September 2011 - Wine-Devel

re: [PATCH 11/21] vbscript: Added function parser implementation

by Dan Kegel

Fails tests reliably (4 out of 4 runs) here under WINEDEBUG=warn+heap on a q9300 (but not on 32 or 64 bit non-warn-heap runs on q9300 or i7). On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 7:17 AM, <buildbot(a)kegel.com> wrote: > This is an experimental automated build and test service. > Please feel free to ignore this email while we work the kinks out. > > For more info about this message, see http://wiki.winehq.org/BuildBot > > The Buildbot has detected a failed build on builder runtests-heaptest while building Wine. > Full details are available at: http://buildbot.kegel.com/builders/runtests-heaptest/builds/35 (though maybe not for long, as I'm still reinstalling the buildbot periodically while experimenting) > BUILD FAILED: failed shell_3 > > Errors: > vbscript.c:443: Test failed: expected OnEnterScript > vbscript.c:444: Test failed: expected OnLeaveScript > make: *** [vbscript.ok] Error 2 > >

Sept. 14, 2011

Re: [PATCH 1/3] server: certain access flags are illegal for OpenMutex

by Marvin

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=14233 Your paranoid android. === WNT4WSSP6 (32 bit sync) === sync.c:174: Test failed: ReleaseMutex should have failed with ERROR_NOT_OWNER instead of 5 === W2KPROSP4 (32 bit sync) === sync.c:174: Test failed: ReleaseMutex should have failed with ERROR_NOT_OWNER instead of 5 === WXPPROSP3 (32 bit sync) === sync.c:174: Test failed: ReleaseMutex should have failed with ERROR_NOT_OWNER instead of 5 === W2K3R2SESP2 (32 bit sync) === sync.c:174: Test failed: ReleaseMutex should have failed with ERROR_NOT_OWNER instead of 5 === WVISTAADM (32 bit sync) === sync.c:174: Test failed: ReleaseMutex should have failed with ERROR_NOT_OWNER instead of 5 === W2K8SE (32 bit sync) === sync.c:174: Test failed: ReleaseMutex should have failed with ERROR_NOT_OWNER instead of 5 === W7PRO (32 bit sync) === sync.c:174: Test failed: ReleaseMutex should have failed with ERROR_NOT_OWNER instead of 5 === W7PROX64 (32 bit sync) === sync.c:174: Test failed: ReleaseMutex should have failed with ERROR_NOT_OWNER instead of 5 === W7PROX64 (64 bit sync) === sync.c:174: Test failed: ReleaseMutex should have failed with ERROR_NOT_OWNER instead of 5

Sept. 14, 2011

Re: [PATCH 06/21] vbscript: Added function arguments compiler implementation

by Jacek Caban

On 09/14/11 13:47, Octavian Voicu wrote: > On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 1:56 PM, Jacek Caban<jacek(a)codeweavers.com> wrote: >> --- a/dlls/vbscript/compile.c >> +++ b/dlls/vbscript/compile.c >> @@ -658,9 +658,26 @@ static HRESULT create_function(compile_ctx_t *ctx, function_decl_t *decl, functi >> func->code_ctx = ctx->code; >> func->type = decl->type; >> >> + func->arg_cnt = 0; >> if(decl->args) { > ... >> + }else { >> + decl->args = NULL; > I think you want to set func->args to NULL at the last line. > Yeah, good catch, thanks. Jacek

Sept. 14, 2011

Re: [PATCH 06/21] vbscript: Added function arguments compiler implementation

by Octavian Voicu

On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 1:56 PM, Jacek Caban <jacek(a)codeweavers.com> wrote: > --- a/dlls/vbscript/compile.c > +++ b/dlls/vbscript/compile.c > @@ -658,9 +658,26 @@ static HRESULT create_function(compile_ctx_t *ctx, function_decl_t *decl, functi > func->code_ctx = ctx->code; > func->type = decl->type; > > + func->arg_cnt = 0; > if(decl->args) { ... > + }else { > + decl->args = NULL; I think you want to set func->args to NULL at the last line. Cheers, Octavian

Sept. 14, 2011

Re: [PATCH 19/21] vbscript: Added interp_xor implementation

by Marvin

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=14230 Your paranoid android. === WNT4WSSP6 (32 bit) === No test summary line found === W2KPROSP4 (32 bit) === No test summary line found === WXPPROSP3 (32 bit) === No test summary line found === W2K3R2SESP2 (32 bit) === No test summary line found === WVISTAADM (32 bit) === No test summary line found === W2K8SE (32 bit) === No test summary line found === W7PRO (32 bit) === No test summary line found === W7PROX64 (32 bit) === No test summary line found === W7PROX64 (64 bit) === No test summary line found

Sept. 14, 2011

Re: [PATCH 10/21] vbscript: Added support for sub local variables

by Marvin

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=14224 Your paranoid android. === WNT4WSSP6 (32 bit) === No test summary line found === W2KPROSP4 (32 bit) === No test summary line found === WXPPROSP3 (32 bit) === No test summary line found === W2K3R2SESP2 (32 bit) === No test summary line found === WVISTAADM (32 bit) === No test summary line found === W2K8SE (32 bit) === No test summary line found === W7PRO (32 bit) === No test summary line found === W7PROX64 (32 bit) === No test summary line found === W7PROX64 (64 bit) === No test summary line found

Sept. 14, 2011

Re: [PATCH 09/21] vbscript: Added exit sub statement implementation

by Marvin

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=14223 Your paranoid android. === WNT4WSSP6 (32 bit) === No test summary line found === W2KPROSP4 (32 bit) === No test summary line found === WXPPROSP3 (32 bit) === No test summary line found === W2K3R2SESP2 (32 bit) === No test summary line found === WVISTAADM (32 bit) === No test summary line found === W2K8SE (32 bit) === No test summary line found === W7PRO (32 bit) === No test summary line found === W7PROX64 (32 bit) === No test summary line found === W7PROX64 (64 bit) === No test summary line found

