On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 6:38 PM, Detlef Riekenberg wrote:
> --
> By by ... Detlef
> ---
> dlls/shell32/iconcache.c | 42
> ++
> dlls/shell32/shell32.spec |1 +
> 2 files changed, 43 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>
>
On 8 February 2013 11:11, Detlef Riekenberg wrote:
> I prefer typedef to reduce a bit of typing.
>
Typedefs aren't meant to be a tool for obfuscation. (Though if you're
into that, there are some interesting things you can make the
preprocessor do as well.)
7;t cast away 'const'.
Fixed. Thanks
>> +HRESULT WINAPI SHGetStockIconInfo(SHSTOCKICONID id, UINT flags,
>> SHSTOCKICONINFO *sii)
...
>> + GetModuleFileNameW(shell32_hInstance, sii->szPath, MAX_PATH);
> GetModuleFileNameW can fail, so filling 'sii' may be a bit
Detlef Riekenberg wrote:
> +/
> + * helper for SHGetStockIconInfo
> + */
> +typedef struct stockiconentry_t {
> +SHSTOCKICONID id;
> +DWORD iconid;
> +} stockiconentry;
Why bother with a typedef?
> +static stock
Detlef Riekenberg writes:
> +/* Not all variables are supported before vista */
> +if (broken(*bufferA == '%'))
> +trace("%d: %s not supported\n", i, bufferA);
> +else
> +{
> +if (i < 3) todo_wine
> +ok(HIWORD(res) && (LOWORD(res
> http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=26830 is easily solved by
> http://bugs.winehq.org/attachment.cgi?id=34184 but I don't know if this will
> break anything. I cannot find a reference as to why it needs to be set to
> 256, but there must be a reason for this.
The correct solution would be to
Evening all,
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=26830 is easily solved by
http://bugs.winehq.org/attachment.cgi?id=34184 but I don't know if this
will break anything. I cannot find a reference as to why it needs to be
set to 256, but there must be a reason for this.
Anyone any ideas?
Th
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=22786
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=22785
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=22302
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=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
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
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=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=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=21999
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=22000
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=21998
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=21949
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=21950
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=21655
Your paranoid android
Hi Francois,
pretty sure you didn't mean to leave this hunk in:
@@ -2296,9 +2406,13 @@ START_TEST(shlexec)
init_test();
+#if 0
test_argify();
test_lpFile_parsed();
test_filename();
+#endif
+test_fileurl();
+#if 0
test_find_executable();
test_lnks();
test_ex
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=21649
Your paranoid android
Erik van Pienbroek writes:
> +#if defined(HAVE_FORK) && defined(HAVE_WAITPID)
> +static UINT_PTR SHELL_try_native_execute ( const char *openCmd, const char
> *unixName )
> +{
> +UINT_PTR retval = SE_ERR_NOASSOC;
> +pid_t cpid;
> +struct stat st;
> +
> +if (stat(openCmd, &st) == -
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://winetestbot.dolphin/JobDetails.pl?Key=138
Your paranoid android.
On Tue, 19 Jun 2012, Erik van Pienbroek wrote:
[...]
> Additionally a check is added to make sure no recursive loop is
> triggered when the native file association database points back to
> wine and the fallback path is triggered again
This looks much better.
[...]
> @@ -1911,6 +1944,44 @@ sta
Damjan Jovanovic writes:
> Changelog:
> * shell32: add some tests for the Progman DDE interface
Please merge that with the existing tests, assuming that what you are
testing is not already covered.
