[Bug 14831] New: ws2_32: sock.ok fails in Solaris, but not Linux

Summary: ws2_32: sock.ok fails in Solaris, but not Linux Product: Wine Version: 1.1.2 Platform: PC OS/Version: Solaris Status: NEW Keywords: testcase Severity: enhancement Priority: P2 Component: -unknown AssignedTo: wine-bugs@winehq.org ReportedBy: austinenglish@gmail.com

austin@opensolaris:~/wine-git/dlls/ws2_32/tests$ make testclean ; wineserver -k ; rm -rf ~/.wine ; make sock.ok rm -f protocol.ok sock.ok ../../../tools/runtest -q -P wine -M ws2_32.dll -T ../../.. -p ws2_32_test.exe.so sock.c && touch sock.ok wine: created the configuration directory '/export/home/austin/.wine' err:iphlpapi:getNumWithOneHeader Unable to open '/proc/net/route' to count entries! err:iphlpapi:getRouteTable unimplemented! Could not load Mozilla. HTML rendering will be disabled. sock.c:947: Test failed: get/setsockopt(SO_RCVTIMEO) failed error: 10042 sock.c:955: Test failed: get/setsockopt(SO_SNDTIMEO) failed error: 10042 err:iphlpapi:getNumWithOneHeader Unable to open '/proc/net/route' to count entries! err:iphlpapi:getRouteTable unimplemented! sock.c:1258: Test failed: Failed to create socket: 10043 sock.c:1662: Test succeeded inside todo block: select should not return any socket handles sock.c:1663: Test succeeded inside todo block: FD should not be set sock.c:1664: Test succeeded inside todo block: FD should not be set sock.c:1688: Test failed: closesocket did not wakeup select sock.c:1765: Test failed: closesocket did not wakeup accept

+winsock attached

-- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching all bug changes.

Show replies by date

wine-bugs＠winehq.org

6 Oct 6 Oct

9:07 p.m.

New subject: [Bug 14831] ws2_32: sock.ok fails in Solaris, but not Linux

--- Comment #1 from Austin English austinenglish@gmail.com 2008-10-06 16:07:36 --- Similar on PC-BSD:

../../../tools/runtest -q -P wine -M ws2_32.dll -T ../../.. -p ws2_32_test.exe.so sock.c && touch sock.ok sock.c:1664: Test succeeded inside todo block: select should not return any socket handles sock.c:1665: Test succeeded inside todo block: FD should not be set sock.c:1666: Test succeeded inside todo block: FD should not be set *** Error code 3

wine-bugs＠winehq.org

20 Oct 20 Oct

6:12 a.m.

New subject: [Bug 14831] ws2_32: sock.ok fails in Solaris, but not Linux

--- Comment #2 from Austin English austinenglish@gmail.com 2008-10-20 01:12:59 --- Tried again in OpenSolaris, still present, with additional error: sock.c:2274: Test failed: Could not bind IPv4 address (LastError: 10048; 10048 expected if IPv6 binds to IPv4 as well).

wine-bugs＠winehq.org

21 Oct 21 Oct

4:43 a.m.

New subject: [Bug 14831] ws2_32: sock.ok fails in Solaris, but not Linux

Kai Blin kai.blin@gmail.com changed:

What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Component|-unknown |winsock

--- Comment #3 from Kai Blin kai.blin@gmail.com 2008-10-20 23:43:53 --- Do you have IPv6 set up on that machine?

wine-bugs＠winehq.org

8:51 a.m.

New subject: [Bug 14831] ws2_32: sock.ok fails in Solaris, but not Linux

--- Comment #4 from Austin English austinenglish@gmail.com 2008-10-21 03:51:21 --- (In reply to comment #3)

Do you have IPv6 set up on that machine?

I don't know to be honest :-). According to Google: http://internecine.eu/systems/solaris-ipv6.html

It's enabled by default, but I'll try to find some way to confirm that. Just getting my feet wet in OpenSolaris.

wine-bugs＠winehq.org

9 a.m.

