http://vmlinux.org/jakov/Wine/regrtest.exe Should now work on Win9x too. Works on ME at least.
On August 30, 2003 01:40 pm, Jakob Eriksson wrote:
Very nice! I already submitted some results :) Some comments: -- I have Win2k here, and the comctl32 test bombed because it could not find DPA_Create (why?!?) -- We should look for and report the exact version number of the OS. Now that we have a C program, it should not be difficult. -- I haven't checked, I hope it also cleans up after itself :) This is shaping up nicely. What we still need to do: -- enlist someone for building this binary on every release, and upload it to WineHQ. -- process these results automatically. Feri is on that one -- create a new page on WineHQ dedicated to testing. We should move the testing bits from the janitorial pages there, plus instructions, links to the binary, the results, etc. -- Dimi.
--- "Dimitrie O. Paun" <dpaun(a)rogers.com> wrote:
Very nice! I already submitted some results :) Some comments: -- I have Win2k here, and the comctl32 test bombed because it could not find DPA_Create (why?!?)
DPA_Create is exported by ordinal on windows not by name. This is causing problems for me on my mingw porting work. __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com
Dimitrie O. Paun wrote:
-- We should look for and report the exact version number of the OS. Now that we have a C program, it should not be difficult.
============================================================== Tests prepared Aug 30 2003 Operating system version: 5.0 Service Pack 2 - NT family 2000 The above is, AFAIK the exact version number.
-- I haven't checked, I hope it also cleans up after itself :)
I am afraid it does not. I decided not to for now, since I wanted to run the tests manually in case of trouble. Look in your $TEMP\winertest there you will find both EXEs and the html form.
This is shaping up nicely. What we still need to do: -- enlist someone for building this binary on every release, and upload it to WineHQ.
This is built with cross-mingw, so the build should be done at the same time Wine is tagged in releases, IMHO. Jakob
On August 30, 2003 04:16 pm, Jakob Eriksson wrote:
Dimitrie O. Paun wrote:
-- We should look for and report the exact version number of the OS. Now that we have a C program, it should not be difficult.
============================================================== Tests prepared Aug 30 2003 Operating system version: 5.0 Service Pack 2 - NT family 2000
Yes, but I was looking for something more exact. For example, on my laptop, My Computer's Properties report: Microsoft Windows 2000 5.00.2195 Service Pack 2 In other words, the stuff returned by GetVersionEx(): http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/sysinfo/bas...
-- I haven't checked, I hope it also cleans up after itself :)
I am afraid it does not. I decided not to for now, since I wanted to run the tests manually in case of trouble.
But this should be more a development mode. Maybe just a switch to turn off cleanup should suffice. For those who care, they can run it with the switch. Otherwise, always cleanup.
This is shaping up nicely. What we still need to do: -- enlist someone for building this binary on every release, and upload it to WineHQ.
This is built with cross-mingw, so the build should be done at the same time Wine is tagged in releases, IMHO.
Indeed, I was just pointing out that someone needs to do the build, and uploaded to SourceForge for others to download. -- Dimi.
Le dim 31/08/2003 à 19:01, Dimitrie O. Paun a écrit :
On August 30, 2003 04:16 pm, Jakob Eriksson wrote:
Dimitrie O. Paun wrote:
-- We should look for and report the exact version number of the OS. Now that we have a C program, it should not be difficult.
============================================================== Tests prepared Aug 30 2003 Operating system version: 5.0 Service Pack 2 - NT family 2000
Yes, but I was looking for something more exact. For example, on my laptop, My Computer's Properties report: Microsoft Windows 2000 5.00.2195 Service Pack 2
Of those, only the SP will change when installing newer SPs. The build number will stay the same. NT 4.0 was build 1381 from the original CDs to SP6a. (And why haven't you installed SP3 yet? You've read the EULA for it? :))
In other words, the stuff returned by GetVersionEx(): http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/sysinfo/bas...
Of course, this would be the easiest way to categorize versions. But how much "original" is the version? What has been installed since then? I know you can't really trust the DLL versions either...
-- I haven't checked, I hope it also cleans up after itself :)
I am afraid it does not. I decided not to for now, since I wanted to run the tests manually in case of trouble.
But this should be more a development mode. Maybe just a switch to turn off cleanup should suffice. For those who care, they can run it with the switch. Otherwise, always cleanup.
Can we assume that individual tests will cleanup after themselves?
This is shaping up nicely. What we still need to do: -- enlist someone for building this binary on every release, and upload it to WineHQ.
This is built with cross-mingw, so the build should be done at the same time Wine is tagged in releases, IMHO.
Indeed, I was just pointing out that someone needs to do the build, and uploaded to SourceForge for others to download.
I don't know if at each release is frequent enough. What about bi-weekly? Or after a set number of CVS commits by Alexandre? I agree for sf.net for downloading though. We'll need to exactly label what they are and how to use them productively. Vincent
On August 31, 2003 07:18 pm, Vincent Béron wrote:
(And why haven't you installed SP3 yet? You've read the EULA for it? :))
Nah, I'm just lazy :) I don't use Windows much...
In other words, the stuff returned by GetVersionEx():
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/sysinfo/ base/getversionex.asp
Of course, this would be the easiest way to categorize versions. But how much "original" is the version? What has been installed since then? I know you can't really trust the DLL versions either...
Well, we need to go by something. A full dump of the stuff returned by GetVersionEx is a must. Also, for eash of the DLLs we care about, would be nice to have some info in case we find failures we can't explain otherwise.