--
Alexandre Julliard
julli...@winehq.org
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=18869
Your paranoid android
Marcus Meissner writes:
> On Wed, Jun 06, 2012 at 11:56:06AM +0200, Jacek Caban wrote:
>> On 06/06/12 11:52, Alexandre Julliard wrote:
>> > Jacek Caban writes:
>> >
>> >> This usage of list is broken here as well. list_init should be called
>> >> before list_add_head (so calling it early in init
On Wed, Jun 06, 2012 at 11:56:06AM +0200, Jacek Caban wrote:
> On 06/06/12 11:52, Alexandre Julliard wrote:
> > Jacek Caban writes:
> >
> >> This usage of list is broken here as well. list_init should be called
> >> before list_add_head (so calling it early in initialization code will
> >> fix bot
On 06/06/12 11:52, Alexandre Julliard wrote:
> Jacek Caban writes:
>
>> This usage of list is broken here as well. list_init should be called
>> before list_add_head (so calling it early in initialization code will
>> fix both problems).
> There's no reason to call list_init on list entries, it sh
Jacek Caban writes:
> This usage of list is broken here as well. list_init should be called
> before list_add_head (so calling it early in initialization code will
> fix both problems).
There's no reason to call list_init on list entries, it should only be
called on the actual list.
--
Alexand
ne
>>> control.exe joy.cpl.
>>>
>>> The list is just not setup yet as we fail...
>>>
>>> Ciao, Marcus
>>> ---
>>> dlls/shell32/control.c | 2 +-
>>> 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>>>
>>>
just not setup yet as we fail...
> >
> > Ciao, Marcus
> > ---
> > dlls/shell32/control.c |2 +-
> > 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/dlls/shell32/control.c b/dlls/shell32/control.c
> > index cb080d5..b3eddb6 100644
Hi Marcus,
On 06/06/12 10:17, Marcus Meissner wrote:
> Hi,
>
> wine control.exe joy crashed in this line, as it should be wine control.exe
> joy.cpl.
>
> The list is just not setup yet as we fail...
>
> Ciao, Marcus
> ---
> dlls/shell32/control.c |2 +-
&g
A static string constant would be better here.
On Sat, Jun 2, 2012 at 12:42 PM, Vitaly Lipatov wrote:
> ---
> dlls/shell32/pidl.c | 5 +++--
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/dlls/shell32/pidl.c b/dlls/shell32/pidl.c
> index c394e5b..5906
On Thu, 31 May 2012, Erik van Pienbroek wrote:
[...]
> Tested successfully on a Fedora 17 environment using the start.exe
> command and Outlook 2007 by trying to open a .pdf file (where there
> is no file association registered inside the wine prefix)
There are two issues with this patch:
* In so
On 5/20/2012 18:47, Detlef Riekenberg wrote:
} else if (IsEqualIID(riid,&IID_IExtractIconA)&&(cidl == 1)) {
- pidl = ILCombine(This->pidlRoot, apidl[0]);
- pObj = (LPUNKNOWN) IExtractIconA_Constructor(pidl);
- SHFree(pidl);
- hr = S_OK;
+
On 5/20/2012 18:47, Detlef Riekenberg wrote:
+HRESULT IQueryInfo_Constructor(LPCITEMIDLIST root, LPCITEMIDLIST item, void **
ppvOut)
+{
+IQueryInfoImpl *qi = HeapAlloc(GetProcessHeap(), 0,
sizeof(IQueryInfoImpl));
+LPITEMIDLIST pidl = ILCombine(root, item);
+
+if (!pidl || !qi) {
+
On 5/18/2012 14:06, Detlef Riekenberg wrote:
+} else if (IsEqualIID(riid,&IID_IQueryInfo)&& (cidl == 1)) {
+pidl = ILCombine (This->pidlRoot, apidl[0]);
+pObj = (IUnknown *) IQueryInfo_Constructor (pidl);
+SHFree (pidl);
+hr = S_OK;
On 5/18/2012 14:06, Detlef Riekenberg wrote:
+if (ppv == NULL)
+return E_POINTER;
This is usually redundant.
+
+if (IsEqualGUID(&IID_IUnknown, riid) ||
+IsEqualGUID(&IID_IQueryInfo, riid)) {
+*ppv =&This->IQueryInfo_iface;
+IUnknown_AddRef((IUnknown*)*ppv
> I don't think you need a new file for that.
