September 2016 - Wine-devel

Re: Alexandre Julliard : winex11: Remove support for synthesizing clipboard formats.
by Ken Thomases 09 Sep '16

09 Sep '16

On Sep 7, 2016, at 10:48 AM, Alexandre Julliard <julliard(a)winehq.org> wrote: > > Module: wine > Branch: master > Commit: 761d244970dd189b1a639121e668a5089fd0112d > URL: http://source.winehq.org/git/wine.git/?a=commit;h=761d244970dd189b1a639121e… > > Author: Alexandre Julliard <julliard(a)winehq.org> > Date: Wed Sep 7 11:35:14 2016 +0900 > > winex11: Remove support for synthesizing clipboard formats. > > Signed-off-by: Alexandre Julliard <julliard(a)winehq.org> > > --- > > dlls/winex11.drv/clipboard.c | 454 ++------------------------------------ > dlls/winex11.drv/winex11.drv.spec | 1 - > 2 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 441 deletions(-) > > Diff: http://source.winehq.org/git/wine.git/?a=commitdiff;h=761d244970dd189b1a639… Either I'm missing something or this isn't correct. You've made user32 synthesize formats when a Windows app puts one text format on the clipboard but not the others, but you haven't handled the case were an external program has put some text on the clipboard. For example, if some non-Wine X client puts UTF8_STRING but not STRING or text/plain on the clipboard, a Windows program will see CF_UNICODETEXT, but not CF_TEXT or CF_OEMTEXT. That shouldn't be possible. -Ken

3 6

Re: [1/3] jscript: Properly handle \0 characters in String to{Lower,Upper}Case methods.
by Sebastian Lackner 09 Sep '16

09 Sep '16

On 09.09.2016 12:03, Jacek Caban wrote: > On 08.09.2016 23:52, Sebastian Lackner wrote: >> diff --git a/dlls/jscript/tests/api.js b/dlls/jscript/tests/api.js >> index c7f2bcd..e7b55fc 100644 >> --- a/dlls/jscript/tests/api.js >> +++ b/dlls/jscript/tests/api.js >> @@ -661,6 +661,8 @@ tmp = "tEsT".toLowerCase(); >> ok(tmp === "test", "''.toLowerCase() = " + tmp); >> tmp = "tEsT".toLowerCase(3); >> ok(tmp === "test", "''.toLowerCase(3) = " + tmp); >> +tmp = ("tE" + String.fromCharCode(0) + "sT").toLowerCase(); >> +ok(tmp === "te" + String.fromCharCode(0) + "st", "''.toLowerCase() = " + tmp); >> >> tmp = "".toUpperCase(); >> ok(tmp === "", "''.toUpperCase() = " + tmp); >> @@ -672,6 +674,8 @@ tmp = "tEsT".toUpperCase(); >> ok(tmp === "TEST", "''.toUpperCase() = " + tmp); >> tmp = "tEsT".toUpperCase(3); >> ok(tmp === "TEST", "''.toUpperCase(3) = " + tmp); >> +tmp = ("tE" + String.fromCharCode(0) + "sT").toUpperCase(); >> +ok(tmp === "TE" + String.fromCharCode(0) + "ST", "''.toUpperCase() = " + tmp); >> >> tmp = "".anchor(); >> ok(tmp === "<A NAME=\"undefined\"></A>", "''.anchor() = " + tmp); > > FWIW "\0" escape should work here, but that's fine with me. No, unfortunately that doesn't work yet. The lexer currently stores string literals in a \0 terminated string (see unescape in lex.c). The tests would pass, but only by luck because both strings are truncated. As soon as this issue is fixed we can use "\0" everywhere of course.

1 0

Re: [PATCH] ws2_32/tests: Add more SIO_ADDRESS_LIST_CHANGE tests
by Marvin 08 Sep '16

08 Sep '16

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 https://testbot.winehq.org/JobDetails.pl?Key=25719 Your paranoid android. === w7pro64 (32 bit sock) === sock.c:7766: Test failed: bytesReturned isn't supposed to be 1 sock.c:7790: Test failed: GetOverlappedResult failed, error 0

1 0

Re: [3/3] jscript: Allocate string of correct size in Date toTimeString method.
by Marvin 08 Sep '16

08 Sep '16

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 https://testbot.winehq.org/JobDetails.pl?Key=25702 Your paranoid android. === wxppro (32 bit) === Found no trace of the test summary line or of a crash === w2003std (32 bit) === Found no trace of the test summary line or of a crash === wvistau64 (32 bit) === Found no trace of the test summary line or of a crash === w2008s64 (32 bit) === Found no trace of the test summary line or of a crash === w7u (32 bit) === Found no trace of the test summary line or of a crash === w7pro64 (32 bit) === Found no trace of the test summary line or of a crash === w8 (32 bit) === Found no trace of the test summary line or of a crash === w864 (32 bit) === Found no trace of the test summary line or of a crash === w1064 (32 bit) === Found no trace of the test summary line or of a crash === wvistau64 (64 bit) === Found no trace of the test summary line or of a crash === w2008s64 (64 bit) === Found no trace of the test summary line or of a crash === w7pro64 (64 bit) === Found no trace of the test summary line or of a crash === w864 (64 bit) === Found no trace of the test summary line or of a crash === w1064 (64 bit) === Found no trace of the test summary line or of a crash

