October 2010 - Wine-Devel - list.winehq.org

Re: [PATCH 5/5] shlwapi/tests: Add more tests
by testbot＠testbot.winehq.org Oct. 12, 2010

Oct. 12, 2010

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 http://testbot.winehq.org/JobDetails.pl?Key=6118 Your paranoid android. === WVISTAADM (32 bit ordinal) === No test summary line found === W7PRO (32 bit ordinal) === ordinal.c:1793: Test failed: got 29 ordinal.c:1843: Test failed: got 29 ordinal.c:1851: Test failed: got 29 ordinal.c:1859: Test failed: got 40, length 41 ordinal.c:1870: Test failed: got 43 === W7PROX64 (64 bit ordinal) === ordinal.c:1787: Test failed: got 10 ordinal.c:1808: Test failed: got 7 ordinal.c:1821: Test failed: got 10 ordinal.c:1829: Test failed: got 10 ordinal.c:1859: Test failed: got 36, length 37 ordinal.c:1870: Test failed: got 39 ordinal.c:1881: Test failed: got 21 ordinal.c:1892: Test failed: got 24

2 1

Re: [PATCH 1/5] shlwapi: Improved SHGetShellKey implementation
by testbot＠testbot.winehq.org Oct. 12, 2010

Oct. 12, 2010

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 http://testbot.winehq.org/JobDetails.pl?Key=6117 Your paranoid android. === WVISTAADM (32 bit ordinal) === No test summary line found === W7PRO (32 bit ordinal) === ordinal.c:1789: Test failed: got 29 ordinal.c:1839: Test failed: got 29 ordinal.c:1847: Test failed: got 29 ordinal.c:1855: Test failed: got 40, length 41 ordinal.c:1866: Test failed: got 43 === W7PROX64 (64 bit ordinal) === ordinal.c:1783: Test failed: got 10 ordinal.c:1804: Test failed: got 7 ordinal.c:1817: Test failed: got 10 ordinal.c:1825: Test failed: got 10 ordinal.c:1855: Test failed: got 36, length 37 ordinal.c:1866: Test failed: got 39 ordinal.c:1877: Test failed: got 21 ordinal.c:1888: Test failed: got 24

1 0

Re: [PATCH 1/5] ddraw: Use a linear filter in ddraw_surface7_Blt().
by Stefan Dösinger Oct. 12, 2010

Oct. 12, 2010

Am 12.10.2010 um 13:40 schrieb Henri Verbeet: > + hr = IWineD3DSurface_Blt(This->WineD3DSurface, DestRect, Src ? Src->WineD3DSurface : NULL, > + SrcRect, Flags, (WINEDDBLTFX *)DDBltFx, WINED3DTEXF_LINEAR); Why do you think a linear filter is correct? I was under the impression that ddraw only uses point filters.

2 2

Re: setupapi/tests: Fix wow64 failures
by Alexandre Julliard Oct. 12, 2010

Oct. 12, 2010

André Hentschel <nerv(a)dawncrow.de> writes: > This removes problems on wow64 on windows platforms (wine can't even handle the normal case yet) > See http://test.winehq.org/data/tests/setupapi:devinst.html > --- > dlls/setupapi/tests/devinst.c | 44 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------- > 1 files changed, 29 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-) It doesn't work here: ../../../tools/runtest -q -P wine -M setupapi.dll -T ../../.. -p setupapi_test.exe.so devinst.c && touch devinst.ok devinst.c:1120: Test succeeded inside todo block: Unexpected path \\?\ROOT#LEGACY_BOGUS#0001#{6A55B5A4-3F65-11DB-B704-0011955C2BDB} make[1]: *** [devinst.ok] Error 1 -- Alexandre Julliard julliard(a)winehq.org

1 0

Re: [1/2] d3dx9/tests: Fix a failure on 64 bits.
by Alexandre Julliard Oct. 12, 2010

Oct. 12, 2010

Matteo Bruni <matteo.mystral(a)gmail.com> writes: > @@ -131,7 +131,9 @@ static void test_get_shader_constant_table_ex(void) > > /* With invalid CTAB data */ > hr = D3DXGetShaderConstantTableEx(shader_with_invalid_ctab, 0, &constant_table); > - ok(hr == D3DXERR_INVALIDDATA, "Got result %x, expected %x (D3DXERR_INVALIDDATA)\n", hr, D3DXERR_INVALIDDATA); > + /* Native on 64 bit doesn't check for invalid data */ > + ok(hr == D3DXERR_INVALIDDATA || (hr == D3D_OK && sizeof(DWORD) != sizeof(DWORD_PTR)), > + "Got result %x, expected %x (D3DXERR_INVALIDDATA)\n", hr, D3DXERR_INVALIDDATA); This doesn't seem to have much to do with 64-bit, it looks more like a broken implementation. -- Alexandre Julliard julliard(a)winehq.org

1 0

Re: libs/wine: make lack of LDT support an #error
by Alexandre Julliard Oct. 12, 2010

Oct. 12, 2010

Austin English <austinenglish(a)gmail.com> writes: > Nothing runs without it. The error is pretty obvious, I don't think there's a need to break the build. Besides, you don't need LDT for 32-bit apps if you have GDT support. -- Alexandre Julliard julliard(a)winehq.org

1 0

LLVM compilation
by Jeff Cook Oct. 11, 2010

Oct. 11, 2010

Just wondering if anyone has experimented building WINE with LLVM instead of GCC. For those who haven't been following it closely, LLVM/Clang is fairly mature now and can now build some really mammoth projects. Has anyone experimented in building WINE with LLVM/Clang? If so, what results were gotten? My understanding is that WINE tries hard to be pretty portable and non-GCC-specific, so I would expect good results... Thanks From Jeff

6 5

IDE for Wine Development?
by Evil Jay Oct. 11, 2010

Oct. 11, 2010

The small patches I've submitted previously have been very minor code changes that I put together in a text editor. But today I've been perusing the available bug list, and see a couple of more ambitious things I would like to try to tackle. My question is: Which IDE/editors do you "real" devs prefer for your work on Wine? This topic doesn't seem to be mentioned in the dev faq/guides on WineHQ. I googled to see if others had asked before, but if they did I must have not phrased my searches very well. I've been playing with KDevelop 4.0.2 for the last hour. It's beautiful, but I haven't had the best experience with it: It randomly crashed 3 times within a short period of first using it. Oddly, it's not crashed since I restarted it from the command line so that I could attempt to figure out what the problem is. -J

5 4

Re: [1/2] kernel32: Implement GetSystemRegistryQuota as a semi-stub.
by testbot＠testbot.winehq.org Oct. 11, 2010

Oct. 11, 2010

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 http://testbot.winehq.org/JobDetails.pl?Key=6079 Your paranoid android. === W98SE (32 bit process) === Failure running script in VM: Exceeded timeout limit of 315 sec

2 1

Re: [6/6] msi/tests: Reduce the UI level for a couple of tests.
by testbot＠testbot.winehq.org Oct. 11, 2010

Oct. 11, 2010

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 http://testbot.winehq.org/JobDetails.pl?Key=6078 Your paranoid android. === W2K8SE (32 bit install) === Timeout

1 0