April 2012 - Wine-Devel - list.winehq.org

Re: [1/2] comctl32/tests: Added tests for mouse events handling (try 4)
by Marvin April 10, 2012

April 10, 2012

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=17772 Your paranoid android. === WNT4WSSP6 (32 bit treeview) === treeview.c:1892: Test failed: right click (parent): in msg 0x004e expecting id 0xfffffffb got 0xfffffff4 treeview.c:1892: Test failed: right click (parent): the msg sequence is not complete: expected 0000 - actual 004e treeview.c:1893: Test failed: right click (tree): the msg 0x000f should NOT have been sent by DefWindowProc treeview.c:1893: Test failed: right click (tree): the msg sequence is not complete: expected 0000 - actual 000f treeview.c:1900: Test failed: right drag (parent): in msg 0x004e expecting id 0xfffffe68 got 0xfffffff4 treeview.c:1900: Test failed: right drag (parent): the msg sequence is not complete: expected 0000 - actual 004e treeview.c:1901: Test failed: right drag (tree): the msg 0x000f should NOT have been sent by DefWindowProc treeview.c:1901: Test failed: right drag (tree): the msg sequence is not complete: expected 0000 - actual 000f

1 0

Re: [PATCH 1/6] msvcrt: Rewrite asctime function (try3)
by Alexandre Julliard April 10, 2012

April 10, 2012

Piotr Caban <piotr(a)codeweavers.com> writes: > + || !MSVCRT_CHECK_PMT(asctime_buf(time, mstm) != NULL)) { You don't want to use MSVCRT_CHECK_PMT this way, the error won't make sense. -- Alexandre Julliard julliard(a)winehq.org

1 0

Re: [PATCH 1/2] server: Add mechanism to retrieve the connect time of a socket (resend 2, deferred, rebased).
by Alexandre Julliard April 10, 2012

April 10, 2012

"Erich E. Hoover" <ehoover(a)mines.edu> writes: > Real Name: > Erich Hoover > > Description: > This patch implements storing the connect time of a socket for > retrieval with the SO_CONNECT_TIME socket option (part 2). > > Changelog: > server: Add mechanism to retrieve the connect time of a socket. You should make it a generic get_info request, and return the time in standard server format. -- Alexandre Julliard julliard(a)winehq.org

2 2

Re: msvcrt: Add bsearch_s implementation by reusing code and tests from ntdll (try 4)
by Alexandre Julliard April 10, 2012

April 10, 2012

André Hentschel <nerv(a)dawncrow.de> writes: > /********************************************************************* > + * bsearch_s (msvcrt.@) > + */ > +void* CDECL MSVCRT_bsearch_s(const void *key, const void *base, > + MSVCRT_size_t nmemb, MSVCRT_size_t size, > + int (__cdecl *compare)(void *, const void *, const void *), void *ctx) > +{ > + ssize_t min = 0; > + ssize_t max; > + > + if (!MSVCRT_CHECK_PMT(key != NULL) || !MSVCRT_CHECK_PMT(base != NULL) || > + !MSVCRT_CHECK_PMT(size != 0) || !MSVCRT_CHECK_PMT(compare != NULL)) > + { > + *MSVCRT__errno() = MSVCRT_EINVAL; > + return NULL; > + } > + > + if (!MSVCRT_CHECK_PMT(nmemb != 0) || !MSVCRT_CHECK_PMT(ctx != NULL)) > + { > + *MSVCRT__errno() = 0; > + return NULL; > + } That looks even more suspicious... -- Alexandre Julliard julliard(a)winehq.org

1 0

Re: [PATCH 6/6] msvcrt/tests: Added more strftime tests
by Marvin April 10, 2012

April 10, 2012

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=17760 Your paranoid android. === WNT4WSSP6 (32 bit time) === time.c:605: Test failed: errno = -559038737 time: unhandled exception c0000005 at 78013981 === W2KPROSP4 (32 bit time) === time.c:605: Test failed: errno = -559038737 time: unhandled exception c0000005 at 7801124A === WXPPROSP3 (32 bit time) === time.c:605: Test failed: errno = -559038737 time: unhandled exception c0000005 at 77C4900F === W2K3R2SESP2 (32 bit time) === time.c:605: Test failed: errno = -559038737 time: unhandled exception c0000005 at 77BD9F8B