1 0

Re: [2/3] jscript: Properly handle \0 characters in String indexOf method.
by Marvin 08 Sep '16

08 Sep '16

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 https://testbot.winehq.org/JobDetails.pl?Key=25701 Your paranoid android. === wxppro (32 bit) === Found no trace of the test summary line or of a crash === w2003std (32 bit) === Found no trace of the test summary line or of a crash === wvistau64 (32 bit) === Found no trace of the test summary line or of a crash === w2008s64 (32 bit) === Found no trace of the test summary line or of a crash === w7u (32 bit) === Found no trace of the test summary line or of a crash === w7pro64 (32 bit) === Found no trace of the test summary line or of a crash === w8 (32 bit) === Found no trace of the test summary line or of a crash === w864 (32 bit) === Found no trace of the test summary line or of a crash === w1064 (32 bit) === Found no trace of the test summary line or of a crash === wvistau64 (64 bit) === Found no trace of the test summary line or of a crash === w2008s64 (64 bit) === Found no trace of the test summary line or of a crash === w7pro64 (64 bit) === Found no trace of the test summary line or of a crash === w864 (64 bit) === Found no trace of the test summary line or of a crash === w1064 (64 bit) === Found no trace of the test summary line or of a crash

1 0

Re: [1/3] jscript: Properly handle \0 characters in String to{Lower, Upper}Case methods.
by Marvin 08 Sep '16

08 Sep '16

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 https://testbot.winehq.org/JobDetails.pl?Key=25700 Your paranoid android. === wxppro (32 bit) === Found no trace of the test summary line or of a crash === w2003std (32 bit) === Found no trace of the test summary line or of a crash === wvistau64 (32 bit) === Found no trace of the test summary line or of a crash === w2008s64 (32 bit) === Found no trace of the test summary line or of a crash === w7u (32 bit) === Found no trace of the test summary line or of a crash === w7pro64 (32 bit) === Found no trace of the test summary line or of a crash === w8 (32 bit) === Found no trace of the test summary line or of a crash === w864 (32 bit) === Found no trace of the test summary line or of a crash === w1064 (32 bit) === Found no trace of the test summary line or of a crash === wvistau64 (64 bit) === Found no trace of the test summary line or of a crash === w2008s64 (64 bit) === Found no trace of the test summary line or of a crash === w7pro64 (64 bit) === Found no trace of the test summary line or of a crash === w864 (64 bit) === Found no trace of the test summary line or of a crash === w1064 (64 bit) === Found no trace of the test summary line or of a crash

1 0

Re: shlwapi: Use debugstr_w() in TRACE() message.
by Nikolay Sivov 08 Sep '16

08 Sep '16

On 08.09.2016 23:51, Andrey Gusev wrote: > - TRACE("(%p, 0x%08x, %p, %p, %p, %p, %p, 0x%08x)\n", hUSKey, dwIndex, > - pszValueName, pcchValueNameLen, pdwType, pvData, pcbData, enumRegFlags); > + TRACE("(%p, 0x%08x, %s, %p, %p, %p, %p, 0x%08x)\n", hUSKey, dwIndex, > + debugstr_w(pszValueName), pcchValueNameLen, pdwType, pvData, pcbData, enumRegFlags); This is wrong, it's an out parameter.

1 0

Re: [PATCH] bcrypt/tests: Show that BCryptGetFipsAlgorithmMode checks a registry key
by Sebastian Lackner 08 Sep '16

08 Sep '16

On 08.09.2016 22:11, Bruno Jesus wrote: > + if (!RegOpenKeyW(HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE, policyKeyVistaW, &hkey)) > + { Why do you open the key when you don't use it? > + if (!RegGetValueW(HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE, policyKeyVistaW, policyValueVistaW, > + RRF_RT_REG_DWORD, NULL, &enabled, &count)) enabled has the type BOOLEAN and a size of 1 byte. Did you want to pass "value" instead? > + { > + expected = !!enabled; > + } > + RegCloseKey(hkey); > + }

1 0

Re: [PATCH] bcrypt/tests: Add more BCryptGetFipsAlgorithmMode tests
by Sebastian Lackner 08 Sep '16

