August 2022 - Wine-Devel - list.winehq.org

Re: [PATCH 1/5] d3d8/tests: Expand tests for valid pools in UpdateTexture().
by Marvin Aug. 3, 2022

Aug. 3, 2022

Hi, It looks like your patch introduced the new failures shown below. Please investigate and fix them before resubmitting your patch. If they are not new, fixing them anyway would help a lot. Otherwise please ask for the known failures list to be updated. The tests also ran into some preexisting test failures. If you know how to fix them that would be helpful. See the TestBot job for the details: The full results can be found at: https://testbot.winehq.org/JobDetails.pl?Key=120465 Your paranoid android. === w1064v1507 (32 bit report) === d3d8: device.c:10825: Test failed: Adapter 0: SetForegroundWindow failed, error 0. === w1064v1809 (32 bit report) === d3d8: device.c:10825: Test failed: Adapter 0: SetForegroundWindow failed, error 0. === w10pro64 (32 bit report) === d3d8: device.c:10825: Test failed: Adapter 0: SetForegroundWindow failed, error 0. === debian11 (32 bit report) === d3d8: Unhandled exception: page fault on read access to 0x007b1000 in 32-bit code (0x714b859f). === debian11 (32 bit German report) === d3d8: Unhandled exception: page fault on read access to 0x002f0010 in 32-bit code (0x714b859f). === debian11 (32 bit French report) === d3d8: Unhandled exception: page fault on read access to 0x002f0010 in 32-bit code (0x714b859f). === debian11 (32 bit Chinese:China report) === d3d8: Unhandled exception: page fault on read access to 0x002f0010 in 32-bit code (0x714b859f). === debian11 (64 bit WoW report) === d3d8: Unhandled exception: page fault on read access to 0xffffffffffffffff in 64-bit code (0x000000712b2dce).

1 0

Re: [PATCH 2/3] dlls/urlmon/tests: Don't use read as a global variable.
by Marvin Aug. 3, 2022

Aug. 3, 2022

Hi, It looks like your patch introduced the new failures shown below. Please investigate and fix them before resubmitting your patch. If they are not new, fixing them anyway would help a lot. Otherwise please ask for the known failures list to be updated. The tests also ran into some preexisting test failures. If you know how to fix them that would be helpful. See the TestBot job for the details: The full results can be found at: https://testbot.winehq.org/JobDetails.pl?Key=120438 Your paranoid android. === w1064v1507 (32 bit report) === urlmon: url.c:1466: Test failed: progress 65: status = 200 === w1064v1507 (64 bit report) === urlmon: url.c:1466: Test failed: progress 65: status = 200 === w1064_adm (64 bit report) === urlmon: url.c:1466: Test failed: progress 1: status = 200 url.c:1466: Test failed: progress 2: status = 200 === debian11 (32 bit report) === urlmon: url.c:1654: Test failed: unexpected call OnProgress_CONNECTING url.c:1466: Test failed: progress 2: status = 302

1 0

Re: [PATCH 7/7] win32u: Move display placement logic out of graphics drivers.
by Marvin Aug. 3, 2022

Aug. 3, 2022

Hi, It looks like your patch introduced the new failures shown below. Please investigate and fix them before resubmitting your patch. If they are not new, fixing them anyway would help a lot. Otherwise please ask for the known failures list to be updated. The full results can be found at: https://testbot.winehq.org/JobDetails.pl?Key=120436 Your paranoid android. === debian11 (build log) === error: patch failed: dlls/winex11.drv/display.c:784 error: patch failed: dlls/winex11.drv/display.c:498 error: patch failed: dlls/winex11.drv/display.c:390 Task: Patch failed to apply === debian11 (build log) === error: patch failed: dlls/winex11.drv/display.c:784 error: patch failed: dlls/winex11.drv/display.c:498 error: patch failed: dlls/winex11.drv/display.c:390 Task: Patch failed to apply

1 0

Re: [PATCH 6/7] win32u: Use current mode position if desired mode doesn't specify it.
by Marvin Aug. 3, 2022

Aug. 3, 2022

Hi, It looks like your patch introduced the new failures shown below. Please investigate and fix them before resubmitting your patch. If they are not new, fixing them anyway would help a lot. Otherwise please ask for the known failures list to be updated. The full results can be found at: https://testbot.winehq.org/JobDetails.pl?Key=120435 Your paranoid android. === debian11 (build log) === error: patch failed: dlls/winex11.drv/display.c:784 error: patch failed: dlls/winex11.drv/display.c:498 Task: Patch failed to apply === debian11 (build log) === error: patch failed: dlls/winex11.drv/display.c:784 error: patch failed: dlls/winex11.drv/display.c:498 Task: Patch failed to apply

1 0

Re: [PATCH 5/7] win32u: Validate NtUserChangeDisplaySettings mode against available modes.
by Marvin Aug. 3, 2022

Aug. 3, 2022

Hi, It looks like your patch introduced the new failures shown below. Please investigate and fix them before resubmitting your patch. If they are not new, fixing them anyway would help a lot. Otherwise please ask for the known failures list to be updated. The full results can be found at: https://testbot.winehq.org/JobDetails.pl?Key=120434 Your paranoid android. === debian11 (build log) === error: patch failed: dlls/winex11.drv/display.c:784 Task: Patch failed to apply === debian11 (build log) === error: patch failed: dlls/winex11.drv/display.c:784 Task: Patch failed to apply

1 0

Re: [PATCH 6/6] mf: Propagate missing attributes to downstream media types.
by Marvin Aug. 3, 2022

Aug. 3, 2022

Hi, It looks like your patch introduced the new failures shown below. Please investigate and fix them before resubmitting your patch. If they are not new, fixing them anyway would help a lot. Otherwise please ask for the known failures list to be updated. The full results can be found at: https://testbot.winehq.org/JobDetails.pl?Key=120429 Your paranoid android. === build (build log) === error: corrupt patch at line 38 Task: Patch failed to apply === debian11 (build log) === error: corrupt patch at line 38 Task: Patch failed to apply === debian11 (build log) === error: corrupt patch at line 38 Task: Patch failed to apply

1 0

Re: [PATCH 5/6] mf: Use the MFT_CATEGORY_VIDEO_PROCESSOR category for converters.
by Marvin Aug. 3, 2022

Aug. 3, 2022

Hi, It looks like your patch introduced the new failures shown below. Please investigate and fix them before resubmitting your patch. If they are not new, fixing them anyway would help a lot. Otherwise please ask for the known failures list to be updated. The full results can be found at: https://testbot.winehq.org/JobDetails.pl?Key=120428 Your paranoid android. === build (build log) === error: corrupt patch at line 38 Task: Patch failed to apply === debian11 (build log) === error: corrupt patch at line 38 Task: Patch failed to apply === debian11 (build log) === error: corrupt patch at line 38 Task: Patch failed to apply

1 0

Re: [PATCH 4/6] winegstreamer: Better implement Video Processor MFT.
by Marvin Aug. 3, 2022

Aug. 3, 2022

Hi, It looks like your patch introduced the new failures shown below. Please investigate and fix them before resubmitting your patch. If they are not new, fixing them anyway would help a lot. Otherwise please ask for the known failures list to be updated. The full results can be found at: https://testbot.winehq.org/JobDetails.pl?Key=120427 Your paranoid android. === build (build log) === error: corrupt patch at line 38 Task: Patch failed to apply === debian11 (build log) === error: corrupt patch at line 38 Task: Patch failed to apply === debian11 (build log) === error: corrupt patch at line 38 Task: Patch failed to apply