1 0

Re: [PATCH 1/6] msvcrt: Rewrite asctime function
by Marvin April 10, 2012

April 10, 2012

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=17759 Your paranoid android. === WNT4WSSP6 (32 bit time) === time.c:646: Test failed: asctime returned time.c:647: Test failed: errno = -559038737 time.c:658: Test failed: asctime returned Wed Feb 30 02:58:41 1979 time.c:659: Test failed: errno = -559038737 === W2KPROSP4 (32 bit time) === time.c:646: Test failed: asctime returned time.c:647: Test failed: errno = -559038737 time.c:658: Test failed: asctime returned Wed Feb 30 02:58:41 1979 time.c:659: Test failed: errno = -559038737 === WXPPROSP3 (32 bit time) === time.c:646: Test failed: asctime returned time.c:647: Test failed: errno = -559038737 time.c:658: Test failed: asctime returned Wed Feb 30 02:58:41 1979 time.c:659: Test failed: errno = -559038737 === W2K3R2SESP2 (32 bit time) === time.c:646: Test failed: asctime returned time.c:647: Test failed: errno = -559038737 time.c:658: Test failed: asctime returned Wed Feb 30 02:58:41 1979 time.c:659: Test failed: errno = -559038737

1 0

'Pending' patches state
by Dmitry Timoshkov April 10, 2012

April 10, 2012

Hello, http://source.winehq.org/patches has the following legend for the Pending patch status: Pending * The patch is not obviously correct at first glance. Making a more convincing argument, preferably in the form of a test case, may help. * Waiting for feedback from the main developer in that area. It's very confusing, and absolutely not clear what is required from the patch submitter, especially since *there is no any feedback on the patch*. 'Rejected' at least requies some sort of feedback, while 'Pending' doesn't. To me 'Pending' looks like a silent case of 'Reject', but without any obligation to explain why. I find myself on somewhat shaky ground when I see a bunch of my patches in the pending state, especially if they already contain the tests and main developer in the area I'm changing is Alexandre :). Is it possible to get at least some feedback for pending patches? Pretty please? -- Dmitry.

6 13

RFC: KUSER_SHARED_DATA update patch to fix bug 29168
by Joey Yandle April 10, 2012

April 10, 2012

Hi everybody, As originally discovered by Carsten Juttner, Star Wars: The Old Republic uses the time values in KUSER_SHARED_DATA to trigger network send buffers. wine does not currently update these values, so TOR does not make it past an initial server handshake. I'm attaching my current patch which fixes this. It updates the values every 15600000 nanoseconds as does Windows 7, and presumably all Windows versions. The words of the timers are written in the correct order for applications to detect clock tick. It uses a separate thread which does nothing else; a previous attempt at an NtTimer based solution did not work, presumably due to irregularity in the exact callback times. Attempts at setting thread priority were also abandoned after many people were unable to run the code. The patch does not check the return code of nanosleep; I could add code to nanosleep again for the remaining time in the case of an interrupt, but didn't think it was necessary. I could also change it to use clock_nanosleep, which would allow for more absolute timing. Please let me know what you think. cheers, Joey

9 34

Re: [PATCH 2/2] wininet/tests: Added checks for bad return values and skip tests when it happens. (try 2)
by Alexandre Julliard April 9, 2012

April 9, 2012

Morten Rønne <morten.roenne(a)tdcadsl.dk> writes: > diff --git a/dlls/wininet/tests/urlcache.c b/dlls/wininet/tests/urlcache.c > index 02d8d28..1bf3f23 100644 > --- a/dlls/wininet/tests/urlcache.c > +++ b/dlls/wininet/tests/urlcache.c > @@ -60,7 +60,20 @@ static void test_find_url_cache_entriesA(void) > hEnumHandle = FindFirstUrlCacheEntry(NULL, NULL, &cbCacheEntryInfo); > ok(!hEnumHandle, "FindFirstUrlCacheEntry should have failed\n"); > ok(GetLastError() == ERROR_INSUFFICIENT_BUFFER, "FindFirstUrlCacheEntry should have set last error to ERROR_INSUFFICIENT_BUFFER instead of %d\n", GetLastError()); > + if (GetLastError() != ERROR_INSUFFICIENT_BUFFER) > + { > + skip("Find*UrlCacheEntry tests skipped, due to wrong return value\n"); > + return; > + } You don't need to add skip() for that sort of thing, it's not supposed to happen, and if it does there will already be a test failure in the report. -- Alexandre Julliard julliard(a)winehq.org

2 2

Re: [1/3] shell32: Add test for GetCurrentProcessExplicitAppUserModelID.
by Alexandre Julliard April 9, 2012

April 9, 2012

Vincent Povirk <madewokherd(a)gmail.com> writes: > @@ -3,6 +3,7 @@ IMPORTS = shell32 ole32 oleaut32 user32 advapi32 > > C_SRCS = \ > appbar.c \ > + appusermodel.c \ > assoc.c \ > autocomplete.c \ > brsfolder.c \ I don't think you need a new file for that. -- Alexandre Julliard julliard(a)winehq.org

2 1