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=5017
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=5018
Your paranoid android.
Tom Spear wrote:
> I believe it would be prudent to have some warning appear when
> certain native dll's are missing which required by the app being
> run, and which we do not implement builtins for.
I suppose a +winediag message might be appropriate for
some commonly-needed DLLs. Probably there'
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=5014
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=5016
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=5015
Your paranoid android.
Hi all, so it has been a long time since I have posted here. Much has
changed; I now have 3 little ones. :-)
Anyways, right to the point: I stumbled on an old bug of mine this evening
while doing some long overdue mailbox maintenance. Bug 657:
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=657
Dan made a
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=5013
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=5012
Your paranoid android.
On Monday 23 August 2010 22:00:22 Jacek Caban wrote:
> This build is based on Firefox 4 beta 4 (that is expected to be released
> this week). It goes with massive improvements, but it's less interesting
> here. We finally have sane building procedure. Thanks to mingw-w64 project,
> we no longer hav
* On Fri, 3 Sep 2010, joerg-cyril.hoe...@t-systems.com wrote:
>
> Saulius Krasuckas wrote:
> >Then we would know for sure :)
> As far as MCICDA is concerned, it doesn't look like it knows about
> multi-sessions. All it offers is to play music. Therefore the mcicda
> tests is not the right place
Hi Juan,
>Since we don't have the same limitation in Wine,
>applications can call it or not, but it won't have any effect. Hence
>maintaining a version-dependent external behavior, while not behaving
>differently internally, doesn't make sense to me.
Ok, thanks for the info, then i'll just let i
I threw together a perl script this morning to scan a wineprefix for
references to MS dlls. It's at
http://code.google.com/p/winezeug/source/browse/trunk/mscodescan.pl
It's pretty crufty, but might still be handy.
For a working install of Sam and Max episode 304 (with native vcrun80
installed),
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=4989
Your paranoid android.
Hi Louis,
> The check is there as the tests show that there is a difference between ver <
> win98 and ver > WINNT. I don't know if there a are applications that depend
> on this difference really. Anyway, i could return something like
> min(65536,count) for all versions, is that ok? (i'll strip
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=4988
Your paranoid android.
Hi Thomas,
On 9/3/10 1:19 AM, Thomas Mullaly wrote:
---
dlls/urlmon/tests/uri.c | 22 -
dlls/urlmon/uri.c | 80
++
2 files changed, 93 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
+static HRESULT setup_builder_properties(UriBuilder*builder
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=4987
Your paranoid android.
Hi,
Octavian Voicu wrote:
>> b) Sysinfo cdaudio quantity open
The latest patches I've now submitted show how to modify parameters in
the parser. The key is to do it after the parsing.
> I'll focus on getting basic 64 bit support working first,
>while also looking at the big picture when possible.
On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 6:45 AM, Frank Richter wrote:
> On 10.08.2010 20:22, Michael Mc Donnell wrote:
>> When a user clicks the "Make New Folder" button a new folder is created.
>> The name of the folder is selected, and the dialog box waits for the user
>> to either accept the name or type in a
Saulius,
Saulius Krasuckas wrote:
>It would be nice to indicate disks containing tracks of different types
>(sessions) in the log and to extract some info from the data track.
>Drive info would be also interesting to see in the log.
It is on purpose that I did not write too specific info to the lo
Louis Lenders wrote:
>> It's pretty unlikely that count would be larger than 0x.
> I agree, but i thought we should mimic Windows-behaviour, and the tests
> showed that such large values are at least allowed. If this value is too
> large could you suggest another one?
I know I'm spoiling
On 09/03/2010 12:30 PM, Alexandre Julliard wrote:
GetCPInfo, that's where the kernel32 info is.
I must admit I don't understand anymore.
GetCPInfo failed with codepage 1361 on my XP (whereas _setmbcp(1361)
succeeded )
However, on WXPPROJASP3 (32 bit) [1], GetCPInfo succeeds and LeadByte[]
co
>It's pretty unlikely that count would be larger than 0x.
I agree, but i thought we should mimic Windows-behaviour, and the tests showed
that such large values are at least allowed. If this value is too large could
you suggest another one?
> Also I don't think we need a version check.
T
On 9/3/2010 13:25, Mariusz Pluciński wrote:
+hr = IXMLDOMElement_get_text(lpXMLElement,&bstrValue);
+if(SUCCEEDED(hr))
+{
+nValueLen = SysStringLen(bstrValue)+1;
+
+GameData->sName = CoTaskMemAlloc(nValueLen*sizeof(WCHAR));
+
On 9/3/2010 13:25, Mariusz Pluciński wrote:
+static HRESULT _ParseGameDefinition(
+IXMLDOMElement *lpXMLGameDefinitionElement,
+struct GAME_DATA *GameData)
+{
+static const WCHAR sGameId[] = {'g','a','m','e','I','D',0};
+
+HRESULT hr = S_OK;
+BSTR bstrAttribute = NULL
On 9/3/2010 13:25, Mariusz Pluciński wrote:
---
dlls/gameux/Makefile.in |2 +-
dlls/gameux/gameexplorer.c | 254
+-
dlls/gameux/gameux_private.h | 63 ++
dlls/gameux/tests/gameexplorer.c | 18 ++--
4 files changed, 322 in
GOUJON Alexandre writes:
> On 09/03/2010 11:18 AM, Alexandre Julliard wrote:
>> A quick test on Windows shows that this isn't correct as far as the
>> kernel32 info is concerned
>
> Huh ? What test did you do ?
GetCPInfo, that's where the kernel32 info is.
--
Alexandre Julliard
julli...@winehq
On 09/03/2010 11:18 AM, Alexandre Julliard wrote:
A quick test on Windows shows that this isn't correct as far as the
kernel32 info is concerned
Huh ? What test did you do ?
I compiled the attached source with mingw on my virtual XP.
(unfortunately, G**gle prevent me from attaching the produce
André Hentschel writes:
> ole32 function CoTaskMemAlloc is already used in DLL_PROCESS_ATTACH
> (SIC_Initialize -> SIC_IconAppend -> SHAlloc -> CoTaskMemAlloc)
A better fix would be to avoid initializing unneeded stuff in process
attach.
--
Alexandre Julliard
julli...@winehq.org
Alexandre Goujon writes:
> @@ -1563,8 +1564,16 @@ sub HANDLE_FILE(@)
> }
> printf OUTPUT "#include \"wine/unicode.h\"\n\n";
>
> +@lb_ranges = get_lb_ranges();
> +
> +if( $codepage == 1361 )
> +{
> +$lb_ranges[0] = 0x81;
> +$lb_ranges[2] = 0xd8;
> +}
A
Louis Lenders writes:
> @@ -1192,7 +1192,10 @@ BOOL WINAPI UnlockFileEx( HANDLE hFile, DWORD
> reserved, DWORD count_low, DWORD c
> */
> UINT WINAPI SetHandleCount( UINT count )
> {
> -return min( 256, count );
> +if (GetVersion() & 0x8000)
> +return min( 0x100, count );
32 matches
Mail list logo