1 0

Re: [PATCH 3/6] mf/tests: Add topology loader tests with video formats.
by Marvin Aug. 3, 2022

Aug. 3, 2022

Hi, It looks like your patch introduced the new failures shown below. Please investigate and fix them before resubmitting your patch. If they are not new, fixing them anyway would help a lot. Otherwise please ask for the known failures list to be updated. The full results can be found at: https://testbot.winehq.org/JobDetails.pl?Key=120426 Your paranoid android. === build (build log) === error: corrupt patch at line 38 Task: Patch failed to apply === debian11 (build log) === error: corrupt patch at line 38 Task: Patch failed to apply === debian11 (build log) === error: corrupt patch at line 38 Task: Patch failed to apply

1 0

Re: [PATCH 2/6] mf/tests: Add video processor conversion tests.
by Marvin Aug. 3, 2022

Aug. 3, 2022

Hi, It looks like your patch introduced the new failures shown below. Please investigate and fix them before resubmitting your patch. If they are not new, fixing them anyway would help a lot. Otherwise please ask for the known failures list to be updated. The full results can be found at: https://testbot.winehq.org/JobDetails.pl?Key=120425 Your paranoid android. === build (build log) === error: corrupt patch at line 38 Task: Patch failed to apply === debian11 (build log) === error: corrupt patch at line 38 Task: Patch failed to apply === debian11 (build log) === error: corrupt patch at line 38 Task: Patch failed to apply

1 0

Re: [PATCH 1/6] mf/tests: Rotate test videos 90° to better show vertical flips.
by Marvin Aug. 3, 2022

Aug. 3, 2022

Hi, It looks like your patch introduced the new failures shown below. Please investigate and fix them before resubmitting your patch. If they are not new, fixing them anyway would help a lot. Otherwise please ask for the known failures list to be updated. The full results can be found at: https://testbot.winehq.org/JobDetails.pl?Key=120424 Your paranoid android. === build (build log) === error: corrupt patch at line 38 Task: Patch failed to apply === debian11 (build log) === error: corrupt patch at line 38 Task: Patch failed to apply === debian11 (build log) === error: corrupt patch at line 38 Task: Patch failed to apply

1 0

Re: [PATCH v15 1/1] cabinet/tests: add tests for DllGetVersion & GetDllVersion expect both functions to fail in wine as a) D
by Marvin Aug. 2, 2022

Aug. 2, 2022

Hi, It looks like your patch introduced the new failures shown below. Please investigate and fix them before resubmitting your patch. If they are not new, fixing them anyway would help a lot. Otherwise please ask for the known failures list to be updated. The full results can be found at: https://testbot.winehq.org/JobDetails.pl?Key=120358 Your paranoid android. === debian11 (32 bit report) === cabinet: version.c:67: Test succeeded inside todo block: Function GetDllVersion in DLL not found: Error = 203. Unhandled exception: unimplemented function cabinet.dll.GetDllVersion called in 32-bit code (0x7b0122f6). === debian11 (32 bit Arabic:Morocco report) === cabinet: version.c:67: Test succeeded inside todo block: Function GetDllVersion in DLL not found: Error = 203. Unhandled exception: unimplemented function cabinet.dll.GetDllVersion called in 32-bit code (0x7b0122f6). === debian11 (32 bit German report) === cabinet: version.c:67: Test succeeded inside todo block: Function GetDllVersion in DLL not found: Error = 203. Unhandled exception: unimplemented function cabinet.dll.GetDllVersion called in 32-bit code (0x7b0122f6). === debian11 (32 bit French report) === cabinet: version.c:67: Test succeeded inside todo block: Function GetDllVersion in DLL not found: Error = 203. Unhandled exception: unimplemented function cabinet.dll.GetDllVersion called in 32-bit code (0x7b0122f6). === debian11 (32 bit Hebrew:Israel report) === cabinet: version.c:67: Test succeeded inside todo block: Function GetDllVersion in DLL not found: Error = 203. Unhandled exception: unimplemented function cabinet.dll.GetDllVersion called in 32-bit code (0x7b0122f6). === debian11 (32 bit Hindi:India report) === cabinet: version.c:67: Test succeeded inside todo block: Function GetDllVersion in DLL not found: Error = 203. Unhandled exception: unimplemented function cabinet.dll.GetDllVersion called in 32-bit code (0x7b0122f6). === debian11 (32 bit Japanese:Japan report) === cabinet: version.c:67: Test succeeded inside todo block: Function GetDllVersion in DLL not found: Error = 203. Unhandled exception: unimplemented function cabinet.dll.GetDllVersion called in 32-bit code (0x7b0122f6). === debian11 (32 bit Chinese:China report) === cabinet: version.c:67: Test succeeded inside todo block: Function GetDllVersion in DLL not found: Error = 203. Unhandled exception: unimplemented function cabinet.dll.GetDllVersion called in 32-bit code (0x7b0122f6). === debian11 (32 bit WoW report) === cabinet: version.c:67: Test succeeded inside todo block: Function GetDllVersion in DLL not found: Error = 203. Unhandled exception: unimplemented function cabinet.dll.GetDllVersion called in 32-bit code (0x7b0122f6). === debian11 (64 bit WoW report) === cabinet: version.c:67: Test succeeded inside todo block: Function GetDllVersion in DLL not found: Error = 203. Unhandled exception: unimplemented function cabinet.dll.GetDllVersion called in 64-bit code (0x0000007b0138ae).

1 0

Re: [PATCH v14 1/1] cabinet/tests: add tests for DllGetVersion & GetDllVersion expect both functions to fail in wine as a) D
by Marvin Aug. 2, 2022

Aug. 2, 2022

Hi, It looks like your patch introduced the new failures shown below. Please investigate and fix them before resubmitting your patch. If they are not new, fixing them anyway would help a lot. Otherwise please ask for the known failures list to be updated. The full results can be found at: https://testbot.winehq.org/JobDetails.pl?Key=120357 Your paranoid android. === debian11 (32 bit report) === cabinet: version.c:67: Test succeeded inside todo block: Function GetDllVersion in DLL not found: Error = 203. Unhandled exception: unimplemented function cabinet.dll.GetDllVersion called in 32-bit code (0x7b0122f6). === debian11 (32 bit Arabic:Morocco report) === cabinet: version.c:67: Test succeeded inside todo block: Function GetDllVersion in DLL not found: Error = 203. Unhandled exception: unimplemented function cabinet.dll.GetDllVersion called in 32-bit code (0x7b0122f6). === debian11 (32 bit German report) === cabinet: version.c:67: Test succeeded inside todo block: Function GetDllVersion in DLL not found: Error = 203. Unhandled exception: unimplemented function cabinet.dll.GetDllVersion called in 32-bit code (0x7b0122f6). === debian11 (32 bit French report) === cabinet: version.c:67: Test succeeded inside todo block: Function GetDllVersion in DLL not found: Error = 203. Unhandled exception: unimplemented function cabinet.dll.GetDllVersion called in 32-bit code (0x7b0122f6). === debian11 (32 bit Hebrew:Israel report) === cabinet: version.c:67: Test succeeded inside todo block: Function GetDllVersion in DLL not found: Error = 203. Unhandled exception: unimplemented function cabinet.dll.GetDllVersion called in 32-bit code (0x7b0122f6). === debian11 (32 bit Hindi:India report) === cabinet: version.c:67: Test succeeded inside todo block: Function GetDllVersion in DLL not found: Error = 203. Unhandled exception: unimplemented function cabinet.dll.GetDllVersion called in 32-bit code (0x7b0122f6). === debian11 (32 bit Japanese:Japan report) === cabinet: version.c:67: Test succeeded inside todo block: Function GetDllVersion in DLL not found: Error = 203. Unhandled exception: unimplemented function cabinet.dll.GetDllVersion called in 32-bit code (0x7b0122f6). === debian11 (32 bit Chinese:China report) === cabinet: version.c:67: Test succeeded inside todo block: Function GetDllVersion in DLL not found: Error = 203. Unhandled exception: unimplemented function cabinet.dll.GetDllVersion called in 32-bit code (0x7b0122f6). === debian11 (32 bit WoW report) === cabinet: version.c:67: Test succeeded inside todo block: Function GetDllVersion in DLL not found: Error = 203. Unhandled exception: unimplemented function cabinet.dll.GetDllVersion called in 32-bit code (0x7b0122f6). === debian11 (64 bit WoW report) === cabinet: version.c:67: Test succeeded inside todo block: Function GetDllVersion in DLL not found: Error = 203. Unhandled exception: unimplemented function cabinet.dll.GetDllVersion called in 64-bit code (0x0000007b0138ae).

