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=22112
Your paranoid android
On Fri, Oct 5, 2012 at 6:54 PM, Henri Verbeet wrote:
> On 5 October 2012 22:12, Austin English wrote:
>> Fixes http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=31891
>>
> That doesn't look right (and doesn't do what you think it does
> anyway), did you verify this against the Windows driver? It probably
>
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=22103
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=22104
Your paranoid android
Daniel Lehman wrote:
> 0x26a8 becomes 0xc9aa instead of just 0x9aa
It can't, the code explicitly casts handle to unsigned before the shift.
--
Dmitry.
"Vincas Miliūnas" wrote:
> * Renamed DUMMYUNIONNAME to u.
...
> +typedef struct _FILE_ID_DESCRIPTOR {
> +DWORDdwSize;
> +FILE_ID_TYPE Type;
> +union {
> +LARGE_INTEGER FileId;
> +GUID ObjectId;
> +} u;
> +} FILE_ID_DESCRIPTOR, *LPFILE_ID_DESCRIPTOR
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=22091
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=22090
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=22078
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=22079
Your paranoid android
On 10.10.2012 09:49, Nozomi Kodama wrote:
math.c:2994: Test failed: Red: case 9, order 7: expected[10] = 0.00,
received -134495294795062701298349336420239278080.00
math.c:2994: Test failed: Red: case 9, order 7: expected[15] = 0.00,
received -131556728585661638158151798785793064960.00
On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 10:42:53AM +0200, joerg-cyril.hoe...@t-systems.com
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> David Laight wrote:
>
> >Better to code as:
> >status = wmm->dwStatus;
> >if (...)
> Incidentally, that's what I did tonight in patch 20/25 try 2.
>
> >but even then I think the compiler
On 10/10/12 19:42, Daniel Lehman wrote:
+memcpy_s(*to_next, MB_LEN_MAX, buf, size);
You may use memory after to_end in this code. to_next buffer size
should be probably following:
memcpy_s(*to_next, to_end-to_next, buf, size);
Cheers,
Piotr
"Vincas Miliūnas" wrote:
> >> +objectName.Buffer = (WCHAR
> >> *)&lpFileID->DUMMYUNIONNAME.FileId;
> > This doesn't look right.
> That's how the pointer to the fileid is transported, see the
> file_id_to_unix_file_name function in ntdll/directory.c
I meant DUMMYUNIONNAME.
--
D
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=22088
Your paranoid android
On 10/10/2012 05:45 AM, Dmitry Timoshkov wrote:
> "Vincas Miliūnas" wrote:
>
>> +objectName.Buffer = (WCHAR
>> *)&lpFileID->DUMMYUNIONNAME.FileId;
> This doesn't look right.
That's how the pointer to the fileid is transported, see the
file_id_to_unix_file_name function in ntdll/di
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=22045
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=22031
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=22044
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=22030
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=22043
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=22055
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=22066
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=22064
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=22063
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=22057
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=22056
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=22054
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=22053
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=22047
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=22046
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=22042
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=22041
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=22040
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=22039
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=22038
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=22026
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=22027
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=22025
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=22024
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=22023
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=22019
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=22018
Your paranoid android
André Hentschel writes:
> @@ -2569,6 +2570,7 @@ sub generate_project_files($)
> print FILEO "\$(${canon}_MODULE).so: \$(${canon}_OBJS)
> \$(${canon}_MODULE:.dll=.def)\n";
>} elsif (@$target[$T_TYPE] == $TT_DLL) {
> print FILEO "\$(${canon}_MODULE).so: \$(${canon}_OBJS)
On 10/10/2012 10:42 AM, joerg-cyril.hoe...@t-systems.com wrote:
> Hi,
>
> David Laight wrote:
>
>> Better to code as:
>>status = wmm->dwStatus;
>>if (...)
> Incidentally, that's what I did tonight in patch 20/25 try 2.
>
>> but even then I think the compiler is allowed to perform
On 10.10.2012 09:44, Nozomi Kodama wrote:
+if ( green_out )
Same as last time: I'd use "if (x == y)" without spaces on all
occurrences... there are a couple of them in the patch! Please make all
consistent in the patch.
On 10.10.2012 09:45, Nozomi Kodama wrote:
+CONST FLOAT coeff[]={
+out[7] -= (matrix->u.m[1][0] * matrix->u.m[0][2] + matrix->u.m[1][2] *
matrix->u.m[0][0]) * in[4];
+
+out[7] += (matrix->u.m[1][0] * matrix->u.m[2][2] + matrix->u.m[1][2] *
matrix->u.m[2][0]) * in[5];
Em
Hi,
David Laight wrote:
>Better to code as:
>status = wmm->dwStatus;
>if (...)
Incidentally, that's what I did tonight in patch 20/25 try 2.
>but even then I think the compiler is allowed to perform extra reads.
>It might, for example, do so if the condition was complicayted and
48 matches
Mail list logo