Probably true. I guess I was just making room for myself because I'm
not sure yet how extensive the tests will have to be (or WHERE most of
them will have to be).
Vincent Povirk writes:
> @@ -3,6 +3,7 @@ IMPORTS = shell32 ole32 oleaut32 user32 advapi32
>
> C_SRCS = \
> appbar.c \
> + appusermodel.c \
> assoc.c \
> autocomplete.c \
> brsfolder.c \
I don't think you need a new file for that.
Whoops, meant to send this to wine-patches. Sorry for the noise.
On Thu, Apr 5, 2012 at 4:52 PM, Vincent Povirk wrote:
>
From 83736b323bf173aaa9803ff7ddf1cb16d5fb7fb2 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Vincent Povirk
Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2012 13:47:11 -0500
Subject: [PATCH 3/4] shell32: Add test for STARTF_TITLEISAPPID flag.
---
dlls/shell32/tests/appusermodel.c | 104 +
1 files
Hi Jacek,
First I'd like to put a disclaimer, that I'm extremely new to this, so please
forgive me if I don't understand most of the behaviours and dependancies. That
being said, I will try my very best to dig as much as I can to find out more.
On 2012-04-01, at 7:08 AM, Jacek Caban wrote:
> t
Hi Gaurav,
On 3/31/12 9:22 PM, Gaurav Jain wrote:
shell32: Added stubs for IMarshal interface (resend)
Resending due to previous code freeze.
ShellLink_QueryInterface() did not have a lookup for the IMarshal Interface.
This resulted in an error message popping up in the Quest for Glory II
Piotr Caban writes:
> ---
> dlls/shell32/assoc.c | 49
> +
> 1 files changed, 25 insertions(+), 24 deletions(-)
It doesn't work here:
../../../tools/runtest -q -P wine -M shlwapi.dll -T ../../.. -p
shlwapi_test.exe.so
On 1/25/2012 13:36, Alexandre Julliard wrote:
Nikolay Sivov writes:
Fix for http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=28087
You shouldn't need anything of the kind. If StrStrIW doesn't work right
it should be fixed (plus of course there's no reason to even use
strstr() here at all).
When I debug
Nikolay Sivov writes:
> Fix for http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=28087
You shouldn't need anything of the kind. If StrStrIW doesn't work right
it should be fixed (plus of course there's no reason to even use
strstr() here at all).
--
Alexandre Julliard
julli...@winehq.org
Francois Gouget writes:
> Some are not meant to be translated anyway (e.g. 'Program Files') and others
> only partially (e.g. 'Program Files\Common Files'). For rest the path forward
> is to only translate them in the GUI using desktop.ini files.
> The execptions are the folders that we usually
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=16325
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=15738
Your paranoid android
On Thu, Nov 3, 2011 at 8:00 PM, Christian Inci
wrote:
> But my C is a bit rusty, so I don't know a clean way to enumerating an enum.
You cannot enumerate an enum. An enum is just a way to define a bunch
of related constants. If you don't set explicit values, they will get
consecutive values (firs
Hello,
I've tested it now with a value of 0x75 (hex) and it fails.
But my C is a bit rusty, so I don't know a clean way to enumerating an enum.
Greetings,
Christian
On 11/03/2011 02:35 PM, Alexander Morozov wrote:
-1 in this test is only a sample of a bad constant. Do you sure
that S_OK
-1 in this test is only a sample of a bad constant. Do you sure
that S_OK should be returned for any positive argument?
