 @@ static void test_CreateFontIndirect(void)
> hfont = CreateFontIndirectA(&lf);
> ok(hfont != 0, "CreateFontIndirectA failed\n");
> ret = GetObject(hfont, sizeof(getobj_lf), &getobj_lf);
> +ok(ret, "GetObject failed: %
On Sat, May 22, 2010 at 2:06 AM, Austin English wrote:
> Also fix a typo.
>
> Passes WTB:
> https://testbot.winehq.org/JobDetails.pl?Key=2242
>
> --
> -Austin
>
>
>
>
While you're at it, you might as well fix the "change" typo.
36 matches
Mail list logo