08 Sep '16

On 08.09.2016 13:53, Bruno Jesus wrote: > From: Kai Blaschke <kai.blaschke(a)kb-dev.net> > Signed-off-by: Bruno Jesus <00cpxxx(a)gmail.com> > --- > dlls/bcrypt/tests/Makefile.in | 2 +- > dlls/bcrypt/tests/bcrypt.c | 49 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- > 2 files changed, 49 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/dlls/bcrypt/tests/Makefile.in b/dlls/bcrypt/tests/Makefile.in > index 0f130b1..1bf7d2c 100644 > --- a/dlls/bcrypt/tests/Makefile.in > +++ b/dlls/bcrypt/tests/Makefile.in > @@ -1,5 +1,5 @@ > TESTDLL = bcrypt.dll > -IMPORTS = bcrypt user32 > +IMPORTS = bcrypt user32 advapi32 > > C_SRCS = \ > bcrypt.c > diff --git a/dlls/bcrypt/tests/bcrypt.c b/dlls/bcrypt/tests/bcrypt.c > index 9bd2cea..d16735c 100644 > --- a/dlls/bcrypt/tests/bcrypt.c > +++ b/dlls/bcrypt/tests/bcrypt.c > @@ -61,14 +61,61 @@ static void test_BCryptGenRandom(void) > > static void test_BCryptGetFipsAlgorithmMode(void) > { > - NTSTATUS ret; > + static const WCHAR policyKeyVistaW[] = { > + 'S','y','s','t','e','m','\\', > + 'C','u','r','r','e','n','t','C','o','n','t','r','o','l','S','e','t','\\', > + 'C','o','n','t','r','o','l','\\', > + 'L','s','a','\\', > + 'F','I','P','S','A','l','g','o','r','i','t','h','m','P','o','l','i','c','y',0}; > + static const WCHAR policyValueVistaW[] = {'E','n','a','b','l','e','d',0}; > + static const WCHAR policyKeyXPW[] = { > + 'S','y','s','t','e','m','\\', > + 'C','u','r','r','e','n','t','C','o','n','t','r','o','l','S','e','t','\\', > + 'C','o','n','t','r','o','l','\\', > + 'L','s','a',0}; > + static const WCHAR policyValueXPW[] = { > + 'F','I','P','S','A','l','g','o','r','i','t','h','m','P','o','l','i','c','y',0}; > + HKEY hkey; > + BOOLEAN expected; > + BOOLEAN result; > BOOLEAN enabled; > + DWORD value, count = sizeof(value); > + NTSTATUS ret; > > ret = BCryptGetFipsAlgorithmMode(&enabled); > ok(ret == STATUS_SUCCESS, "Expected STATUS_SUCCESS, got 0x%x\n", ret); > > ret = BCryptGetFipsAlgorithmMode(NULL); > ok(ret == STATUS_INVALID_PARAMETER, "Expected STATUS_INVALID_PARAMETER, got 0x%x\n", ret); > + > + expected = FALSE; > + > + if (!RegOpenKeyW(HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE, policyKeyVistaW, &hkey)) > + { > + if (!RegGetValueW(HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE, policyKeyVistaW, policyValueVistaW, > + RRF_RT_REG_DWORD, NULL, &enabled, &count)) > + { > + expected = !!enabled; > + } > + RegCloseKey(hkey); > + } > + else if (!RegOpenKeyW(HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE, policyKeyXPW, &hkey)) > + { > + if (!RegGetValueW(HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE, policyKeyXPW, policyValueXPW, > + RRF_RT_REG_DWORD, NULL, &enabled, &count)) > + { > + expected = !!enabled; > + } > + RegCloseKey(hkey); > + } > + > + ret = BCryptGetFipsAlgorithmMode(&result); > + ok(!ret, "expected status STATUS_SUCCESS(0), got 0x%08X\n", ret); > + ok(result == expected, "expected result %d, got %d\n", expected, result); > + > + ret = BCryptGetFipsAlgorithmMode(NULL); > + ok(ret == STATUS_INVALID_PARAMETER, > + "expected status STATUS_INVALID_PARAMETER(0xC000000D), got 0x%08X\n", ret); Is it intentional that you test everything twice? It would be sufficient to add the "result == expected" check to the existing testcase above. > } > > static void format_hash(const UCHAR *bytes, ULONG size, char *buf) >

2 1

Re: user32/tests: Fix incorrect usage of broken() function. (v2)
by Marvin 08 Sep '16

08 Sep '16

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 https://testbot.winehq.org/JobDetails.pl?Key=25693 Your paranoid android. === w864 (32 bit msg) === msg.c:13939: Test failed: WM_NCRBUTTONDOWN on caption: 3: the msg sequence is not complete: expected 007b - actual 0000 === w1064 (32 bit msg) === msg.c:13939: Test failed: WM_NCRBUTTONDOWN on caption: 3: the msg sequence is not complete: expected 007b - actual 0000 === w864 (64 bit msg) === msg.c:13939: Test failed: WM_NCRBUTTONDOWN on caption: 3: the msg sequence is not complete: expected 007b - actual 0000 === w1064 (64 bit msg) === msg.c:13939: Test failed: WM_NCRBUTTONDOWN on caption: 3: the msg sequence is not complete: expected 007b - actual 0000

1 0