Sept. 14, 2011

Re: [PATCH 08/21] vbscript: Added sub argument tests

by Marvin

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=14222 Your paranoid android. === WNT4WSSP6 (32 bit) === No test summary line found === W2KPROSP4 (32 bit) === No test summary line found === WXPPROSP3 (32 bit) === No test summary line found === W2K3R2SESP2 (32 bit) === No test summary line found === WVISTAADM (32 bit) === No test summary line found === W2K8SE (32 bit) === No test summary line found === W7PRO (32 bit) === No test summary line found === W7PROX64 (32 bit) === No test summary line found === W7PROX64 (64 bit) === No test summary line found

Sept. 14, 2011

Re: [PATCH 02/21] vbscript: Added function compiler implementation

by Jacek Caban

On 09/14/11 13:05, Marvin wrote: > 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=14220 > > Your paranoid android. Here are results of combined patch series submitted manually to testbot: https://testbot.winehq.org/JobDetails.pl?Key=14219 Jacek

Sept. 14, 2011

Re: [PATCH 05/21] vbscript: Added function invocation supprot to do_icall

by Marvin

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=14221 Your paranoid android. === WNT4WSSP6 (32 bit) === No test summary line found === W2KPROSP4 (32 bit) === No test summary line found === WXPPROSP3 (32 bit) === No test summary line found === W2K3R2SESP2 (32 bit) === No test summary line found === WVISTAADM (32 bit) === No test summary line found === W2K8SE (32 bit) === No test summary line found === W7PRO (32 bit) === No test summary line found === W7PROX64 (32 bit) === No test summary line found === W7PROX64 (64 bit) === No test summary line found

Sept. 14, 2011

Re: [PATCH 02/21] vbscript: Added function compiler implementation

by Marvin

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=14220 Your paranoid android. === WNT4WSSP6 (32 bit) === No test summary line found === W2KPROSP4 (32 bit) === No test summary line found === WXPPROSP3 (32 bit) === No test summary line found === W2K3R2SESP2 (32 bit) === No test summary line found === WVISTAADM (32 bit) === No test summary line found === W2K8SE (32 bit) === No test summary line found === W7PRO (32 bit) === No test summary line found === W7PROX64 (32 bit) === No test summary line found === W7PROX64 (64 bit) === No test summary line found

Sept. 14, 2011

IPv6 issue on TestBot?

by Francois Gouget

Connecting to https://testbot.winehq.org/ over IPv6 hangs for ages :-( This makes accessing it from my desktop very annoying. $ time wget -4 --quiet http://testbot.winehq.org/ real 0m2.150s user 0m0.000s sys 0m0.000s $ time wget -6 --quiet http://testbot.winehq.org/ ... still stuck after 6+ minutes $ telnet -6 testbot.winehq.org Trying 2001:888:2000:38:1000::2... ... same thing According to http://test-ipv6.com/ my desktop is configured just fine and I only have trouble with the TestBot. Could this be a firewall problem? (testbot exposing an IPv6 address but the firewall dropping any IPv6 packets) In the mean time I'm going to use my laptop which is still IPv4 only :-/ -- Francois Gouget <fgouget(a)free.fr> http://fgouget.free.fr/ A black hole is just God dividing by zero.

Sept. 14, 2011

Re: pdh/tests: Some tests require that the user interface be in English.

by Marvin

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=14215 Your paranoid android. === W2KPROSP4 (32 bit pdh) === pdh.c:150: Test failed: PdhAddCounterA failed 0xc0000bc4 pdh.c:197: Test failed: PdhAddCounterW failed 0xc0000bc4

Sept. 13, 2011

Re: ieframe/tests: Some tests require that the user interface be in English.