1 0

Re: [PATCH v12 1/1] cabinet/tests: add tests for DllGetVersion & GetDllVersion expect both functions to fail in wine as a) D
by Marvin Aug. 2, 2022

Aug. 2, 2022

Hi, It looks like your patch introduced the new failures shown below. Please investigate and fix them before resubmitting your patch. If they are not new, fixing them anyway would help a lot. Otherwise please ask for the known failures list to be updated. The full results can be found at: https://testbot.winehq.org/JobDetails.pl?Key=120356 Your paranoid android. === debian11 (32 bit report) === cabinet: version.c:67: Test succeeded inside todo block: Function GetDllVersion in DLL not found: Error = 203. Unhandled exception: unimplemented function cabinet.dll.GetDllVersion called in 32-bit code (0x7b0122f6). === debian11 (32 bit Arabic:Morocco report) === cabinet: version.c:67: Test succeeded inside todo block: Function GetDllVersion in DLL not found: Error = 203. Unhandled exception: unimplemented function cabinet.dll.GetDllVersion called in 32-bit code (0x7b0122f6). === debian11 (32 bit German report) === cabinet: version.c:67: Test succeeded inside todo block: Function GetDllVersion in DLL not found: Error = 203. Unhandled exception: unimplemented function cabinet.dll.GetDllVersion called in 32-bit code (0x7b0122f6). === debian11 (32 bit French report) === cabinet: version.c:67: Test succeeded inside todo block: Function GetDllVersion in DLL not found: Error = 203. Unhandled exception: unimplemented function cabinet.dll.GetDllVersion called in 32-bit code (0x7b0122f6). === debian11 (32 bit Hebrew:Israel report) === cabinet: version.c:67: Test succeeded inside todo block: Function GetDllVersion in DLL not found: Error = 203. Unhandled exception: unimplemented function cabinet.dll.GetDllVersion called in 32-bit code (0x7b0122f6). === debian11 (32 bit Hindi:India report) === cabinet: version.c:67: Test succeeded inside todo block: Function GetDllVersion in DLL not found: Error = 203. Unhandled exception: unimplemented function cabinet.dll.GetDllVersion called in 32-bit code (0x7b0122f6). === debian11 (32 bit Japanese:Japan report) === cabinet: version.c:67: Test succeeded inside todo block: Function GetDllVersion in DLL not found: Error = 203. Unhandled exception: unimplemented function cabinet.dll.GetDllVersion called in 32-bit code (0x7b0122f6). === debian11 (32 bit Chinese:China report) === cabinet: version.c:67: Test succeeded inside todo block: Function GetDllVersion in DLL not found: Error = 203. Unhandled exception: unimplemented function cabinet.dll.GetDllVersion called in 32-bit code (0x7b0122f6). === debian11 (32 bit WoW report) === cabinet: version.c:67: Test succeeded inside todo block: Function GetDllVersion in DLL not found: Error = 203. Unhandled exception: unimplemented function cabinet.dll.GetDllVersion called in 32-bit code (0x7b0122f6). === debian11 (64 bit WoW report) === cabinet: version.c:67: Test succeeded inside todo block: Function GetDllVersion in DLL not found: Error = 203. Unhandled exception: unimplemented function cabinet.dll.GetDllVersion called in 64-bit code (0x0000007b0138ae).

1 0

Re: [PATCH v11 1/1] cabinet/tests: add tests for DllGetVersion & GetDllVersion expect both functions to fail in wine as a) D
by Marvin Aug. 2, 2022