2011/10/12 André Hentschel :
> Might fix the crash in some NT4 systems
> ---
> dlls/shell32/tests/brsfolder.c | 3 ++-
> 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/dlls/shell32/tests/brsfolder.c b/dlls/shell32/tests/brsfolder.c
> index 7b87967..6
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=14562
Your paranoid android
Piotr Caban writes:
> @@ -355,24 +351,34 @@ void WINAPI SHChangeNotify(LONG wEventId, UINT uFlags,
> LPCVOID dwItem1, LPCVOID
> if( !notify )
> continue;
>
> -ptr->pidlSignaled = ILClone(Pidls[0]);
> +item = SHAlloc(sizeof(struct notification_recipients));
Hi,
On 09/19/11 20:52, André Hentschel wrote:
@@ -325,7 +325,7 @@ void WINAPI SHChangeNotify(LONG wEventId, UINT uFlags,
LPCVOID dwItem1, LPCVOID
EnterCriticalSection(&SHELL32_ChangenotifyCS);
/* loop through the list */
-LIST_FOR_EACH_ENTRY( ptr,¬ifications, NOTIFICATIONLIST,
On Sun, Sep 18, 2011 at 8:37 PM, Francois Gouget wrote:
> + TRACE("-- vmode %#x, flags %#x", view_params->pfs->ViewMode,
> view_params->pfs->fFlags);
> + if (view_params->prcView)
> + TRACE(", left %d, top %d, right %d, bottom %d",
> view_params->prcView->left,
> + view
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=14201
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=14200
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=14136
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=14016
Your paranoid android
Aric Stewart writes:
> ---
> dlls/shell32/Makefile.in |1 +
> dlls/shell32/cdburn.c| 180
> ++++++
> dlls/shell32/shell32_classes.idl | 6 ++
> dlls/shell32/shell32_main.h |1 +
> dlls/shell32/shell
Mariusz Pluciński writes:
> +for(i=0; i < sizeof(CSIDL_Data)/sizeof(CSIDL_Data[0]); ++i)
> +{
> +if(!CSIDL_Data[i].szValueName)
> +{
> +FIXME("known folder %d has no value name, ignoring\n", i);
> +continue;
> +}
On 8/21/2011 19:21, Jay Yang wrote:
+LoadStringA(shell32_hInstance,IDS_PROPSHEET_VARIOUS,
+various_str,sizeof(various_str));
+LoadStringW(shell32_hInstance,IDS_PROPSHEET_COUNT_FORMAT,
+count_format,sizeof(count_format)/sizeof(WCHAR));
Why -A call here?
+
On 8/21/2011 19:20, Jay Yang wrote:
---
dlls/shell32/shell32.spec |3 ++
dlls/shell32/shellord.c | 88 +
include/shlobj.h |4 ++
3 files changed, 95 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
It's not clear for me why you placed th
On 8/21/2011 19:20, Jay Yang wrote:
Changes from last time:
Factored out the code to find the registry keys for the extensions.
---
dlls/shell32/classes.c| 47 +
dlls/shell32/shell32_main.h |1 +
dlls/shell32/shfldr.h |9
(for this file):
cleaned up the code.
---
dlls/shell32/shlmenu.c | 170 ++-
1 files changed, 166 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
+HKEY *new_keys=NULL;
+new_keys = HeapAlloc(GetProcessHeap(),0,sizeof(HKEY)*cKeys);
No need to initialize that expli
Mariusz Pluciński writes:
> +KNOWN_FOLDER(FOLDERID_AddNewPrograms, NO_CSIDL,
>"AddNewProgramsFolder", KF_CATEGORY_VIRTUAL,
> GUID_NULL,NULL,
>
> "::{21EC2020-3AEA-1069-A
Jay Yang writes:
> Added TRACE statements and removed some stray comments
> ---
> dlls/shell32/Makefile.in |1 +
> dlls/shell32/composite_cmenu.c | 275
>
Please put that in some existing files, there are already way too many
f
On Fri, Jul 29, 2011 at 9:55 AM, Paul Vriens wrote:
>> + win_skip("Not on WOW64, skipping test.\n");
>
> Why a win_skip()? Isn't a normal skip() more appropriate?
Year, you're right, win_skip didn't make much sense. I was only
thinking at GetSystemWow64DirectoryW when I wrote that (which,
On 07/29/2011 01:29 AM, Octavian Voicu wrote:
+else
+win_skip("Not on WOW64, skipping test.\n");
Why a win_skip()? Isn't a normal skip() more appropriate?