by Marvin

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=14214 Your paranoid android. === WNT4WSSP6 (32 bit webbrowser) === webbrowser.c:3062: Test failed: Creating WebBrowser object failed: 80040154 webbrowser.c:3062: Test failed: Creating WebBrowser object failed: 80040154 webbrowser.c:3062: Test failed: Creating WebBrowser object failed: 80040154 webbrowser.c:3062: Test failed: Creating WebBrowser object failed: 80040154 webbrowser.c:3138: Test failed: Creating WebBrowser object failed: 80040154 === W2KPROSP4 (32 bit webbrowser) === webbrowser.c:2455: Test failed: expected GetOverridesKeyPath webbrowser.c:2459: Test failed: expected Invoke_SETSECURELOCKICON webbrowser.c:2460: Test failed: expected Invoke_FILEDOWNLOAD webbrowser.c:2069: Test failed: put_Resizable failed: 80004001 webbrowser.c:2070: Test failed: expected Invoke_WINDOWSETRESIZABLE webbrowser.c:2074: Test failed: put_Resizable failed: 80004001 webbrowser.c:2075: Test failed: expected Invoke_WINDOWSETRESIZABLE webbrowser.c:2455: Test failed: expected GetOverridesKeyPath webbrowser.c:2459: Test failed: expected Invoke_SETSECURELOCKICON webbrowser.c:2460: Test failed: expected Invoke_FILEDOWNLOAD webbrowser.c:394: Test failed: unexpected call Exec_SETDOWNLOADSTATE_0 webbrowser.c:2069: Test failed: put_Resizable failed: 80004001 webbrowser.c:2070: Test failed: expected Invoke_WINDOWSETRESIZABLE webbrowser.c:2074: Test failed: put_Resizable failed: 80004001 webbrowser.c:2075: Test failed: expected Invoke_WINDOWSETRESIZABLE webbrowser.c:2455: Test failed: expected GetOverridesKeyPath webbrowser.c:2459: Test failed: expected Invoke_SETSECURELOCKICON webbrowser.c:2460: Test failed: expected Invoke_FILEDOWNLOAD webbrowser.c:447: Test failed: unexpected nCmdID 29 webbrowser.c:945: Test failed: unexpected call GetContainer webbrowser.c:495: Test failed: unexpected call webbrowser.c:945: Test failed: unexpected call GetContainer webbrowser.c:495: Test failed: unexpected call webbrowser.c:2605: Test failed: expected Invoke_SETSECURELOCKICON webbrowser.c:2725: Test failed: expected TranslateUrl webbrowser.c:2726: Test failed: expected Invoke_BEFORENAVIGATE2 webbrowser.c:2727: Test failed: expected Invoke_PROPERTYCHANGE webbrowser.c:2733: Test failed: ReadyState = 1, expected 4 webbrowser.c:2557: Test failed: ReadyState = 1, expected 4 webbrowser.c:777: Test failed: unexpected call Invoke_PROPERTYCHANGE webbrowser.c:793: Test failed: unexpected call Invoke_BEFORENAVIGATE2 webbrowser.c:800: Test failed: ReadyState = 1, expected 4 webbrowser.c:592: Test failed: unexpected call Invoke_AMBIENT_USERMODE webbrowser.c:592: Test failed: unexpected call Invoke_AMBIENT_USERMODE webbrowser.c:595: Test failed: unexpected call Invoke_AMBIENT_DLCONTROL webbrowser.c:599: Test failed: unexpected call Invoke_AMBIENT_USERAGENT webbrowser.c:603: Test failed: unexpected call Invoke_AMBIENT_PALETTE webbrowser.c:1495: Test failed: unexpected call GetOptionKeyPath webbrowser.c:343: Test failed: unexpected call QueryStatus_SETPROGRESSTEXT webbrowser.c:777: Test failed: unexpected call Invoke_PROPERTYCHANGE webbrowser.c:777: Test failed: unexpected call Invoke_PROPERTYCHANGE webbrowser.c:777: Test failed: unexpected call Invoke_PROPERTYCHANGE webbrowser.c:777: Test failed: unexpected call Invoke_PROPERTYCHANGE webbrowser.c:447: Test failed: unexpected nCmdID 26 webbrowser.c:447: Test failed: unexpected nCmdID 29 webbrowser.c:945: Test failed: unexpected call GetContainer webbrowser.c:495: Test failed: unexpected call webbrowser.c:878: Test failed: ReadyState = 1, expected 4 webbrowser.c:1506: Test failed: unexpected call GetDropTarget webbrowser.c:945: Test failed: unexpected call GetContainer webbrowser.c:495: Test failed: unexpected call webbrowser.c:2605: Test failed: expected Invoke_SETSECURELOCKICON webbrowser.c:3098: Test failed: doc != doc2 webbrowser.c:592: Test failed: unexpected call Invoke_AMBIENT_USERMODE webbrowser.c:592: Test failed: unexpected call Invoke_AMBIENT_USERMODE webbrowser.c:595: Test failed: unexpected call Invoke_AMBIENT_DLCONTROL webbrowser.c:599: Test failed: unexpected call Invoke_AMBIENT_USERAGENT webbrowser.c:603: Test failed: unexpected call Invoke_AMBIENT_PALETTE webbrowser.c:1495: Test failed: unexpected call GetOptionKeyPath webbrowser.c:343: Test failed: unexpected call QueryStatus_SETPROGRESSTEXT webbrowser.c:447: Test failed: unexpected nCmdID 26 webbrowser.c:447: Test failed: unexpected nCmdID 29 webbrowser.c:945: Test failed: unexpected call GetContainer webbrowser.c:495: Test failed: unexpected call webbrowser.c:1506: Test failed: unexpected call GetDropTarget webbrowser.c:945: Test failed: unexpected call GetContainer webbrowser.c:495: Test failed: unexpected call webbrowser.c:2598: Test failed: expected TranslateUrl webbrowser.c:2605: Test failed: expected Invoke_SETSECURELOCKICON webbrowser.c:2818: Test failed: expected RequestUIActivate webbrowser.c:2910: Test failed: Got 0x80004002 webbrowser.c:3105: Test failed: doc != doc2 webbrowser.c:3005: Test failed: QueryService failed: 80004002 webbrowser: unhandled exception c0000005 at 0040C9B2

Sept. 13, 2011

Re: shlwapi/tests: Some tests require that the user interface be in English.