Aug. 2, 2022

Hi, It looks like your patch introduced the new failures shown below. Please investigate and fix them before resubmitting your patch. If they are not new, fixing them anyway would help a lot. Otherwise please ask for the known failures list to be updated. The full results can be found at: https://testbot.winehq.org/JobDetails.pl?Key=120355 Your paranoid android. === w7u_2qxl (32 bit report) === cabinet: version.c:57: Test failed: Cabinet struct doesn't contain correct version: Error = 203. === w7u_adm (32 bit report) === cabinet: version.c:57: Test failed: Cabinet struct doesn't contain correct version: Error = 203. === w7u_el (32 bit report) === cabinet: version.c:57: Test failed: Cabinet struct doesn't contain correct version: Error = 203. === w8 (32 bit report) === cabinet: version.c:57: Test failed: Cabinet struct doesn't contain correct version: Error = 203. === w8adm (32 bit report) === cabinet: version.c:57: Test failed: Cabinet struct doesn't contain correct version: Error = 203. === w864 (32 bit report) === cabinet: version.c:57: Test failed: Cabinet struct doesn't contain correct version: Error = 203. === w1064v1507 (32 bit report) === cabinet: version.c:57: Test failed: Cabinet struct doesn't contain correct version: Error = 203. === w1064v1809 (32 bit report) === cabinet: version.c:57: Test failed: Cabinet struct doesn't contain correct version: Error = 203. === w1064 (32 bit report) === cabinet: version.c:57: Test failed: Cabinet struct doesn't contain correct version: Error = 203. === w1064_tsign (32 bit report) === cabinet: version.c:57: Test failed: Cabinet struct doesn't contain correct version: Error = 203. === w10pro64 (32 bit report) === cabinet: version.c:57: Test failed: Cabinet struct doesn't contain correct version: Error = 203. === w864 (64 bit report) === cabinet: version.c:57: Test failed: Cabinet struct doesn't contain correct version: Error = 203. === w1064v1507 (64 bit report) === cabinet: version.c:57: Test failed: Cabinet struct doesn't contain correct version: Error = 203. === w1064v1809 (64 bit report) === cabinet: version.c:57: Test failed: Cabinet struct doesn't contain correct version: Error = 203. === w1064 (64 bit report) === cabinet: version.c:57: Test failed: Cabinet struct doesn't contain correct version: Error = 203. === w1064_2qxl (64 bit report) === cabinet: version.c:57: Test failed: Cabinet struct doesn't contain correct version: Error = 203. === w1064_adm (64 bit report) === cabinet: version.c:57: Test failed: Cabinet struct doesn't contain correct version: Error = 203. === w1064_tsign (64 bit report) === cabinet: version.c:57: Test failed: Cabinet struct doesn't contain correct version: Error = 203. === w10pro64 (64 bit report) === cabinet: version.c:57: Test failed: Cabinet struct doesn't contain correct version: Error = 203. === w10pro64_en_AE_u8 (64 bit report) === cabinet: version.c:57: Test failed: Cabinet struct doesn't contain correct version: Error = 203. === w10pro64_ar (64 bit report) === cabinet: version.c:57: Test failed: Cabinet struct doesn't contain correct version: Error = 203. === w10pro64_ja (64 bit report) === cabinet: version.c:57: Test failed: Cabinet struct doesn't contain correct version: Error = 203. === w10pro64_zh_CN (64 bit report) === cabinet: version.c:57: Test failed: Cabinet struct doesn't contain correct version: Error = 203. === debian11 (32 bit report) === cabinet: version.c:57: Test succeeded inside todo block: Cabinet struct doesn't contain correct version: Error = 203. version.c:67: Test succeeded inside todo block: Function GetDllVersion in DLL not found: Error = 203. Unhandled exception: unimplemented function cabinet.dll.GetDllVersion called in 32-bit code (0x7b0122f6). === debian11 (32 bit Arabic:Morocco report) === cabinet: version.c:57: Test succeeded inside todo block: Cabinet struct doesn't contain correct version: Error = 203. version.c:67: Test succeeded inside todo block: Function GetDllVersion in DLL not found: Error = 203. Unhandled exception: unimplemented function cabinet.dll.GetDllVersion called in 32-bit code (0x7b0122f6). === debian11 (32 bit German report) === cabinet: version.c:57: Test succeeded inside todo block: Cabinet struct doesn't contain correct version: Error = 203. version.c:67: Test succeeded inside todo block: Function GetDllVersion in DLL not found: Error = 203. Unhandled exception: unimplemented function cabinet.dll.GetDllVersion called in 32-bit code (0x7b0122f6). === debian11 (32 bit French report) === cabinet: version.c:57: Test succeeded inside todo block: Cabinet struct doesn't contain correct version: Error = 203. version.c:67: Test succeeded inside todo block: Function GetDllVersion in DLL not found: Error = 203. Unhandled exception: unimplemented function cabinet.dll.GetDllVersion called in 32-bit code (0x7b0122f6). === debian11 (32 bit Hebrew:Israel report) === cabinet: version.c:57: Test succeeded inside todo block: Cabinet struct doesn't contain correct version: Error = 203. version.c:67: Test succeeded inside todo block: Function GetDllVersion in DLL not found: Error = 203. Unhandled exception: unimplemented function cabinet.dll.GetDllVersion called in 32-bit code (0x7b0122f6). === debian11 (32 bit Hindi:India report) === cabinet: version.c:57: Test succeeded inside todo block: Cabinet struct doesn't contain correct version: Error = 203. version.c:67: Test succeeded inside todo block: Function GetDllVersion in DLL not found: Error = 203. Unhandled exception: unimplemented function cabinet.dll.GetDllVersion called in 32-bit code (0x7b0122f6). === debian11 (32 bit Japanese:Japan report) === cabinet: version.c:57: Test succeeded inside todo block: Cabinet struct doesn't contain correct version: Error = 203. version.c:67: Test succeeded inside todo block: Function GetDllVersion in DLL not found: Error = 203. Unhandled exception: unimplemented function cabinet.dll.GetDllVersion called in 32-bit code (0x7b0122f6). === debian11 (32 bit Chinese:China report) === cabinet: version.c:57: Test succeeded inside todo block: Cabinet struct doesn't contain correct version: Error = 203. version.c:67: Test succeeded inside todo block: Function GetDllVersion in DLL not found: Error = 203. Unhandled exception: unimplemented function cabinet.dll.GetDllVersion called in 32-bit code (0x7b0122f6). === debian11 (32 bit WoW report) === cabinet: version.c:57: Test succeeded inside todo block: Cabinet struct doesn't contain correct version: Error = 203. version.c:67: Test succeeded inside todo block: Function GetDllVersion in DLL not found: Error = 203. Unhandled exception: unimplemented function cabinet.dll.GetDllVersion called in 32-bit code (0x7b0122f6). === debian11 (64 bit WoW report) === cabinet: version.c:57: Test succeeded inside todo block: Cabinet struct doesn't contain correct version: Error = 203. version.c:67: Test succeeded inside todo block: Function GetDllVersion in DLL not found: Error = 203. Unhandled exception: unimplemented function cabinet.dll.GetDllVersion called in 64-bit code (0x0000007b0138ae).

1 0

Re: [PATCH v10 1/1] cabinet/tests: add tests for DllGetVersion & GetDllVersion expect both functions to fail in wine as a) D
by Marvin Aug. 2, 2022

