Re: [PATCH 2/2] shell32: SHFileOperation can move several files into one directory

[Vitaly Perov]

> The move operation can already do this.  Why is this patch necessary?
> The test you sent in already passes, so this 'fix' is not being tested
> at all.

I've checked my test again. It fails!

$ wine shell32_test.exe.so shlfileop

So, the result is:
shlfileop.c:171: Test failed: SHGetFileInfoA(c:\nonexistent | 
SHGFI_ATTRIBUTES) failed
shlfileop.c:178: Test failed: SHGetFileInfoA(c:\nonexistent | SHGFI_EXETYPE) 
returned 0
shlfileop.c:1230: Test failed: Expected ERROR_SUCCESS, got 1223
shlfileop.c:1231: Test failed: Expected one.txt to not exist
shlfileop.c:1232: Test failed: Expected one2.txt to not exist
shlfileop.c:1233: Test failed: Expected one.txt to exist
shlfileop.c:1234: Test failed: Expected one.txt to exist
shlfileop: 582 tests executed (0 marked as todo, 7 failures), 0 skipped.

Could you check it again, please.

-- 
Best wishes,
Vitaly Perov
Russia, Saint-Petersburg. www.etersoft.ru

[PATCH 2/2] shell32: SHFileOperation can move several files into one directory

[James Hawkins]

On Wed, Jun 18, 2008 at 10:29 AM, Vitaly Perov <vitperov(a)etersoft.ru> wrote:
> > The move operation can already do this.  Why is this patch necessary?
> > The test you sent in already passes, so this 'fix' is not being tested
> > at all.
>
> I've checked my test again. It fails!
>
> $ wine shell32_test.exe.so shlfileop
>
> So, the result is:
> shlfileop.c:171: Test failed: SHGetFileInfoA(c:\nonexistent |
> SHGFI_ATTRIBUTES) failed
> shlfileop.c:178: Test failed: SHGetFileInfoA(c:\nonexistent | SHGFI_EXETYPE)
> returned 0
> shlfileop.c:1230: Test failed: Expected ERROR_SUCCESS, got 1223
> shlfileop.c:1231: Test failed: Expected one.txt to not exist
> shlfileop.c:1232: Test failed: Expected one2.txt to not exist
> shlfileop.c:1233: Test failed: Expected one.txt to exist
> shlfileop.c:1234: Test failed: Expected one.txt to exist
> shlfileop: 582 tests executed (0 marked as todo, 7 failures), 0 skipped.
>
> Could you check it again, please.

I never tested the patch in the first place.  I assumed it passed
because you didn't wrap the failing test in todo_wine.  I have
problems with the test patch though, but I'll reply to that patch
instead of here.

-- 
James Hawkins