On 11/17/05, Saulius Krasuckas <saulius2(a)ar.fi.lt> 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.
Log message: Saulius Krasuckas <saulius.krasuckas(a)ieee.org> Exit test after first TranslateInfString() failure, which seems to be NT3.51 specific.
I don't think this is correct. I don't have hands on access to this NT3.51 machine, so it's hard to tell, but it sounds like there's a problem creating the file c:\test.inf for whatever reason. I'll send a patch to wine-patches that adds an ok to check that the file was created successfully. -- James Hawkins
Am Mittwoch, den 16.11.2005, 23:31 +0000 schrieb James Hawkins:
same way later. I guess, this is because of NT3.51 unability to parse usual INF-files.
Log message: Saulius Krasuckas <saulius.krasuckas(a)ieee.org> Exit test after first TranslateInfString() failure, which seems to be NT3.51 specific.
I don't think this is correct. I don't have hands on access to this NT3.51 machine, so it's hard to tell,
I have NT3.51sp5 with ie5.00 here. (qemu) Tell me, what you want to be tested. -- By By ... ... Detlef
On 11/17/05, Detlef Riekenberg <wine.dev(a)web.de> wrote:
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. Thanks, James Hawkins
Am Donnerstag, den 17.11.2005, 18:38 +0000 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
Am Donnerstag, den 17.11.2005, 18:38 +0000 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 3.51 sp5 Will try with IE5 this evening. -- By By ... ... Detlef
On 11/22/05, Detlef Riekenberg <wine.dev(a)web.de> wrote:
Am Donnerstag, den 17.11.2005, 18:38 +0000 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 3.51 sp5 Will try with IE5 this evening.
Ok then the patch is good, and it has been committed. -- James Hawkins
* On Thu, 24 Nov 2005, James Hawkins wrote:
* On 11/22/05, Detlef Riekenberg <wine.dev(a)web.de> wrote:
* Am Donnerstag, den 17.11.2005, 18:38 +0000 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 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 interesting to know exactly why NT351 fails. BTW, how do you all folks think -- is it reliable approach to test WinAPI inside a machine emulator, like a QEmu? I'd say it shoot exactly 100% of original OS functioning. I saw some non-failing results once from Detlef qemulated box while on other boxes tests were failing. But that should be started as a separate discussion, perhaps.
* On Fri, 25 Nov 2005, Saulius Krasuckas wrote:
BTW, how do you all folks think -- is it reliable approach to test WinAPI inside a machine emulator, like a QEmu? I'd say it shoot exactly 100% of original OS functioning.
As always in my case, some word was forgotten. Should sound like a: "machine emulators cannot shoot 100% of original OS functioning". Your opinions?
I saw some non-failing results once from Detlef qemulated box while on other boxes tests were failing.
Am Freitag, den 25.11.2005, 01:11 +0200 schrieb Saulius Krasuckas:
BTW, how do you all folks think -- is it reliable approach to test WinAPI inside a machine emulator, like a QEmu?
IMHO, only using "Real Hardware" for Regression-Test give us much less Results.
"machine emulators cannot shoot 100% of original OS functioning".
qemu is really new compared to vmware/virtualpc. I joined qemu-devel and started to report our/my problems with qemu.
I saw some non-failing results once from Detlef qemulated box while on other boxes tests were failing.
This was "kernel32:threads" on qemu/win98se -- By By ... ... Detlef
On 11/24/05, Saulius Krasuckas <saulius2(a)ar.fi.lt> 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 interesting to know exactly why NT351 fails.
If advpack.dll does not come with NT 3.51 out of the box, then your change is correct, because the error is reporting that the module does not exist (which is the case.)
BTW, how do you all folks think -- is it reliable approach to test WinAPI inside a machine emulator, like a QEmu? I'd say it shoot exactly 100% of original OS functioning. I saw some non-failing results once from Detlef qemulated box while on other boxes tests were failing.
I've always thought it would be very convenient, albeit expensive, to have a test farm set up to run the tests inside vmware/qemu/etc for as many versions of windows as possible and wine at least once a day. An alert could be sent to wine-devel whenever any of the tests change state i.e. the test fails now when it passed before or vice versa. -- James Hawkins
participants (3)
-
Detlef Riekenberg -
James Hawkins -
Saulius Krasuckas