-- I haven't checked, I hope it also cleans up after itself :)
I am afraid it does not. I decided not to for now, since I wanted to run the tests manually in case of trouble.
But this should be more a development mode. Maybe just a switch to turn off cleanup should suffice. For those who care, they can run it with the switch. Otherwise, always cleanup.
Can we assume that individual tests will cleanup after themselves?
Maybe they do, but we still unpack some files, we should just erase the entire temp dir we create, unless we're told not to do so. It's just good manners :)
I don't know if at each release is frequent enough. What about bi-weekly? Or after a set number of CVS commits by Alexandre? I agree for sf.net for downloading though. We'll need to exactly label what they are and how to use them productively.
Yes, it would be nice to have more frequent releases, but we would have trouble labeling them...unless we stick to the build date. But in that case, we have to have a well understood convention on what YYYYMMDD means in terms of time, and we have to stick to it (well, the person building this should). Any takers? -- Dimi.
Dimitrie O. Paun wrote:
On August 30, 2003 04:16 pm, Jakob Eriksson wrote:
Dimitrie O. Paun wrote:
-- We should look for and report the exact version number of the OS. Now that we have a C program, it should not be difficult.
============================================================== Tests prepared Aug 30 2003 Operating system version: 5.0 Service Pack 2 - NT family 2000
Yes, but I was looking for something more exact. For example, on my laptop, My Computer's Properties report: Microsoft Windows 2000 5.00.2195 Service Pack 2
Do not know how to get that info. Please have a look at the code at http://vmlinux.org/jakov/Wine/
In other words, the stuff returned by GetVersionEx(): http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/sysinfo/bas...
I am using GetVersionEx ...
But this should be more a development mode. Maybe just a switch to turn off cleanup should suffice. For those who care, they can run it with the switch. Otherwise, always cleanup.
Agreed. regards, Jakob
Jakob Eriksson <jakob(a)vmlinux.org> writes:
How could you make it this small? 400 kB vs. 2.9 MB, that is, the tenth of mine! It makes a good difference in download. Archive: tests.zip (2.9 MB) Length Date Time Name -------- ---- ---- ---- 259487 08-28-03 18:58 advapi32_crosstest.exe 418749 08-28-03 18:58 comctl32_crosstest.exe 981411 08-28-03 18:58 gdi32_crosstest.exe 1261724 08-28-03 18:59 kernel32_crosstest.exe 267873 08-28-03 18:59 msvcrt_crosstest.exe 393248 08-28-03 18:59 netapi32_crosstest.exe 1110496 08-28-03 18:59 ntdll_crosstest.exe 1019072 08-28-03 21:47 oleaut32_crosstest.exe 537499 08-28-03 19:00 rpcrt4_crosstest.exe 9799 08-30-03 22:55 runtests.bat 649170 08-28-03 19:00 shell32_crosstest.exe 1139141 08-28-03 19:00 shlwapi_crosstest.exe 580658 08-28-03 21:48 urlmon_crosstest.exe 982073 08-28-03 19:00 user32_crosstest.exe 319961 08-28-03 19:01 wininet_crosstest.exe 295935 08-28-03 19:01 winmm_crosstest.exe 315657 08-28-03 19:01 winspool.drv_crosstest.exe 615043 08-28-03 19:01 ws2_32_crosstest.exe -------- ------- 11156996 18 files On XP it produced rather strange results where the programs showed their possible tests, like: .............................................................. Running 'C:\Temp\winertest\comctl32_crosstest.exe': dpa: 4 tests executed, 0 marked as todo, 0 failures. dpa: 4 tests executed, 0 marked as todo, 0 failures. -------------------------------------------------------------- .............................................................. Running 'C:\Temp\winertest\comctl32_crosstest.exe': Usage: C:\Temp\winertest\comctl32_crosstest.exe test_name Valid test names: dpa dpa -------------------------------------------------------------- I am not sure if it is intended. But the tests seem to run anyway. Results submitted. Best wishes, Feri.
Ferenc Wagner wrote:
Jakob Eriksson <jakob(a)vmlinux.org> writes:
How could you make it this small? 400 kB vs. 2.9 MB, that is, the tenth of mine! It makes a good difference in download.
First all tests are stripped from symbols. I guess you did that too. Secondly, not all tests are included. I disabled a few who would not build with cross-mingw. Lastly, and most important; I ran the "upx" packer on the resulting exe. (apt-get install upx, if you are on debian.) This took the size down from 1632290 to 408098 bytes.
On XP it produced rather strange results where the programs showed their possible tests, like:
..............................................................
Running 'C:\Temp\winertest\comctl32_crosstest.exe': dpa: 4 tests executed, 0 marked as todo, 0 failures. dpa: 4 tests executed, 0 marked as todo, 0 failures.
--------------------------------------------------------------
..............................................................
Running 'C:\Temp\winertest\comctl32_crosstest.exe': Usage: C:\Temp\winertest\comctl32_crosstest.exe test_name
Valid test names: dpa dpa
--------------------------------------------------------------
No, this is a bug and I do not know why it happens. I am working on sprucing up the source so you can have a look and maybe point out what is wrong. regards, Jakob
participants (6)
-
Dimitrie O. Paun -
Ferenc Wagner -
Jakob Eriksson -
Jakob Eriksson -
Steven Edwards -
Vincent Béron