On Wed, 5 Jan 2005, Walt Ogburn wrote:
> There's a patch to make the metafile test pass, which also un-comments the
> test, at
>
> http://www.winehq.org/hypermail/wine-patches/2004/12/0191.html
>
> The patch hasn't been committed, but if anybody wants to make it nicer and
> try again, feel free t
Vincent Béron <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> So if we put them in a simple ok test, we'll get failures for some
> chars, and if we put them in a todo block, then we'll get failures for
> all the other cases which work fine.
>
> We could get on with a todo_table listing for which chars we fail, but
Le mer 05/01/2005 à 15:12, Walt Ogburn a écrit :
> Hi Gerald,
>
> The metafile.c warning is because of a test that is commented out in
> dlls/gdi/test/metafile.c. It's commented out instead of protected with
> todo because it doesn't just fail, it crashes. Perhaps the rtlstr test
> warnings are
Hi Gerald,
The metafile.c warning is because of a test that is commented out in
dlls/gdi/test/metafile.c. It's commented out instead of protected with
todo because it doesn't just fail, it crashes. Perhaps the rtlstr test
warnings are there for similar reasons.
There's a patch to make the metaf
Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
When compiling on SUSE LINUX 9.2 using GCC 3.3.5 the following are the
only warnings I'm getting for current Wine CVS:
metafile.c:395: warning: `test_mf_PatternBrush' defined but not used
rtlstr.c:552: warning: `test_RtlUpcaseUnicodeChar' defined but not used
rtlstr.c:
When compiling on SUSE LINUX 9.2 using GCC 3.3.5 the following are the
only warnings I'm getting for current Wine CVS:
metafile.c:395: warning: `test_mf_PatternBrush' defined but not used
rtlstr.c:552: warning: `test_RtlUpcaseUnicodeChar' defined but not used
rtlstr.c:578: warning: `test_Rt