Aug. 2, 2022

Hi, It looks like your patch introduced the new failures shown below. Please investigate and fix them before resubmitting your patch. If they are not new, fixing them anyway would help a lot. Otherwise please ask for the known failures list to be updated. The full results can be found at: https://testbot.winehq.org/JobDetails.pl?Key=120354 Your paranoid android. === w7u_2qxl (32 bit report) === cabinet: version.c:57: Test failed: Cabinet struct doesn't contain correct version: Error = 203. === w7u_adm (32 bit report) === cabinet: version.c:57: Test failed: Cabinet struct doesn't contain correct version: Error = 203. === w7u_el (32 bit report) === cabinet: version.c:57: Test failed: Cabinet struct doesn't contain correct version: Error = 203. === w8 (32 bit report) === cabinet: version.c:57: Test failed: Cabinet struct doesn't contain correct version: Error = 203. === w8adm (32 bit report) === cabinet: version.c:57: Test failed: Cabinet struct doesn't contain correct version: Error = 203. === w864 (32 bit report) === cabinet: version.c:57: Test failed: Cabinet struct doesn't contain correct version: Error = 203. === w1064v1507 (32 bit report) === cabinet: version.c:57: Test failed: Cabinet struct doesn't contain correct version: Error = 203. === w1064v1809 (32 bit report) === cabinet: version.c:57: Test failed: Cabinet struct doesn't contain correct version: Error = 203. === w1064 (32 bit report) === cabinet: version.c:57: Test failed: Cabinet struct doesn't contain correct version: Error = 203. === w1064_tsign (32 bit report) === cabinet: version.c:57: Test failed: Cabinet struct doesn't contain correct version: Error = 203. === w10pro64 (32 bit report) === cabinet: version.c:57: Test failed: Cabinet struct doesn't contain correct version: Error = 203. === w864 (64 bit report) === cabinet: version.c:57: Test failed: Cabinet struct doesn't contain correct version: Error = 203. === w1064v1507 (64 bit report) === cabinet: version.c:57: Test failed: Cabinet struct doesn't contain correct version: Error = 203. === w1064v1809 (64 bit report) === cabinet: version.c:57: Test failed: Cabinet struct doesn't contain correct version: Error = 203. === w1064 (64 bit report) === cabinet: version.c:57: Test failed: Cabinet struct doesn't contain correct version: Error = 203. === w1064_2qxl (64 bit report) === cabinet: version.c:57: Test failed: Cabinet struct doesn't contain correct version: Error = 203. === w1064_adm (64 bit report) === cabinet: version.c:57: Test failed: Cabinet struct doesn't contain correct version: Error = 203. === w1064_tsign (64 bit report) === cabinet: version.c:57: Test failed: Cabinet struct doesn't contain correct version: Error = 203. === w10pro64 (64 bit report) === cabinet: version.c:57: Test failed: Cabinet struct doesn't contain correct version: Error = 203. === w10pro64_en_AE_u8 (64 bit report) === cabinet: version.c:57: Test failed: Cabinet struct doesn't contain correct version: Error = 203. === w10pro64_ar (64 bit report) === cabinet: version.c:57: Test failed: Cabinet struct doesn't contain correct version: Error = 203. === w10pro64_ja (64 bit report) === cabinet: version.c:57: Test failed: Cabinet struct doesn't contain correct version: Error = 203. === w10pro64_zh_CN (64 bit report) === cabinet: version.c:57: Test failed: Cabinet struct doesn't contain correct version: Error = 203. === debian11 (32 bit report) === cabinet: version.c:67: Test succeeded inside todo block: Function GetDllVersion in DLL not found: Error = 203. Unhandled exception: unimplemented function cabinet.dll.GetDllVersion called in 32-bit code (0x7b0122f6). === debian11 (32 bit Arabic:Morocco report) === cabinet: version.c:67: Test succeeded inside todo block: Function GetDllVersion in DLL not found: Error = 203. Unhandled exception: unimplemented function cabinet.dll.GetDllVersion called in 32-bit code (0x7b0122f6). === debian11 (32 bit German report) === cabinet: version.c:67: Test succeeded inside todo block: Function GetDllVersion in DLL not found: Error = 203. Unhandled exception: unimplemented function cabinet.dll.GetDllVersion called in 32-bit code (0x7b0122f6). === debian11 (32 bit French report) === cabinet: version.c:67: Test succeeded inside todo block: Function GetDllVersion in DLL not found: Error = 203. Unhandled exception: unimplemented function cabinet.dll.GetDllVersion called in 32-bit code (0x7b0122f6). === debian11 (32 bit Hebrew:Israel report) === cabinet: version.c:67: Test succeeded inside todo block: Function GetDllVersion in DLL not found: Error = 203. Unhandled exception: unimplemented function cabinet.dll.GetDllVersion called in 32-bit code (0x7b0122f6). === debian11 (32 bit Hindi:India report) === cabinet: version.c:67: Test succeeded inside todo block: Function GetDllVersion in DLL not found: Error = 203. Unhandled exception: unimplemented function cabinet.dll.GetDllVersion called in 32-bit code (0x7b0122f6). === debian11 (32 bit Japanese:Japan report) === cabinet: version.c:67: Test succeeded inside todo block: Function GetDllVersion in DLL not found: Error = 203. Unhandled exception: unimplemented function cabinet.dll.GetDllVersion called in 32-bit code (0x7b0122f6). === debian11 (32 bit Chinese:China report) === cabinet: version.c:67: Test succeeded inside todo block: Function GetDllVersion in DLL not found: Error = 203. Unhandled exception: unimplemented function cabinet.dll.GetDllVersion called in 32-bit code (0x7b0122f6). === debian11 (32 bit WoW report) === cabinet: version.c:67: Test succeeded inside todo block: Function GetDllVersion in DLL not found: Error = 203. Unhandled exception: unimplemented function cabinet.dll.GetDllVersion called in 32-bit code (0x7b0122f6). === debian11 (64 bit WoW report) === cabinet: version.c:67: Test succeeded inside todo block: Function GetDllVersion in DLL not found: Error = 203. Unhandled exception: unimplemented function cabinet.dll.GetDllVersion called in 64-bit code (0x0000007b0138ae).

1 0

Re: [PATCH v9 1/1] cabinet/tests: add tests for DllGetVersion & GetDllVersion expect both functions to fail in wine as a) Dl
by Marvin Aug. 2, 2022

Aug. 2, 2022

Hi, It looks like your patch introduced the new failures shown below. Please investigate and fix them before resubmitting your patch. If they are not new, fixing them anyway would help a lot. Otherwise please ask for the known failures list to be updated. The full results can be found at: https://testbot.winehq.org/JobDetails.pl?Key=120351 Your paranoid android. === w7u_2qxl (32 bit report) === cabinet: version.c:57: Test failed: Cabinet struct doesn't contain correct version: Error = 203. version.c:67: Test failed: Function GetDllVersion in DLL not found: Error = 127. === w7u_adm (32 bit report) === cabinet: version.c:57: Test failed: Cabinet struct doesn't contain correct version: Error = 203. version.c:67: Test failed: Function GetDllVersion in DLL not found: Error = 127. === w7u_el (32 bit report) === cabinet: version.c:57: Test failed: Cabinet struct doesn't contain correct version: Error = 203. version.c:67: Test failed: Function GetDllVersion in DLL not found: Error = 127. === w8 (32 bit report) === cabinet: version.c:57: Test failed: Cabinet struct doesn't contain correct version: Error = 203. version.c:67: Test failed: Function GetDllVersion in DLL not found: Error = 127. === w8adm (32 bit report) === cabinet: version.c:57: Test failed: Cabinet struct doesn't contain correct version: Error = 203. version.c:67: Test failed: Function GetDllVersion in DLL not found: Error = 127. === w864 (32 bit report) === cabinet: version.c:57: Test failed: Cabinet struct doesn't contain correct version: Error = 203. version.c:67: Test failed: Function GetDllVersion in DLL not found: Error = 127. === w1064v1507 (32 bit report) === cabinet: version.c:57: Test failed: Cabinet struct doesn't contain correct version: Error = 203. version.c:67: Test failed: Function GetDllVersion in DLL not found: Error = 127. === w1064v1809 (32 bit report) === cabinet: version.c:57: Test failed: Cabinet struct doesn't contain correct version: Error = 203. version.c:67: Test failed: Function GetDllVersion in DLL not found: Error = 127. === w1064 (32 bit report) === cabinet: version.c:57: Test failed: Cabinet struct doesn't contain correct version: Error = 203. version.c:67: Test failed: Function GetDllVersion in DLL not found: Error = 127. === w1064_tsign (32 bit report) === cabinet: version.c:57: Test failed: Cabinet struct doesn't contain correct version: Error = 203. version.c:67: Test failed: Function GetDllVersion in DLL not found: Error = 127. === w10pro64 (32 bit report) === cabinet: version.c:57: Test failed: Cabinet struct doesn't contain correct version: Error = 203. version.c:67: Test failed: Function GetDllVersion in DLL not found: Error = 127. === w864 (64 bit report) === cabinet: version.c:57: Test failed: Cabinet struct doesn't contain correct version: Error = 203. version.c:67: Test failed: Function GetDllVersion in DLL not found: Error = 127. === w1064v1507 (64 bit report) === cabinet: version.c:57: Test failed: Cabinet struct doesn't contain correct version: Error = 203. version.c:67: Test failed: Function GetDllVersion in DLL not found: Error = 127. === w1064v1809 (64 bit report) === cabinet: version.c:57: Test failed: Cabinet struct doesn't contain correct version: Error = 203. version.c:67: Test failed: Function GetDllVersion in DLL not found: Error = 127. === w1064 (64 bit report) === cabinet: version.c:57: Test failed: Cabinet struct doesn't contain correct version: Error = 203. version.c:67: Test failed: Function GetDllVersion in DLL not found: Error = 127. === w1064_2qxl (64 bit report) === cabinet: version.c:57: Test failed: Cabinet struct doesn't contain correct version: Error = 203. version.c:67: Test failed: Function GetDllVersion in DLL not found: Error = 127. === w1064_adm (64 bit report) === cabinet: version.c:57: Test failed: Cabinet struct doesn't contain correct version: Error = 203. version.c:67: Test failed: Function GetDllVersion in DLL not found: Error = 127. === w1064_tsign (64 bit report) === cabinet: version.c:57: Test failed: Cabinet struct doesn't contain correct version: Error = 203. version.c:67: Test failed: Function GetDllVersion in DLL not found: Error = 127. === w10pro64 (64 bit report) === cabinet: version.c:57: Test failed: Cabinet struct doesn't contain correct version: Error = 203. version.c:67: Test failed: Function GetDllVersion in DLL not found: Error = 127. === w10pro64_en_AE_u8 (64 bit report) === cabinet: version.c:57: Test failed: Cabinet struct doesn't contain correct version: Error = 203. version.c:67: Test failed: Function GetDllVersion in DLL not found: Error = 127. === w10pro64_ar (64 bit report) === cabinet: version.c:57: Test failed: Cabinet struct doesn't contain correct version: Error = 203. version.c:67: Test failed: Function GetDllVersion in DLL not found: Error = 127. === w10pro64_ja (64 bit report) === cabinet: version.c:57: Test failed: Cabinet struct doesn't contain correct version: Error = 203. version.c:67: Test failed: Function GetDllVersion in DLL not found: Error = 127. === w10pro64_zh_CN (64 bit report) === cabinet: version.c:57: Test failed: Cabinet struct doesn't contain correct version: Error = 203. version.c:67: Test failed: Function GetDllVersion in DLL not found: Error = 127.