--
Cheers,
Paul.
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=12984
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=12975
Your paranoid android
Mariusz Pluciński writes:
> Checks relative path for each known folder.
This one crashes here:
../../../../wine/tools/runtest -q -P wine -M shell32.dll -T ../../.. -p
shell32_test.exe.so ../../../../wine/dlls/shell32/tests/shellpath.c && touch
shellpath.ok
fixme:shell:_SHGetUser
On 07/14/2011 09:50 AM, Alexandre Julliard wrote:
> Jay Yang writes:
>
>> @@ -240,7 +240,7 @@ static HRESULT WINAPI
>> RecycleBinMenu_InvokeCommand(IContextMenu2 *iface,
>> LPCSTR verb = pici->lpVerb;
>> if(!HIWORD(verb))
>> {
>> -switch((UINT)verb)
>> +switch((UINT
Jay Yang writes:
> Removed an unused variable.
Still failing ("ret may be used uninitialized").
--
Alexandre Julliard
julli...@winehq.org
Jay Yang writes:
> @@ -240,7 +240,7 @@ static HRESULT WINAPI
> RecycleBinMenu_InvokeCommand(IContextMenu2 *iface,
> LPCSTR verb = pici->lpVerb;
> if(!HIWORD(verb))
> {
> -switch((UINT)verb)
> +switch((UINT_PTR)verb)
Actually the HIWORD() is more problematic.
--
Jay Yang writes:
> +static void test_query_recyclebin(void)
> +{
> +SHQUERYRBINFO
> info1={sizeof(info1),0xdeadbeefdeadbeefLL,0xdeadbeefdeadbeefLL};
> +SHQUERYRBINFO
> info2={sizeof(info2),0xdeadbeefdeadbeefLL,0xdeadbeefdeadbeefLL};
You can't use LL constants.
--
Alexandre Julliard
j
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=12300
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=12302
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=12302
Your paranoid android
2011/7/6 Frédéric Delanoy :
> ---
> dlls/shell32/shelllink.c | 16
> 1 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/dlls/shell32/shelllink.c b/dlls/shell32/shelllink.c
> index 07fe7aa..fff0e79 100644
> --- a/dlls/shell32/shelllink.c
Hi Jay,
+HRESULT TRASH_RestoreItem(LPCITEMIDLIST pidl){
Nit: the brace should be on its own line.
+HRESULT TRASH_RestoreItem(LPCITEMIDLIST pidl) DECLSPEC_HIDDEN;
+HRESULT TRASH_EraseItem(LPCITEMIDLIST pidl) DECLSPEC_HIDDEN;
These two functions are never called in this patch, so you're
introduci
Please, ignore this single patch. This function should be implemented in
other way (using redirection feature, the thing I am working on but did
not submit yet).
W dniu 23.06.2011 18:50, Mariusz Pluciński pisze:
---
dlls/shell32/shellpath.c | 32 ++--
dlls
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=11886
Your paranoid android
Mariusz Pluciński writes:
> Would you explain me, what is wrong with this patches series? I've
> submitted it last week and for some reason it's status is
> untouched. (the "failed" status seems to be temporal testbot's problem
> rather than my patch's, so this is not the reason). I have no idea
king CSIDL-based way. New code is used only for folders
registered using RegisterFolder(). For all others, the older code
using CSIDL_Data array is used.
2. move all folders from CSIDL_Data array to registry and remove old
way of accessing them.
---
dlls/sh
t; working CSIDL-based way. New code is used only for folders registered using
> RegisterFolder(). For all others, the older code using CSIDL_Data array is
> used.
> 2. move all folders from CSIDL_Data array to registry and remove old way of
> accessing them.
> ---
>
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=11756
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=11755
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=11754
Your paranoid android
1 - 100 of 910 matches
Mail list logo