by Marvin

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=14213 Your paranoid android. === W2KPROSP4 (32 bit string) === string.c:562: Test failed: Formatted 0000027cf wrong: got 9,95 KB, expected 9.95 KB string.c:562: Test failed: Formatted 000018801 wrong: got 98,0 KB, expected 98.0 KB string.c:562: Test failed: Formatted 0000ff94e wrong: got 0,99 MB, expected 0.99 MB string.c:562: Test failed: Formatted 03fffffcf wrong: got 0,99 GB, expected 0.99 GB string.c:562: Test failed: Formatted fffffffa9b wrong: got 0,99 TB, expected 0.99 TB string.c:562: Test failed: Formatted 3fffffffffbe8 wrong: got 0,99 PB, expected 0.99 PB string.c:562: Test failed: Formatted ffffffffffffa9b wrong: got 0,99 EB, expected 0.99 EB string.c:610: Test failed: Formatted 0000ff94e wrong: got 1.023 KB, expected 1,023 KB string.c:610: Test failed: Formatted 03e7ffa9b wrong: got 1.023.999 KB, expected 1,023,999 KB string.c:610: Test failed: Formatted 03fffffcf wrong: got 1.048.576 KB, expected 1,048,576 KB string.c:610: Test failed: Formatted f9fffff94e wrong: got 1.048.575.999 KB, expected 1,048,575,999 KB string.c:610: Test failed: Formatted fffffffa9b wrong: got 1.073.741.823 KB, expected 1,073,741,823 KB string.c:610: Test failed: Formatted 3e7fffffffa9b wrong: got 1.073.741.823.999 KB, expected 1,073,741,823,999 KB string.c:610: Test failed: Formatted 3fffffffffbe8 wrong: got 1.099.511.627.775 KB, expected 1,099,511,627,775 KB string.c:610: Test failed: Formatted f9ffffffffffd35 wrong: got 1.099.511.627.776.000 KB, expected 1,099,511,627,776,000 KB string.c:610: Test failed: Formatted ffffffffffffa9b wrong: got 1.125.899.906.842.623 KB, expected 1,125,899,906,842,623 KB string.c:587: Test failed: Formatted 0000ff94e wrong: got 1.023 KB, expected 1,023 KB string.c:587: Test failed: Formatted 03e7ffa9b wrong: got 1.023.999 KB, expected 1,023,999 KB string.c:587: Test failed: Formatted 03fffffcf wrong: got 1.048.576 KB, expected 1,048,576 KB string.c:587: Test failed: Formatted f9fffff94e wrong: got 1.048.575.999 KB, expected 1,048,575,999 KB string.c:587: Test failed: Formatted fffffffa9b wrong: got 1.073.741.823 KB, expected 1,073,741,823 KB string.c:587: Test failed: Formatted 3e7fffffffa9b wrong: got 1.073.741.823.999 KB, expected 1,073,741,823,999 KB string.c:587: Test failed: Formatted 3fffffffffbe8 wrong: got 1.099.511.627.775 KB, expected 1,099,511,627,775 KB string.c:587: Test failed: Formatted f9ffffffffffd35 wrong: got 1.099.511.627.776.000 KB, expected 1,099,511,627,776,000 KB string.c:587: Test failed: Formatted ffffffffffffa9b wrong: got 1.125.899.906.842.623 KB, expected 1,125,899,906,842,623 KB === WXPPROSP3 (32 bit string) === string.c:562: Test failed: Formatted 0000027cf wrong: got 9,95 KB, expected 9.95 KB string.c:562: Test failed: Formatted 000018801 wrong: got 98,0 KB, expected 98.0 KB string.c:562: Test failed: Formatted 0000ff94e wrong: got 0,99 MB, expected 0.99 MB string.c:562: Test failed: Formatted 03fffffcf wrong: got 0,99 GB, expected 0.99 GB string.c:562: Test failed: Formatted fffffffa9b wrong: got 0,99 TB, expected 0.99 TB string.c:562: Test failed: Formatted 3fffffffffbe8 wrong: got 0,99 PB, expected 0.99 PB string.c:562: Test failed: Formatted ffffffffffffa9b wrong: got 0,99 EB, expected 0.99 EB string.c:610: Test failed: Formatted 0000ff94e wrong: got 1.023 KB, expected 1,023 KB string.c:610: Test failed: Formatted 03e7ffa9b wrong: got 1.023.999 KB, expected 1,023,999 KB string.c:610: Test failed: Formatted 03fffffcf wrong: got 1.048.576 KB, expected 1,048,576 KB string.c:610: Test failed: Formatted f9fffff94e wrong: got 1.048.575.999 KB, expected 1,048,575,999 KB string.c:610: Test failed: Formatted fffffffa9b wrong: got 1.073.741.823 KB, expected 1,073,741,823 KB string.c:610: Test failed: Formatted 3e7fffffffa9b wrong: got 1.073.741.823.999 KB, expected 1,073,741,823,999 KB string.c:610: Test failed: Formatted 3fffffffffbe8 wrong: got 1.099.511.627.775 KB, expected 1,099,511,627,775 KB string.c:610: Test failed: Formatted f9ffffffffffd35 wrong: got 1.099.511.627.776.000 KB, expected 1,099,511,627,776,000 KB string.c:610: Test failed: Formatted ffffffffffffa9b wrong: got 1.125.899.906.842.623 KB, expected 1,125,899,906,842,623 KB string.c:587: Test failed: Formatted 0000ff94e wrong: got 1.023 KB, expected 1,023 KB string.c:587: Test failed: Formatted 03e7ffa9b wrong: got 1.023.999 KB, expected 1,023,999 KB string.c:587: Test failed: Formatted 03fffffcf wrong: got 1.048.576 KB, expected 1,048,576 KB string.c:587: Test failed: Formatted f9fffff94e wrong: got 1.048.575.999 KB, expected 1,048,575,999 KB string.c:587: Test failed: Formatted fffffffa9b wrong: got 1.073.741.823 KB, expected 1,073,741,823 KB string.c:587: Test failed: Formatted 3e7fffffffa9b wrong: got 1.073.741.823.999 KB, expected 1,073,741,823,999 KB string.c:587: Test failed: Formatted 3fffffffffbe8 wrong: got 1.099.511.627.775 KB, expected 1,099,511,627,775 KB string.c:587: Test failed: Formatted f9ffffffffffd35 wrong: got 1.099.511.627.776.000 KB, expected 1,099,511,627,776,000 KB string.c:587: Test failed: Formatted ffffffffffffa9b wrong: got 1.125.899.906.842.623 KB, expected 1,125,899,906,842,623 KB === W2K3R2SESP2 (32 bit string) === string.c:562: Test failed: Formatted 0000027cf wrong: got 9,95 KB, expected 9.95 KB string.c:562: Test failed: Formatted 000018801 wrong: got 98,0 KB, expected 98.0 KB string.c:562: Test failed: Formatted 0000ff94e wrong: got 0,99 MB, expected 0.99 MB string.c:562: Test failed: Formatted 03fffffcf wrong: got 0,99 GB, expected 0.99 GB string.c:562: Test failed: Formatted fffffffa9b wrong: got 0,99 TB, expected 0.99 TB string.c:562: Test failed: Formatted 3fffffffffbe8 wrong: got 0,99 PB, expected 0.99 PB string.c:562: Test failed: Formatted ffffffffffffa9b wrong: got 0,99 EB, expected 0.99 EB string.c:610: Test failed: Formatted 0000ff94e wrong: got 1.023 KB, expected 1,023 KB string.c:610: Test failed: Formatted 03e7ffa9b wrong: got 1.023.999 KB, expected 1,023,999 KB string.c:610: Test failed: Formatted 03fffffcf wrong: got 1.048.576 KB, expected 1,048,576 KB string.c:610: Test failed: Formatted f9fffff94e wrong: got 1.048.575.999 KB, expected 1,048,575,999 KB string.c:610: Test failed: Formatted fffffffa9b wrong: got 1.073.741.823 KB, expected 1,073,741,823 KB string.c:610: Test failed: Formatted 3e7fffffffa9b wrong: got 1.073.741.823.999 KB, expected 1,073,741,823,999 