1 0

Re: [PATCH v2 4/7] ws2_32/tests: Work around a Linux bug.
by Marvin Aug. 2, 2022

Aug. 2, 2022

Hi, It looks like your patch introduced the new failures shown below. Please investigate and fix them before resubmitting your patch. If they are not new, fixing them anyway would help a lot. Otherwise please ask for the known failures list to be updated. The full results can be found at: https://testbot.winehq.org/JobDetails.pl?Key=120345 Your paranoid android. === debian11 (32 bit report) === ws2_32: sock.c:8699: Test failed: got 0 === debian11 (32 bit Arabic:Morocco report) === ws2_32: sock.c:8699: Test failed: got 0 === debian11 (32 bit German report) === ws2_32: sock.c:8699: Test failed: got 0 === debian11 (32 bit French report) === ws2_32: sock.c:8699: Test failed: got 0 === debian11 (32 bit Hebrew:Israel report) === ws2_32: sock.c:8699: Test failed: got 0 === debian11 (32 bit Hindi:India report) === ws2_32: sock.c:8699: Test failed: got 0 === debian11 (32 bit Japanese:Japan report) === ws2_32: sock.c:8699: Test failed: got 0 === debian11 (32 bit Chinese:China report) === ws2_32: sock.c:8699: Test failed: got 0 === debian11 (32 bit WoW report) === ws2_32: sock.c:8699: Test failed: got 0 === debian11 (64 bit WoW report) === ws2_32: sock.c:8699: Test failed: got 0

1 0

Re: [PATCH v2 3/7] ws2_32/tests: Test send() after TCP reset.
by Marvin Aug. 2, 2022

Aug. 2, 2022

Hi, It looks like your patch introduced the new failures shown below. Please investigate and fix them before resubmitting your patch. If they are not new, fixing them anyway would help a lot. Otherwise please ask for the known failures list to be updated. The full results can be found at: https://testbot.winehq.org/JobDetails.pl?Key=120344 Your paranoid android. === debian11 (32 bit report) === ws2_32: sock.c:8693: Test failed: got 0 === debian11 (32 bit Arabic:Morocco report) === ws2_32: sock.c:8693: Test failed: got 0 === debian11 (32 bit German report) === ws2_32: sock.c:8693: Test failed: got 0 === debian11 (32 bit French report) === ws2_32: sock.c:8693: Test failed: got 0 === debian11 (32 bit Hebrew:Israel report) === ws2_32: sock.c:8693: Test failed: got 0 === debian11 (32 bit Hindi:India report) === ws2_32: sock.c:8693: Test failed: got 0 === debian11 (32 bit Japanese:Japan report) === ws2_32: sock.c:8693: Test failed: got 0 === debian11 (32 bit Chinese:China report) === ws2_32: sock.c:8693: Test failed: got 0 === debian11 (32 bit WoW report) === ws2_32: sock.c:8693: Test failed: got 0 === debian11 (64 bit WoW report) === ws2_32: sock.c:8693: Test failed: got 0

1 0

Re: [PATCH v2 1/7] ws2_32/tests: Test sending data to a peer is closed().
by Marvin Aug. 2, 2022

Aug. 2, 2022

Hi, It looks like your patch introduced the new failures shown below. Please investigate and fix them before resubmitting your patch. If they are not new, fixing them anyway would help a lot. Otherwise please ask for the known failures list to be updated. The full results can be found at: https://testbot.winehq.org/JobDetails.pl?Key=120342 Your paranoid android. === debian11 (32 bit report) === ws2_32: sock.c:8693: Test failed: got 0 === debian11 (32 bit Arabic:Morocco report) === ws2_32: sock.c:8693: Test failed: got 0 === debian11 (32 bit German report) === ws2_32: sock.c:8693: Test failed: got 0 === debian11 (32 bit French report) === ws2_32: sock.c:8693: Test failed: got 0 === debian11 (32 bit Hebrew:Israel report) === ws2_32: sock.c:8693: Test failed: got 0 === debian11 (32 bit Hindi:India report) === ws2_32: sock.c:8693: Test failed: got 0 === debian11 (32 bit Japanese:Japan report) === ws2_32: sock.c:8693: Test failed: got 0 === debian11 (32 bit Chinese:China report) === ws2_32: sock.c:8693: Test failed: got 0 === debian11 (32 bit WoW report) === ws2_32: sock.c:8693: Test failed: got 0 === debian11 (64 bit WoW report) === ws2_32: sock.c:8693: Test failed: got 0

1 0

Re: [PATCH v6 3/3] cabinet: Implement GetDllVersion implement GetDllVersion, use DllGetVersion as helper function to retreiv
by Marvin Aug. 1, 2022

Aug. 1, 2022

Hi, It looks like your patch introduced the new failures shown below. Please investigate and fix them before resubmitting your patch. If they are not new, fixing them anyway would help a lot. Otherwise please ask for the known failures list to be updated. The full results can be found at: https://testbot.winehq.org/JobDetails.pl?Key=120332 Your paranoid android. === debian11 (build log) === ../wine/dlls/cabinet/cabinet_main.c:58:13: error: conflicting types for ‘DllGetVersion’ Task: The win32 Wine build failed === debian11 (build log) === ../wine/dlls/cabinet/cabinet_main.c:58:13: error: conflicting types for ‘DllGetVersion’ Task: The wow64 Wine build failed

