January 2002 - Wine-Devel - list.winehq.org

Re: We *really* need a development model change !

by Alexandre Julliard

Jeremy White <jwhite(a)codeweavers.com> writes: > I've started playing with this, Alexandre, and I had a thought/question: > why not put the tests under 'wine/tests'? I recognize the benefit > of having a test immediately associated with the implementation. > But, I would argue > a) that not all tests are going to be specific to one dll It seems to me that a given test should always be specific not only to a dll, but to a single or a few functions of this dll. When do you think this would not be the case? This really goes with the dll separation strategy: Wine should no longer be viewed as a monolithic program, but more as a set of dll packages grouped in the same tar file. And at some point it could become desirable to split some dlls out of the main tree, or to have separate people maintain separate dlls independently. So I think the unit tests should be part of their respective dll. > b) by placing all the tests together, you make exporting > a 'test' package to Windows simpler. > c) You centralize the info and allow for good doco > d) We can create and sustain a whole Windows make > file hierarchy, which would be useful to a test > writer in Windows. I don't think we should maintain a Windows make hierarchy, at least not manually. If we have to ship Windows makefiles they should be generated from the Wine makefiles (or both types of makefile generated from some other source file). Asking people to keep two hierarchies in sync won't work. -- Alexandre Julliard julliard(a)winehq.com

Jan. 1, 2002

Re: We *really* need a development model change !

by Alexandre Julliard

Andriy Palamarchuk <apa3a(a)yahoo.com> writes: > Before I was confident the tests would be developed under Windows and > then run under Wine. You described reverse situation. > > To create a test people will have to use Windows to check it works > properly. Of course all the tests must succeed under Windows. In theory tests should be written under Windows yes. In practice the initial version of a test may be done on Windows, but I'm sure people will then modify the test under Wine without bothering to retry under Windows every time. -- Alexandre Julliard julliard(a)winehq.com

Jan. 1, 2002

Re: We *really* need a development model change !

by Jeremy White

> > > >In fact here's a 10-minute hack to add a make test target. With that >all you have to do is create a test script in dlls/xxx/tests/foo.test, >put the expected output in tests/foo.test.ref (presumably generated by >running the test under Windows), add your script to the makefile and >run make test. > I've started playing with this, Alexandre, and I had a thought/question: why not put the tests under 'wine/tests'? I recognize the benefit of having a test immediately associated with the implementation. But, I would argue a) that not all tests are going to be specific to one dll b) by placing all the tests together, you make exporting a 'test' package to Windows simpler. c) You centralize the info and allow for good doco d) We can create and sustain a whole Windows make file hierarchy, which would be useful to a test writer in Windows. (And yes, I ask because I am threatening to actually do some of the work; of course, I'll run out of time shortly, and it will be an empty threat...<g>). Thoughts? Jer

Jan. 1, 2002

Re: What have I done to my debugger?

by eric pouech

> No, but I wouldn't worry about it if it is working on other people's. > > (It looks like some sort of problem with the Tab sheets) well, try at least the patch I just sent, it may fix some issues (at least the memory hog issue and the potential X11 crash) > p.s. Happy New Year Happy New Year to all wine addicts too !! A+ -- --------------- Eric Pouech (http://perso.wanadoo.fr/eric.pouech/) "The future will be better tomorrow", Vice President Dan Quayle

Jan. 1, 2002

Re: mvcrt.ungetc and stdio buffering

by Mike McCormack

Hello Waldek, Have a look at the following two messages from Marcus Meissner to wine-devel and wine-patches: Mon, 23 Jul 2001 09:08:31 -0400 http://www.integrita.com/cgi-local/lwgate.pl/WINE-DEVEL/archives/2001- 07/date/article-185.html Sat, 21 Jul 2001 09:14:03 -0400 http://www.integrita.com/cgi-local/lwgate.pl/WINE-PATCHES/archives/200 1-07/date/article-102.html You can probably also use the native MSVCRT.DLL, from your windows installation. Mike > Recently I tried to run g77 compiled Fortran program under Wine. > It seems that to do any input g77 uses `ungetc'. Currently, > Wine msvcrt has unbufferd stdio. I would like to add buffering > and implement `ungetc'. Are there any traps (thread safety ??) > or will strightforward implementation work ? > -- > Waldek Hebisch > hebisch(a)math.uni.wroc.pl or hebisch(a)hera.math.uni.wroc.pl ------------------------------------------ mailto:Mike_McCormack(a)start.com.au ph +82 16 430 0425 __________________________________________________________________ Get your free Australian email account at http://www.Looksmart.com.au

Jan. 1, 2002

Re: We *really* need a development model change !

by Andriy Palamarchuk

Alexandre Julliard wrote: > Andriy Palamarchuk <apa3a(a)yahoo.com> writes: >>It seems the problem is not so big. It will be sufficient to run the >>binary, compiled under Windows not more often than once a month. >> > > But it won't compile. Once we have a simple environment in Wine where > you run make test and everything happens automatically, people will > use that. They won't bother to update all the makefiles etc. that you > need in order to build on Windows. Then every time someone tries to > build the tests under Windows they will have to fix a ton of problems > before it works. > > > We simply cannot expect people to constantly dual-boot to run their > tests in both environments, so we need a way to make sure that when > code works on one platform it also works on the other without extra > work. We could certainly build a Windows infrastructure that does > everything automatically for C tests, but this is a massive amount of > work. Before I was confident the tests would be developed under Windows and then run under Wine. You described reverse situation. To create a test people will have to use Windows to check it works properly. Of course all the tests must succeed under Windows. >>BTW, tests in Perl address only execution of applications, not compilation. >> > > Compilation is not an interesting case. 99% of it is tested by > compiling Wine itself, and the remaining occasional problem is trivial > to locate and fix. There's simply no need for regression testing of > the compilation environment. You are right for current conditions. The situation may be more interesting if Wine will be ported to non-Intel architecture. Ok, this week I'll create a few tests in Perl and share my unbiased experience :-) Andriy

Jan. 1, 2002

Re: current cvs doesn't compile with freetype-2.0.3

by Ben Stanley

James Juran wrote: >It works fine for me with RH 7.2 and freetype-2.0.3. Try > >rm config.* > Duh. why didn't I think of that? Thanks. It works now. Ben.

Jan. 1, 2002