KB string.c:610: Test failed: Formatted 3fffffffffbe8 wrong: got 1.099.511.627.775 KB, expected 1,099,511,627,775 KB string.c:610: Test failed: Formatted f9ffffffffffd35 wrong: got 1.099.511.627.776.000 KB, expected 1,099,511,627,776,000 KB string.c:610: Test failed: Formatted ffffffffffffa9b wrong: got 1.125.899.906.842.623 KB, expected 1,125,899,906,842,623 KB string.c:587: Test failed: Formatted 0000ff94e wrong: got 1.023 KB, expected 1,023 KB string.c:587: Test failed: Formatted 03e7ffa9b wrong: got 1.023.999 KB, expected 1,023,999 KB string.c:587: Test failed: Formatted 03fffffcf wrong: got 1.048.576 KB, expected 1,048,576 KB string.c:587: Test failed: Formatted f9fffff94e wrong: got 1.048.575.999 KB, expected 1,048,575,999 KB string.c:587: Test failed: Formatted fffffffa9b wrong: got 1.073.741.823 KB, expected 1,073,741,823 KB string.c:587: Test failed: Formatted 3e7fffffffa9b wrong: got 1.073.741.823.999 KB, expected 1,073,741,823,999 KB string.c:587: Test failed: Formatted 3fffffffffbe8 wrong: got 1.099.511.627.775 KB, expected 1,099,511,627,775 KB string.c:587: Test failed: Formatted f9ffffffffffd35 wrong: got 1.099.511.627.776.000 KB, expected 1,099,511,627,776,000 KB string.c:587: Test failed: Formatted ffffffffffffa9b wrong: got 1.125.899.906.842.623 KB, expected 1,125,899,906,842,623 KB === W7PROX64 (32 bit string) === string.c:562: Test failed: Formatted 0000027cf wrong: got 9,95 KB, expected 9.95 KB string.c:562: Test failed: Formatted 000018801 wrong: got 98,0 KB, expected 98.0 KB string.c:562: Test failed: Formatted 0000ff94e wrong: got 0,99 MB, expected 0.99 MB string.c:562: Test failed: Formatted 03fffffcf wrong: got 0,99 GB, expected 0.99 GB string.c:562: Test failed: Formatted fffffffa9b wrong: got 0,99 TB, expected 0.99 TB string.c:562: Test failed: Formatted 3fffffffffbe8 wrong: got 0,99 PB, expected 0.99 PB string.c:562: Test failed: Formatted ffffffffffffa9b wrong: got 0,99 EB, expected 0.99 EB string.c:610: Test failed: Formatted 0000ff94e wrong: got 1.023 KB, expected 1,023 KB string.c:610: Test failed: Formatted 03e7ffa9b wrong: got 1.023.999 KB, expected 1,023,999 KB string.c:610: Test failed: Formatted 03fffffcf wrong: got 1.048.576 KB, expected 1,048,576 KB string.c:610: Test failed: Formatted f9fffff94e wrong: got 1.048.575.999 KB, expected 1,048,575,999 KB string.c:610: Test failed: Formatted fffffffa9b wrong: got 1.073.741.823 KB, expected 1,073,741,823 KB string.c:610: Test failed: Formatted 3e7fffffffa9b wrong: got 1.073.741.823.999 KB, expected 1,073,741,823,999 KB string.c:610: Test failed: Formatted 3fffffffffbe8 wrong: got 1.099.511.627.775 KB, expected 1,099,511,627,775 KB string.c:610: Test failed: Formatted f9ffffffffffd35 wrong: got 1.099.511.627.776.000 KB, expected 1,099,511,627,776,000 KB string.c:610: Test failed: Formatted ffffffffffffa9b wrong: got 1.125.899.906.842.623 KB, expected 1,125,899,906,842,623 KB string.c:587: Test failed: Formatted 0000ff94e wrong: got 1.023 KB, expected 1,023 KB string.c:587: Test failed: Formatted 03e7ffa9b wrong: got 1.023.999 KB, expected 1,023,999 KB string.c:587: Test failed: Formatted 03fffffcf wrong: got 1.048.576 KB, expected 1,048,576 KB string.c:587: Test failed: Formatted f9fffff94e wrong: got 1.048.575.999 KB, expected 1,048,575,999 KB string.c:587: Test failed: Formatted fffffffa9b wrong: got 1.073.741.823 KB, expected 1,073,741,823 KB string.c:587: Test failed: Formatted 3e7fffffffa9b wrong: got 1.073.741.823.999 KB, expected 1,073,741,823,999 KB string.c:587: Test failed: Formatted 3fffffffffbe8 wrong: got 1.099.511.627.775 KB, expected 1,099,511,627,775 KB string.c:587: Test failed: Formatted f9ffffffffffd35 wrong: got 1.099.511.627.776.000 KB, expected 1,099,511,627,776,000 KB string.c:587: Test failed: Formatted ffffffffffffa9b wrong: got 1.125.899.906.842.623 KB, expected 1,125,899,906,842,623 KB === W7PROX64 (64 bit string) === string.c:562: Test failed: Formatted 0000027cf wrong: got 9,95 KB, expected 9.95 KB string.c:562: Test failed: Formatted 000018801 wrong: got 98,0 KB, expected 98.0 KB string.c:562: Test failed: Formatted 0000ff94e wrong: got 0,99 MB, expected 0.99 MB string.c:562: Test failed: Formatted 03fffffcf wrong: got 0,99 GB, expected 0.99 GB string.c:562: Test failed: Formatted fffffffa9b wrong: got 0,99 TB, expected 0.99 TB string.c:562: Test failed: Formatted 3fffffffffbe8 wrong: got 0,99 PB, expected 0.99 PB string.c:562: Test failed: Formatted ffffffffffffa9b wrong: got 0,99 EB, expected 0.99 EB string.c:610: Test failed: Formatted 0000ff94e wrong: got 1.023 KB, expected 1,023 KB string.c:610: Test failed: Formatted 03e7ffa9b wrong: got 1.023.999 KB, expected 1,023,999 KB string.c:610: Test failed: Formatted 03fffffcf wrong: got 1.048.576 KB, expected 1,048,576 KB string.c:610: Test failed: Formatted f9fffff94e wrong: got 1.048.575.999 KB, expected 1,048,575,999 KB string.c:610: Test failed: Formatted fffffffa9b wrong: got 1.073.741.823 KB, expected 1,073,741,823 KB string.c:610: Test failed: Formatted 3e7fffffffa9b wrong: got 1.073.741.823.999 KB, expected 1,073,741,823,999 KB string.c:610: Test failed: Formatted 3fffffffffbe8 wrong: got 1.099.511.627.775 KB, expected 1,099,511,627,775 KB string.c:610: Test failed: Formatted f9ffffffffffd35 wrong: got 1.099.511.627.776.000 KB, expected 1,099,511,627,776,000 KB string.c:610: Test failed: Formatted ffffffffffffa9b wrong: got 1.125.899.906.842.623 KB, expected 1,125,899,906,842,623 KB string.c:587: Test failed: Formatted 0000ff94e wrong: got 1.023 KB, expected 1,023 KB string.c:587: Test failed: Formatted 03e7ffa9b wrong: got 1.023.999 KB, expected 1,023,999 KB string.c:587: Test failed: Formatted 03fffffcf wrong: got 1.048.576 KB, expected 1,048,576 KB string.c:587: Test failed: Formatted f9fffff94e wrong: got 1.048.575.999 KB, expected 1,048,575,999 KB string.c:587: Test failed: Formatted fffffffa9b wrong: got 1.073.741.823 KB, expected 1,073,741,823 KB string.c:587: Test failed: Formatted 3e7fffffffa9b wrong: got 1.073.741.823.999 KB, expected 1,073,741,823,999 KB string.c:587: Test failed: Formatted 3fffffffffbe8 wrong: got 1.099.511.627.775 KB, expected 1,099,511,627,775 KB string.c:587: Test failed: Formatted f9ffffffffffd35 wrong: got 1.099.511.627.776.000 KB, expected 1,099,511,627,776,000 KB string.c:587: Test failed: Formatted ffffffffffffa9b wrong: got 1.125.899.906.842.623 KB, expected 1,125,899,906,842,623 KB

