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=22858
Your paranoid android
Hello,
I've been looking at a patch which sorts out NUL and CON handling in a part
of the command shell, and have stumbled upon a problem I am not sure how to
fix because I really dont understand the underlying console handling, and
would appreciate someone pointing me in a direction.
For simplic
strmbase is a static library which is used by amstream, qcap, quartz and
others. This means functions defined in strmbase end up being included
in amstream.dll.so and other places.
However modifying the strmbase code does not result in a relink of the
dlls that depend on it. Note that this is
On 11/09/2012 06:29 PM, Scott Ritchie wrote:
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2012/11/no-copyrights-apis-help-us-make-case
There are court cases pending that are very, very relevant to what we
do here. It would help the EFF very much if a few engineers could
send them a short email statement e
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2012/11/no-copyrights-apis-help-us-make-case
There are court cases pending that are very, very relevant to what we do
here. It would help the EFF very much if a few engineers could send
them a short email statement explaining how Wine's reimplementation of
the AP
Hi again,
More comments about your tests #2:
+DeleteFileA(test_file);
+[...]
+has_test_file = create_test_file(test_file);
Why do you recreate an identical file between test group 2 and 3?
+has_test_file = create_test_file(test_file);
+ok(has_test_file, "failed to create test
Please ignore this patches for now, the tests are broken.
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=22852
Your paranoid android
Christian Costa writes:
> 2012/11/9 Alexandre Julliard
> Testing last error on success is not useful. Also please use
> MAKELONG
> and related macros instead of doing it by hand.
>
> I can't use LOWORD as the signed bit is not propagated with & 0x.
You could always add a cast, b
2012/11/9 Alexandre Julliard
> Christian Costa writes:
>
> > +SetLastError(0xdeadbeef);
> > +n = MapWindowPoints(wnd, NULL, NULL, 0);
> > +err = GetLastError();
> > +ok(n == ((window_rect.top << 16) | window_rect.left), "Got %x (%d,
> %d), expected %x (%d, %d)\n",
> > + n,
Would a patch that allows data members to be hacked into interface data
structures be acceptable?
Specifically, this would add sequences that follow this template:
#ifdef _IFACE_DATA
_IFACE_DATA
#endif /* _IFACE_DATA defined */
for each inherited interface, in order.
Christian Costa writes:
> +SetLastError(0xdeadbeef);
> +n = MapWindowPoints(wnd, NULL, NULL, 0);
> +err = GetLastError();
> +ok(n == ((window_rect.top << 16) | window_rect.left), "Got %x (%d, %d),
> expected %x (%d, %d)\n",
> + n, (n << 16) >> 16, n >> 16, window_rect.left,
> >
> >
> > Henri said the other. It seems there is no consensus. ;)
> Of course there is consensus. The consensus is:
> - "It depends on the situation"
> - "There are acceptable naming conventions"
> - "IDirectMusicLoaderImpl_IDirectMusicLoader_QueryInterface is not one
> of the acceptable solutio
13 matches
Mail list logo