1 0

Re: [PATCH v6 2/3] cabinet: implement DllGetVersion correctly implement DllGetVersion with correct parameter and behaviour c
by Marvin Aug. 1, 2022

Aug. 1, 2022

Hi, It looks like your patch introduced the new failures shown below. Please investigate and fix them before resubmitting your patch. If they are not new, fixing them anyway would help a lot. Otherwise please ask for the known failures list to be updated. The full results can be found at: https://testbot.winehq.org/JobDetails.pl?Key=120331 Your paranoid android. === debian11 (build log) === ../wine/dlls/cabinet/cabinet_main.c:58:13: error: conflicting types for ‘DllGetVersion’ Task: The win32 Wine build failed === debian11 (build log) === ../wine/dlls/cabinet/cabinet_main.c:58:13: error: conflicting types for ‘DllGetVersion’ Task: The wow64 Wine build failed

1 0

Re: [PATCH v6 1/3] cabinet: test GetDllVersion & DllGetVersion Tests are expected to fail as: DllGetVersion isn't implemente
by Marvin Aug. 1, 2022

Aug. 1, 2022

Hi, It looks like your patch introduced the new failures shown below. Please investigate and fix them before resubmitting your patch. If they are not new, fixing them anyway would help a lot. Otherwise please ask for the known failures list to be updated. The full results can be found at: https://testbot.winehq.org/JobDetails.pl?Key=120330 Your paranoid android. === debian11 (32 bit report) === cabinet: version.c:34: Test succeeded inside todo block: Function DllGetVersion in DLL not found: Error = 203. version.c:38: Test succeeded inside todo block: Couldn't allocate memory to run tests properly! version.c:57: Test succeeded inside todo block: Cabinet struct doesn't contain correct version: Error = 203. version.c:67: Test succeeded inside todo block: Function GetDllVersion in DLL not found: Error = 203. Unhandled exception: unimplemented function cabinet.dll.GetDllVersion called in 32-bit code (0x7b0122f6). === debian11 (32 bit Arabic:Morocco report) === cabinet: version.c:34: Test succeeded inside todo block: Function DllGetVersion in DLL not found: Error = 203. version.c:38: Test succeeded inside todo block: Couldn't allocate memory to run tests properly! version.c:57: Test succeeded inside todo block: Cabinet struct doesn't contain correct version: Error = 203. version.c:67: Test succeeded inside todo block: Function GetDllVersion in DLL not found: Error = 203. Unhandled exception: unimplemented function cabinet.dll.GetDllVersion called in 32-bit code (0x7b0122f6). === debian11 (32 bit German report) === cabinet: version.c:34: Test succeeded inside todo block: Function DllGetVersion in DLL not found: Error = 203. version.c:38: Test succeeded inside todo block: Couldn't allocate memory to run tests properly! version.c:57: Test succeeded inside todo block: Cabinet struct doesn't contain correct version: Error = 203. version.c:67: Test succeeded inside todo block: Function GetDllVersion in DLL not found: Error = 203. Unhandled exception: unimplemented function cabinet.dll.GetDllVersion called in 32-bit code (0x7b0122f6). === debian11 (32 bit French report) === cabinet: version.c:34: Test succeeded inside todo block: Function DllGetVersion in DLL not found: Error = 203. version.c:38: Test succeeded inside todo block: Couldn't allocate memory to run tests properly! version.c:57: Test succeeded inside todo block: Cabinet struct doesn't contain correct version: Error = 203. version.c:67: Test succeeded inside todo block: Function GetDllVersion in DLL not found: Error = 203. Unhandled exception: unimplemented function cabinet.dll.GetDllVersion called in 32-bit code (0x7b0122f6). === debian11 (32 bit Hebrew:Israel report) === cabinet: version.c:34: Test succeeded inside todo block: Function DllGetVersion in DLL not found: Error = 203. version.c:38: Test succeeded inside todo block: Couldn't allocate memory to run tests properly! version.c:57: Test succeeded inside todo block: Cabinet struct doesn't contain correct version: Error = 203. version.c:67: Test succeeded inside todo block: Function GetDllVersion in DLL not found: Error = 203. Unhandled exception: unimplemented function cabinet.dll.GetDllVersion called in 32-bit code (0x7b0122f6). === debian11 (32 bit Hindi:India report) === cabinet: version.c:34: Test succeeded inside todo block: Function DllGetVersion in DLL not found: Error = 203. version.c:38: Test succeeded inside todo block: Couldn't allocate memory to run tests properly! version.c:57: Test succeeded inside todo block: Cabinet struct doesn't contain correct version: Error = 203. version.c:67: Test succeeded inside todo block: Function GetDllVersion in DLL not found: Error = 203. Unhandled exception: unimplemented function cabinet.dll.GetDllVersion called in 32-bit code (0x7b0122f6). === debian11 (32 bit Japanese:Japan report) === cabinet: version.c:34: Test succeeded inside todo block: Function DllGetVersion in DLL not found: Error = 203. version.c:38: Test succeeded inside todo block: Couldn't allocate memory to run tests properly! version.c:57: Test succeeded inside todo block: Cabinet struct doesn't contain correct version: Error = 203. version.c:67: Test succeeded inside todo block: Function GetDllVersion in DLL not found: Error = 203. Unhandled exception: unimplemented function cabinet.dll.GetDllVersion called in 32-bit code (0x7b0122f6). === debian11 (32 bit Chinese:China report) === cabinet: version.c:34: Test succeeded inside todo block: Function DllGetVersion in DLL not found: Error = 203. version.c:38: Test succeeded inside todo block: Couldn't allocate memory to run tests properly! version.c:57: Test succeeded inside todo block: Cabinet struct doesn't contain correct version: Error = 203. version.c:67: Test succeeded inside todo block: Function GetDllVersion in DLL not found: Error = 203. Unhandled exception: unimplemented function cabinet.dll.GetDllVersion called in 32-bit code (0x7b0122f6). === debian11 (32 bit WoW report) === cabinet: version.c:34: Test succeeded inside todo block: Function DllGetVersion in DLL not found: Error = 203. version.c:38: Test succeeded inside todo block: Couldn't allocate memory to run tests properly! version.c:57: Test succeeded inside todo block: Cabinet struct doesn't contain correct version: Error = 203. version.c:67: Test succeeded inside todo block: Function GetDllVersion in DLL not found: Error = 203. Unhandled exception: unimplemented function cabinet.dll.GetDllVersion called in 32-bit code (0x7b0122f6). === debian11 (64 bit WoW report) === cabinet: version.c:34: Test succeeded inside todo block: Function DllGetVersion in DLL not found: Error = 203. version.c:38: Test succeeded inside todo block: Couldn't allocate memory to run tests properly! version.c:57: Test succeeded inside todo block: Cabinet struct doesn't contain correct version: Error = 203. version.c:67: Test succeeded inside todo block: Function GetDllVersion in DLL not found: Error = 203. Unhandled exception: unimplemented function cabinet.dll.GetDllVersion called in 64-bit code (0x0000007b0138ae).

