September 2012 - Wine-Devel

Re: [PATCH 1/3] [cmd] "PATH=value" fails whereas "PATH value" works
by Marvin Sept. 4, 2012

Sept. 4, 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=21386 Your paranoid android. === WVISTAADM (32 bit) === Failure running script in VM: The specified guest user must be logged in interactively to perform this operation

2 1

Re: [1/2] gdiplus: Add some tests for scaling an image with various pixel offset modes.
by Vincent Povirk Sept. 4, 2012

Sept. 4, 2012

> match = memcmp(dst_8x1, td[i].image, sizeof(dst_8x1)) == 0; > + if (!match) > + todo_wine ok(match, "%d: data should match\n", i); > + else > ok(match, "%d: data should match\n", i); This sort of thing makes me nervous. Couldn't you do this in such a way that we'll notice if the existing tests break, like adding a todo field to the structure?

1 0

Re: d3dx9_36 [try 3]: Implement D3DXSHRotate
by Rico Schüller Sept. 4, 2012

Sept. 4, 2012

On 04.09.2012 13:19, Nozomi Kodama wrote: + FLOAT expected, in[100], out[100], ... + for (i = 0; i < 49; i++) + in[i] = i + 1.01f; I guess this belongs together. I'd like to make some suggestions, please don't take it personally. When you got a comment on a patch, read it carefully. Think about it, if it makes sens to do the change (just adding what I've said is not always the best, it just gives you a hint, that you may improve some things, the list is not always complete and different people may have different suggestions) and try to improve your patch. After you are done, read your patch. Well mistakes happen, especially when you try to get something done really fast. (1) Take you some time and read it again and see if you've done that as best as possible and if you are happy with the code you've done, then submit it. If you've found a bug don't submit, fix it and go to #1. The earlier a bug is found the cheaper is it to solve it. I hope this helps a bit and it hopefully saves you some time to get a patch in the feature accepted. Thought I'd like to thank you for your patience and hopefully I haven't annoyed you and we'll see some good quality patches in the feature from you. :-) Cheers Rico

3 4

Re: wininet: Set last error for invalid URL argument
by Marvin Sept. 4, 2012

Sept. 4, 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=21380 Your paranoid android. === W2KPROSP4 (32 bit internet) === Timeout

1 0

Re: [2/2] gdiplus: Add preliminary support for pixel offset modes.
by Vincent Povirk Sept. 4, 2012

Sept. 4, 2012

> return sample_bitmap_pixel(src_rect, bits, width, height, > - gdip_round(point->X), gdip_round(point->Y), attributes); > + point->X + pixel_offset, point->Y + pixel_offset, attributes); > + } This is going to break tiling. By removing gdip_round you're implicitly truncating the number instead of flooring, which will give you the wrong result when X or Y is negative. I suggest explicitly adding a floorf.

1 0

Re: jscript: Fixed empty cases in the end of switch statement
by Marvin Sept. 4, 2012

Sept. 4, 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=21379 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 === TEST64_W7SP1 (32 bit) === No test summary line found === W7PROX64 (64 bit) === No test summary line found === TEST64_W7SP1 (64 bit) === No test summary line found

1 0

Re: [PATCH 1/4] mshtml: Properly expose frame and iframe element's windows to scripts
by Marvin Sept. 4, 2012

Sept. 4, 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=21376 Your paranoid android. === 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 === TEST64_W7SP1 (32 bit) === No test summary line found === W7PROX64 (64 bit) === No test summary line found === TEST64_W7SP1 (64 bit) === No test summary line found

1 0

Wine Gecko 1.8-beta1
by Jacek Caban Sept. 4, 2012

Sept. 4, 2012

Hi all, It's time for another Gecko update. I've uploaded to SourceForge [1] new Gecko builds. These are based on Firefox 16 beta. Other than tons of changes inherited from Firefox and usual fixes to keep it working well for us, it brings a few visible fixes: - Proper <noscript> tag handling - Synchronous ActiveX loading - Possibility to properly call APIs requiring JSContext - Possibility to implement HTMLStyleElement::styleSheet property As usually, to test it you need the attached patch and Gecko build placed in the right place [2]. Any help with testing is appreciated! On related note, I seriously consider dropping debug builds and replace them by unstripped release build or even just a separated package containing only debug symbols for the release build. Here are my thoughts about reasoning (in random order): - People use debug build mostly to retrieve better backtraces. Unstripped builds also give that ability. - If someone really needs debug build, it's easy enough to build it himself (and that's usually a good idea anyway) - Debug builds are seriously different than release build, so it occasionally exposes different set of problems, leading to invalid assumptions. This is really something for developers rather than users. - It costs my time spent builds and tests. And I consider it a serious matter. Amount of work needed to keep Gecko relevant is constantly growing. I try to mitigate it by doing long-term improvements upstream, automating the process and improving my hardware, but that has its limits. And the time spent on Gecko maintenance (as in pure maintenance, not real improvements) costs Wine in terms of improvements I could make in this time. If someone has a reason to keep debug builds, let me know. Any comments are welcomed. Thanks, Jacek [1] http://sourceforge.net/projects/wine/files/Wine%20Gecko/1.8-beta1/ [2] http://wiki.winehq.org/Gecko

3 3

Re: d3dx9_36 [try 2]: Implement D3DXSHRotate
by Rico Schüller Sept. 4, 2012

Sept. 4, 2012

On 03.09.2012 20:59, Nozomi Kodama wrote: > Thanks Rico and Henri for your help. > > Nozomi > > > The patch looks much better now. But I have some minor things which I didn't mention last time... + ok(received_ptr == out, "order %u, Expected %p, received %p\n", order, out, received_ptr); We may write the variables all starting with upper or lower char, maybe the first word will start with a upper char and the rest with a lower char. The mixture as is looks a bit ugly, doesn't it? Please have a look at the surrounding code, but not at test_D3DXSHRotateZ. ;-) And of course only going til 7 we won't need the in/out array till 100. 49 should fit, shouldn't it? That would be reducing the time spend in the for loops, even if it's only the test... Cheers Rico

1 0

vcomp.dll, vcomp90.dll missing on testbot?
by Dan Kegel Sept. 3, 2012

Sept. 3, 2012

I'm trying to test a better set of stubs for vcomp.dll and its ilk, but those dlls don't seem to be installed on testbot. Is vcomp{,90,100}.dll not installed by default on Windows? If not, should we install it on a few of the VMs?

3 9