Sept. 13, 2011

Re: [1/3] msxml3: Add xmlparser interfaces

by Francois Gouget

On Mon, 12 Sep 2011, Alistair Leslie-Hughes wrote: [...] > It shouldn't be a problem, this is the only place you can get a > reference to these interfaces. It appears that once these interfaces > were Deprecated they where removed from the SDK for msxml. See MSDN to > show that they now deprecated, and they aren't just for Mobile > Devices. > http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms757816%28VS.85%29.aspx > > It was part of the msxml3 at some point on windows, see bug > http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=5841 I could not find an xmlparser* file (case insensitive) in any of the following Windows SDKs: Visual C++ 6.0 Visual C++ 2005 Visual C++ 2008 Windows 003sp2 SDK 2006/03/15 Longhorn SDK 6.0.6001.16500.72 2007/04/25 Windows Vista SDK 6.0.6001.18000.367 2008/02/05 Windows 7 SDK 7.1 2010/05/19 So I'm not sure xmlparser.idl and xmlparser.h should be in the include directory. -- Francois Gouget <fgouget(a)free.fr> http://fgouget.free.fr/ If it stinks, it's chemistry. If it moves, it's biology. If it does not work, it's computer science.

Sept. 13, 2011

Re: [2/3] dinput: Prevent apps from hiding mouse cursor in the ConfigureDevices dialog.

by Lucas Zawacki

Is there a way of doing what I want? Would using GetCursorInfo() to discover if it's hidden, and then show it, work? 2011/9/13 Alexandre Julliard <julliard(a)winehq.org>: > Lucas Fialho Zawacki <lfzawacki(a)gmail.com> writes: > >> @@ -377,6 +377,12 @@ static INT_PTR CALLBACK ConfigureDevicesDlgProc(HWND dialog, UINT uMsg, WPARAM w >> break; >> } >> >> + case WM_ACTIVATE: >> + /* Prevent mouse cursor from disappearing inside the dialog */ >> + ShowCursor(1); >> + >> + break; > > That will screw up the cursor show count, you can receive multiple > WM_ACTIVATE. > > -- > Alexandre Julliard > julliard(a)winehq.org >

Sept. 13, 2011

Re: cmd: Use NUL/0 instead of 0x00

by Alexandre Julliard

Frédéric Delanoy <frederic.delanoy(a)gmail.com> writes: > Well IMHO '\0' clearly indicates a char value, while 0 could be an > integer (not in this obvioius example of course). > This way you've a visual indicator/differentiator with nearby integer > values assignments like "foo_integer_var = 0", and this could make the > code more readable IMO They both mean the same thing, and I don't think the extra line noise makes it more readable. But like I said, it's a matter of taste, and you can use the way you prefer in your own code; the corollary is that you can't change it in other people's code. -- Alexandre Julliard julliard(a)winehq.org