1 0

Re: [PATCH 3/3] mshtml: Implement MediaQueryList's matches prop.
by Marvin Aug. 1, 2022

Aug. 1, 2022

Hi, It looks like your patch introduced the new failures shown below. Please investigate and fix them before resubmitting your patch. If they are not new, fixing them anyway would help a lot. Otherwise please ask for the known failures list to be updated. The tests also ran into some preexisting test failures. If you know how to fix them that would be helpful. See the TestBot job for the details: The full results can be found at: https://testbot.winehq.org/JobDetails.pl?Key=120307 Your paranoid android. === w1064v1809 (64 bit report) === mshtml: script.c:3119: Test failed: ReportResult failed: 80ef0001

1 0

Re: [PATCH 2/3] mshtml: Implement MediaQueryList's media prop.
by Marvin Aug. 1, 2022

Aug. 1, 2022

Hi, It looks like your patch introduced the new failures shown below. Please investigate and fix them before resubmitting your patch. If they are not new, fixing them anyway would help a lot. Otherwise please ask for the known failures list to be updated. The tests also ran into some preexisting test failures. If you know how to fix them that would be helpful. See the TestBot job for the details: The full results can be found at: https://testbot.winehq.org/JobDetails.pl?Key=120306 Your paranoid android. === w10pro64_en_AE_u8 (64 bit report) === mshtml: htmldoc.c:2541: Test failed: unexpected call UpdateUI htmldoc.c:2853: Test failed: unexpected call Exec_UPDATECOMMANDS

1 0

Re: [PATCH 6/6] widl: Use a struct list for the import stack.
by Marvin Aug. 1, 2022

Aug. 1, 2022

Hi, It looks like your patch introduced the new failures shown below. Please investigate and fix them before resubmitting your patch. If they are not new, fixing them anyway would help a lot. Otherwise please ask for the known failures list to be updated. The full results can be found at: https://testbot.winehq.org/JobDetails.pl?Key=120323 Your paranoid android. === debian11 (build log) === tools/widl/parser.tab.h:322:5: error: conflicting types for ‘parser_parse’ ../wine/tools/widl/widl.c:899:9: error: too many arguments to function ‘parser_parse’ Task: The win32 Wine build failed === debian11 (build log) === tools/widl/parser.tab.h:322:5: error: conflicting types for ‘parser_parse’ ../wine/tools/widl/widl.c:899:9: error: too many arguments to function ‘parser_parse’ Task: The wow64 Wine build failed

1 0

Re: [PATCH 5/6] widl: Simplify handling of already parsed imports.
by Marvin Aug. 1, 2022

Aug. 1, 2022

Hi, It looks like your patch introduced the new failures shown below. Please investigate and fix them before resubmitting your patch. If they are not new, fixing them anyway would help a lot. Otherwise please ask for the known failures list to be updated. The full results can be found at: https://testbot.winehq.org/JobDetails.pl?Key=120322 Your paranoid android. === debian11 (build log) === tools/widl/parser.tab.h:322:5: error: conflicting types for ‘parser_parse’ ../wine/tools/widl/widl.c:899:9: error: too many arguments to function ‘parser_parse’ Task: The win32 Wine build failed === debian11 (build log) === tools/widl/parser.tab.h:322:5: error: conflicting types for ‘parser_parse’ ../wine/tools/widl/widl.c:899:9: error: too many arguments to function ‘parser_parse’ Task: The wow64 Wine build failed

1 0

Re: [PATCH 4/6] widl: Use a struct list to keep imported files.
by Marvin Aug. 1, 2022

Aug. 1, 2022

Hi, It looks like your patch introduced the new failures shown below. Please investigate and fix them before resubmitting your patch. If they are not new, fixing them anyway would help a lot. Otherwise please ask for the known failures list to be updated. The full results can be found at: https://testbot.winehq.org/JobDetails.pl?Key=120321 Your paranoid android. === debian11 (build log) === tools/widl/parser.tab.h:322:5: error: conflicting types for ‘parser_parse’ ../wine/tools/widl/widl.c:899:9: error: too many arguments to function ‘parser_parse’ Task: The win32 Wine build failed === debian11 (build log) === tools/widl/parser.tab.h:322:5: error: conflicting types for ‘parser_parse’ ../wine/tools/widl/widl.c:899:9: error: too many arguments to function ‘parser_parse’ Task: The wow64 Wine build failed

1 0

Re: [PATCH 3/6] widl: Move output generation calls out of parser.y.
by Marvin Aug. 1, 2022

Aug. 1, 2022

Hi, It looks like your patch introduced the new failures shown below. Please investigate and fix them before resubmitting your patch. If they are not new, fixing them anyway would help a lot. Otherwise please ask for the known failures list to be updated. The full results can be found at: https://testbot.winehq.org/JobDetails.pl?Key=120320 Your paranoid android. === debian11 (build log) === tools/widl/parser.tab.h:322:5: error: conflicting types for ‘parser_parse’ ../wine/tools/widl/widl.c:899:9: error: too many arguments to function ‘parser_parse’ Task: The win32 Wine build failed === debian11 (build log) === tools/widl/parser.tab.h:322:5: error: conflicting types for ‘parser_parse’ ../wine/tools/widl/widl.c:899:9: error: too many arguments to function ‘parser_parse’ Task: The wow64 Wine build failed

1 0

Re: [PATCH 1/3] mshtml: Implement window.matchMedia() with MediaQueryList stub.
by Marvin Aug. 1, 2022

Aug. 1, 2022

Hi, It looks like your patch introduced the new failures shown below. Please investigate and fix them before resubmitting your patch. If they are not new, fixing them anyway would help a lot. Otherwise please ask for the known failures list to be updated. The tests also ran into some preexisting test failures. If you know how to fix them that would be helpful. See the TestBot job for the details: The full results can be found at: https://testbot.winehq.org/JobDetails.pl?Key=120305 Your paranoid android. === w10pro64 (64 bit report) === mshtml: htmldoc.c:2541: Test failed: unexpected call UpdateUI htmldoc.c:2853: Test failed: unexpected call Exec_UPDATECOMMANDS htmldoc.c:2541: Test failed: unexpected call UpdateUI htmldoc.c:2853: Test failed: unexpected call Exec_UPDATECOMMANDS htmldoc.c:350: Test failed: expected Exec_SETTITLE htmldoc.c:2859: Test failed: unexpected call Exec_SETTITLE === w10pro64_ja (64 bit report) === mshtml: htmldoc.c:2541: Test failed: unexpected call UpdateUI htmldoc.c:2853: Test failed: unexpected call Exec_UPDATECOMMANDS htmldoc.c:350: Test failed: expected Exec_SETTITLE htmldoc.c:2859: Test failed: unexpected call Exec_SETTITLE

1 0

Re: [PATCH 2/3] shell32: Add SHBindToFolderIDListParent tests.
by Marvin July 31, 2022

July 31, 2022

Hi, It looks like your patch introduced the new failures shown below. Please investigate and fix them before resubmitting your patch. If they are not new, fixing them anyway would help a lot. Otherwise please ask for the known failures list to be updated. The tests also ran into some preexisting test failures. If you know how to fix them that would be helpful. See the TestBot job for the details: The full results can be found at: https://testbot.winehq.org/JobDetails.pl?Key=120263 Your paranoid android. === w1064v1809 (64 bit report) === shell32: shlfolder.c:4992: Test failed: RMDIR: expected notification type 10, got: 40000 === w1064_tsign (64 bit report) === shell32: shlfolder.c:5009: Test failed: Didn't expect a WM_USER_NOTIFY message (event: 2) === w10pro64_zh_CN (64 bit report) === shell32: shlfolder.c:4992: Test failed: RMDIR: expected notification type 10, got: 40000

1 0