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=4599
Your paranoid android.
James Hawkins wrote:
> On Nov 28, 2007 3:39 PM, Michael Stefaniuc <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> i'm unsure about this patch series. Yes this are simple wrappers around
>> HeapAlloc() that are the same as the "standard" wrappers used in Wine.
>> But they are used only as callbacks aka different usag
On Nov 28, 2007 3:39 PM, Michael Stefaniuc <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Alexandre,
>
> i'm unsure about this patch series. Yes this are simple wrappers around
> HeapAlloc() that are the same as the "standard" wrappers used in Wine.
> But they are used only as callbacks aka different usage.
>
I don
Am Sonntag, den 29.01.2006, 10:25 +0100 schrieb Stefan Leichter:
> anything wrong with this patch ?
Already in the tree:
http://source.winehq.org/git/?p=wine.git;a=commitdiff;h=c824e8bc5b5c2bfcf56a04fe92f7f7bfe8ac1379
--
By By ...
... Detlef
test it myself because the tests are not executed on my win2k
box.
I'm unable to test this atm.
mingw failed in advpack/tests with "-lcabinet" (File not found).
(newest binary from http://mirzam.it.vu.nl/mingw/ )
I will send you a patch for mingw by private mail later today when
an not test it myself because the tests are not executed on my win2k
> box.
I'm unable to test this atm.
mingw failed in advpack/tests with "-lcabinet" (File not found).
(newest binary from http://mirzam.it.vu.nl/mingw/ )
--
By By ...
... Detlef
On 11/24/05, Saulius Krasuckas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > advpack.dll is not present on NT 3.51 sp5
> > > Will try with IE5 this evening.
> >
> > Ok then the patch is good, and it has been committed.
>
> I don't think this is the reason for my patch to be good. It is still
> very inter
* On Thu, 24 Nov 2005, James Hawkins wrote:
> * On 11/22/05, Detlef Riekenberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > * Am Donnerstag, den 17.11.2005, 18:38 + schrieb James Hawkins:
> > > >
> > > > I have NT3.51sp5 with ie5.00 here. (qemu)
> > > > Tell me, what you want to be tested.
> > >
> > > Can
On 11/22/05, Detlef Riekenberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Am Donnerstag, den 17.11.2005, 18:38 + schrieb James Hawkins:
>
> > > I have NT3.51sp5 with ie5.00 here. (qemu)
> > > Tell me, what you want to be tested.
> > Can you run the advpack test after applying and compiling the
> > following
Am Donnerstag, den 17.11.2005, 18:38 + schrieb James Hawkins:
> > I have NT3.51sp5 with ie5.00 here. (qemu)
> > Tell me, what you want to be tested.
> Can you run the advpack test after applying and compiling the
> following patch? Just send back the output.
advpack.dll is not present on NT
Am Donnerstag, den 17.11.2005, 18:38 + schrieb James Hawkins:
> Can you run the advpack test after applying and compiling the
> following patch? Just send back the output.
I need to reinstall NT 3.51 on sunday and send the Results again.
--
By By ...
... Detlef
advpack.c:44:kernel32.
ndex: dlls/advpack/tests/advpack.c
===
RCS file: /home/wine/wine/dlls/advpack/tests/advpack.c,v
retrieving revision 1.8
diff -u -p -r1.8 advpack.c
--- dlls/advpack/tests/advpack.c 14 Nov 2005 12:27:39 - 1.8
+++ dlls/advpack/tests/adv
Am Mittwoch, den 16.11.2005, 23:31 + schrieb James Hawkins:
> > same way later. I guess, this is because of NT3.51 unability to parse
> > usual INF-files.
> >
> > Log message:
> > Saulius Krasuckas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Exit test after first TranslateInfString() failure, whic
* On Wed, 16 Nov 2005, James Hawkins wrote:
> * On 11/17/05, Saulius Krasuckas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > * On Thu, 17 Nov 2005, Saulius Krasuckas wrote:
> > >
> > > I didn't see point in adding HRESULT_FROM_WIN32(ERROR_FILE_NOT_FOUND)
> > I mean:HRESULT_FROM_WIN32(ERROR
On 11/17/05, Saulius Krasuckas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> * On Thu, 17 Nov 2005, Saulius Krasuckas wrote:
> >
> > I didn't see point in adding HRESULT_FROM_WIN32(ERROR_FILE_NOT_FOUND)
>
> I mean:HRESULT_FROM_WIN32(ERROR_MOD_NOT_FOUND),
>
Hmm that makes a difference. I'll
On 11/17/05, Saulius Krasuckas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I didn't see point in adding HRESULT_FROM_WIN32(ERROR_FILE_NOT_FOUND)
> value into every checks for TranslateInfString(), as all they fails in the
> same way later. I guess, this is because of NT3.51 unability to parse
> usual INF-files.
16 matches
Mail list logo