Sept. 13, 2011

Re: [2/2] shell32: Handle the directory parameter in ShellExecute functions (try 2 resend)

by Marvin

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=14201 Your paranoid android. === WNT4WSSP6 (32 bit shlexec) === shlexec.c:2242: Test failed: longPath expected 'C:\TEMP\wt1.tmp\newfolder\tmp\newfolder\tm', got 'C:\TEMP\wt1.tmp\newfolder\shell32_test.exe' === W2KPROSP4 (32 bit shlexec) === shlexec.c:2242: Test failed: longPath expected 'C:\DOCUME~1\winetest\LOCALS~1\Temp\wt1.tmp\newfolder\winetest\LOCALS~1\Temp\wt1.tmp\newfolder\winetest\LOCALS~', got 'C:\DOCUME~1\winetest\LOCALS~1\Temp\wt1.tmp\newfolder\shell32_test.exe' === WXPPROSP3 (32 bit shlexec) === shlexec.c:2242: Test failed: longPath expected 'C:\DOCUME~1\winetest\LOCALS~1\Temp\wt1.tmp\newfolder\winetest\LOCALS~1\Temp\wt1.tmp\newfolder\winetest\LOCALS~', got 'C:\DOCUME~1\winetest\LOCALS~1\Temp\wt1.tmp\newfolder\shell32_test.exe' === W2K3R2SESP2 (32 bit shlexec) === shlexec.c:2242: Test failed: longPath expected 'C:\DOCUME~1\winetest\LOCALS~1\Temp\wt1.tmp\newfolder\winetest\LOCALS~1\Temp\wt1.tmp\newfolder\winetest\LOCALS~', got 'C:\DOCUME~1\winetest\LOCALS~1\Temp\wt1.tmp\newfolder\shell32_test.exe' === WVISTAADM (32 bit shlexec) === shlexec.c:2242: Test failed: longPath expected 'C:\Users\winetest\AppData\Local\Temp\wt7926.tmp\newfolder\etest\AppData\Local\Temp\wt7926.tmp\newfolder\etest\AppData\Lo', got 'C:\Users\winetest\AppData\Local\Temp\wt7926.tmp\newfolder\shell32_test.exe' === W2K8SE (32 bit shlexec) === shlexec.c:2242: Test failed: longPath expected 'C:\Users\winetest\AppData\Local\Temp\wt4D32.tmp\newfolder\etest\AppData\Local\Temp\wt4D32.tmp\newfolder\etest\AppData\Lo', got 'C:\Users\winetest\AppData\Local\Temp\wt4D32.tmp\newfolder\shell32_test.exe' === W7PRO (32 bit shlexec) === shlexec.c:2242: Test failed: longPath expected 'C:\Users\winetest\AppData\Local\Temp\wt70C.tmp\newfolder\etest\AppData\Local\Temp\wt70C.tmp\newfolder\etest\AppData\Lo', got 'C:\Users\winetest\AppData\Local\Temp\wt70C.tmp\newfolder\shell32_test.exe' === W7PROX64 (32 bit shlexec) === shlexec.c:2242: Test failed: longPath expected 'C:\Users\winetest\AppData\Local\Temp\wt11E4.tmp\newfolder\etest\AppData\Local\Temp\wt11E4.tmp\newfolder\etest\AppData\Lo', got 'C:\Users\winetest\AppData\Local\Temp\wt11E4.tmp\newfolder\shell32_test.exe' === W7PROX64 (64 bit shlexec) === shlexec.c:2242: Test failed: longPath expected 'C:\Users\winetest\AppData\Local\Temp\wt329B.tmp\newfolder\etest\AppData\Local\Temp\wt329B.tmp\newfolder\etest\AppData\Loca', got 'C:\Users\winetest\AppData\Local\Temp\wt329B.tmp\newfolder\shell32_test64.exe'

Sept. 13, 2011

Re: [1/2] shell32/tests: Fix path comparison (try 2)

by Marvin

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=14200 Your paranoid android. === WNT4WSSP6 (32 bit shlexec) === shlexec.c:2242: Test failed: longPath expected 'C:\TEMP\wt1.tmp\newfolder\tmp\newfolder\tm', got 'C:\TEMP\wt1.tmp\newfolder\shell32_test.exe' === W2KPROSP4 (32 bit shlexec) === shlexec.c:2242: Test failed: longPath expected 'C:\DOCUME~1\winetest\LOCALS~1\Temp\wt1.tmp\newfolder\winetest\LOCALS~1\Temp\wt1.tmp\newfolder\winetest\LOCALS~', got 'C:\DOCUME~1\winetest\LOCALS~1\Temp\wt1.tmp\newfolder\shell32_test.exe' === WXPPROSP3 (32 bit shlexec) === shlexec.c:2242: Test failed: longPath expected 'C:\DOCUME~1\winetest\LOCALS~1\Temp\wt1.tmp\newfolder\winetest\LOCALS~1\Temp\wt1.tmp\newfolder\winetest\LOCALS~', got 'C:\DOCUME~1\winetest\LOCALS~1\Temp\wt1.tmp\newfolder\shell32_test.exe' === W2K3R2SESP2 (32 bit shlexec) === shlexec.c:2242: Test failed: longPath expected 'C:\DOCUME~1\winetest\LOCALS~1\Temp\wt1.tmp\newfolder\winetest\LOCALS~1\Temp\wt1.tmp\newfolder\winetest\LOCALS~', got 'C:\DOCUME~1\winetest\LOCALS~1\Temp\wt1.tmp\newfolder\shell32_test.exe' === WVISTAADM (32 bit shlexec) === shlexec.c:2242: Test failed: longPath expected 'C:\Users\winetest\AppData\Local\Temp\wtE6E8.tmp\newfolder\etest\AppData\Local\Temp\wtE6E8.tmp\newfolder\etest\AppData\Lo', got 'C:\Users\winetest\AppData\Local\Temp\wtE6E8.tmp\newfolder\shell32_test.exe' === W2K8SE (32 bit shlexec) === shlexec.c:2242: Test failed: longPath expected 'C:\Users\winetest\AppData\Local\Temp\wt7849.tmp\newfolder\etest\AppData\Local\Temp\wt7849.tmp\newfolder\etest\AppData\Lo', got 'C:\Users\winetest\AppData\Local\Temp\wt7849.tmp\newfolder\shell32_test.exe' === W7PRO (32 bit shlexec) === shlexec.c:2242: Test failed: longPath expected 'C:\Users\winetest\AppData\Local\Temp\wt6624.tmp\newfolder\etest\AppData\Local\Temp\wt6624.tmp\newfolder\etest\AppData\Lo', got 'C:\Users\winetest\AppData\Local\Temp\wt6624.tmp\newfolder\shell32_test.exe' === W7PROX64 (32 bit shlexec) === shlexec.c:2242: Test failed: longPath expected 'C:\Users\winetest\AppData\Local\Temp\wt2944.tmp\newfolder\etest\AppData\Local\Temp\wt2944.tmp\newfolder\etest\AppData\Lo', got 'C:\Users\winetest\AppData\Local\Temp\wt2944.tmp\newfolder\shell32_test.exe' === W7PROX64 (64 bit shlexec) === shlexec.c:2242: Test failed: longPath expected 'C:\Users\winetest\AppData\Local\Temp\wt188.tmp\newfolder\etest\AppData\Local\Temp\wt188.tmp\newfolder\etest\AppData\Loca', got 'C:\Users\winetest\AppData\Local\Temp\wt188.tmp\newfolder\shell32_test64.exe'

