On Mon, Sep 19, 2005 at 09:27:05AM +0200, Stefan D?singer wrote:
> Hi,
> > Why do you increase the refcount by 2? Since you add and release them in
> > the same functions, it is not really necessary and just adds complexity
> > to the code.
> Well, Windows does so for some reason, and after what I'
Brian Vincent wrote:
>I've been playing around with file locking and Wine, namely the fact
>that Wine doesn't have any.
>
>Is there any way around this, maybe placing the burden on a
>filesystem? If I wanted to share files between two different users
>(say with something dumb like file permission
> Saulius Krasuckas wrote:
>>>ChangeLog: Fix bug that left mouse buttons swapped after tests
>>>
>>>Ivan.
>>
>>
>> I think your patch causes test to fail on Wine, Ivan. My try goes next.
>
> Maybe that isn't a bad thing, the results from the latest build of
> winetest shows this test fails
> on wi
>> +if (!running_on_visible_desktop ()) {
>> +report (R_ERROR, "Tests must be run on a visible desktop");
>> +exit (2);
>> +}
>> +
>> /* initialize the revision information first */
>> extract_rev_infos();
>>
> Apart from the fact whether winrash should be 'fixed'
>
> While removing todo_wine() for this cases silences the output, anybody
> running on an older kernel will hit an error.
>
> How to proceed in that case. Sould he have something like
> todo_linux(kernelversion){}?
This is interesting! Wine depends on other stuff too (libraries) and
similar t
On Wed, Mar 09, 2005 at 12:03:01AM +0800, Dmitry Timoshkov wrote:
> Hello,
>
> it appears that new test for a visible desktop works fine, time to make
> running tests on a visible desktop a mandatory requirement.
Will this not mean no winrash tests any more, only manual ones?
I haven't got arou