Sept. 13, 2011

Re: cmd: Use NUL/0 instead of 0x00

by Frédéric Delanoy

2011/9/13 Alexandre Julliard <julliard(a)winehq.org>: > Frédéric Delanoy <frederic.delanoy(a)gmail.com> writes: > >> @@ -374,7 +374,7 @@ void WCMD_HandleTildaModifiers(WCHAR **start, const WCHAR *forVariable, >> points to the variable just after the modifiers. Process modifiers >> in a specific order, remembering there could be duplicates */ >> modifierLen = lastModifier - firstModifier; >> - finaloutput[0] = 0x00; >> + finaloutput[0] = '\0'; > > It's mostly a matter of taste, but I don't think '\0' is better than > 0x00, it's just another complicated way of writing 0. Well IMHO '\0' clearly indicates a char value, while 0 could be an integer (not in this obvioius example of course). This way you've a visual indicator/differentiator with nearby integer values assignments like "foo_integer_var = 0", and this could make the code more readable IMO

Sept. 13, 2011

Re: audio: when is a "Resource temporarily unavailable"?

by Maarten Lankhorst

Hey, On 09/12/2011 02:14 PM, Joerg-Cyril.Hoehle(a)t-systems.com wrote: > Hi, > > Bug #28056 involving FreeBSD and OSS exhibits: > warn:oss:AudioRenderClient_ReleaseBuffer write failed: 35 (Resource temporarily unavailable) > > My own notes from times as old as wine-1.1.8 show the same error with ALSA: > err:wave:wodPlayer_WriteMaxFrags Error in writing wavehdr. Reason: Resource temporarily unavailable > > The symbolic errno constant is EAGAIN=EWOULDBLOCK. So we look at write manpage.. EAGAIN or EWOULDBLOCK The file descriptor fd refers to a socket and has been marked nonblocking (O_NONBLOCK), and the write would block. POSIX.1-2001 allows either error to be returned for this case, and does not require these constants to have the same value, so a portable appli‐ cation should check for both possibilities. > Does anybody have a suspicion when/why this happens? > - is audio simply not reliable? > - is Wine not correctly driving audio output? > - ...? > > FWIW, my test experiments outside Wine recently produced EWOULDBLOCK > once despite non-blocking mode in ALSA, when attempting to write a small > number of frames, less than period_size. > > Is this failure really temporary or would it be safer > to close or reset the audio device given such an error value? > What's your experience? > Usually: you're trying to put more data in the audio buffer than the amount that can written. Similar errors happen on alsa, when trying to write > snd_pcm_avail(); Looks like a bug to me. ~Maarten

Sept. 13, 2011

re: [2/2] msxml3: Support creating IXMLParser Interface

by Dan Kegel

test fails here? xmlparser.c:41: Test failed: IXMLParser is not available (0x80040154) make: *** [xmlparser.ok] Error 1 ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: <buildbot(a)kegel.com> Date: Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 7:45 AM Subject: Re: 78800: Subject: [2/2] msxml3: Support creating IXMLParser Interface To: dank(a)kegel.com This is an experimental automated build and test service. Please feel free to ignore this email while we work the kinks out. For more info about this message, see http://wiki.winehq.org/BuildBot The Buildbot has detected a failed build on builder runtests-default while building Wine. Full details are available at: http://buildbot.kegel.com/builders/runtests-default/builds/77 (though maybe not for long, as I'm still reinstalling the buildbot periodically while experimenting) BUILD FAILED: failed shell_3 Errors: xmlparser.c:41: Test failed: IXMLParser is not available (0x80040154) make: *** [xmlparser.ok] Error 1

Sept. 13, 2011

Re: cmd: Use NUL/0 instead of 0x00

by Alexandre Julliard

Frédéric Delanoy <frederic.delanoy(a)gmail.com> writes: > @@ -374,7 +374,7 @@ void WCMD_HandleTildaModifiers(WCHAR **start, const WCHAR *forVariable, > points to the variable just after the modifiers. Process modifiers > in a specific order, remembering there could be duplicates */ > modifierLen = lastModifier - firstModifier; > - finaloutput[0] = 0x00; > + finaloutput[0] = '\0'; It's mostly a matter of taste, but I don't think '\0' is better than 0x00, it's just another complicated way of writing 0. -- Alexandre Julliard julliard(a)winehq.org

Sept. 13, 2011

Re: [PATCH 03/22] vbscript: Added object member assignment tests

by Octavian Voicu

On Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 12:36 PM, Jacek Caban <jacek(a)codeweavers.com> wrote: +const char *debugstr_variant(const VARIANT *v) +{ ... + case VT_I2: + return wine_dbg_sprintf("{VT_I4: %d}", V_I2(v)); Should be "{VT_I2: %d}". Octavian

Sept. 13, 2011