New subject: [Bug 14831] ws2_32: sock.ok fails in Solaris, but not Linux

--- Comment #5 from Austin English austinenglish@gmail.com 2008-10-21 04:00:59 --- (In reply to comment #3)

Do you have IPv6 set up on that machine?

Well, I don't have an IPv6 address: bash-3.2$ ifconfig -a lo0: flags=2001000849<UP,LOOPBACK,RUNNING,MULTICAST,IPv4,VIRTUAL> mtu 8232 index 1 inet 127.0.0.1 netmask ff000000 elxl0: flags=201004843<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,MULTICAST,DHCP,IPv4,CoS> mtu 1500 index 2 inet 128.194.53.159 netmask fffffe00 broadcast 128.194.53.255 lo0: flags=2002000849<UP,LOOPBACK,RUNNING,MULTICAST,IPv6,VIRTUAL> mtu 8252 index 1 inet6 ::1/128

but it seems to be IPv6 aware/configured: bash-3.2$ ping 2001:6b0:e:4040::40 ICMPv6 No Route to Destination from gateway localhost (::1) for icmp6 from localhost (::1) to lacolhost.cs.umu.se (2001:6b0:e:4040::40) ICMPv6 No Route to Destination from gateway localhost (::1) for icmp6 from localhost (::1) to lacolhost.cs.umu.se (2001:6b0:e:4040::40)

wine-bugs＠winehq.org

12 Mar 12 Mar

2:31 a.m.

New subject: [Bug 14831] ws2_32: sock.ok fails in Solaris, but not Linux

--- Comment #6 from Austin English austinenglish@gmail.com 2010-03-11 20:31:49 --- Still fails on OpenSolaris.

wine-bugs＠winehq.org

25 Jan 25 Jan

10:10 a.m.

New subject: [Bug 14831] ws2_32: sock.ok fails in Solaris, but not Linux

François Gouget fgouget@codeweavers.com changed:

What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |fgouget@codeweavers.com

--- Comment #7 from François Gouget fgouget@codeweavers.com 2012-01-25 04:10:06 CST --- It's not just Solaris. ws2_32:sock fails all over the place, Windows, Linux, FreeBSD. It's a disgrace: http://test.winehq.org/data/tests/ws2_32:sock.html

wine-bugs＠winehq.org

13 Jun 13 Jun

10:38 p.m.

New subject: [Bug 14831] ws2_32: sock.ok fails in Solaris, but not Linux

Ken Sharp imwellcushtymelike@gmail.com changed:

--- Comment #8 from Ken Sharp imwellcushtymelike@gmail.com --- The test results look a lot better for Windows.

Is this still an issue in Wine 1.7.45 or later?

-- Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.

wine-bugs＠winehq.org

9 Sep 9 Sep

4:22 p.m.

New subject: [Bug 14831] ws2_32: sock.ok fails in Solaris, but not Linux

--- Comment #9 from François Gouget fgouget@codeweavers.com --- Unfortunately I don't have a working Solaris VM currently :-(

-- Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.

wine-bugs＠winehq.org

4:28 p.m.

New subject: [Bug 14831] ws2_32: sock.ok fails in Solaris, but not Linux

Bruno Jesus 00cpxxx@gmail.com changed:

What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |00cpxxx@gmail.com

--- Comment #10 from Bruno Jesus 00cpxxx@gmail.com --- Certainly still present, ws2_32 only passes on Linux. Freebsd and OSX do not pass so I bet Solaris also does not.

-- Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.

wine-bugs＠winehq.org

3 Aug 3 Aug

6:06 p.m.

New subject: [Bug 14831] ws2_32: sock.ok fails in Solaris, but not Linux

Damjan Jovanovic damjan.jov@gmail.com changed:

What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |damjan.jov@gmail.com

--- Comment #11 from Damjan Jovanovic damjan.jov@gmail.com --- The winsock tests are actually really elaborate, and test the network stack so thoroughly that they reveal differences between *nix network stacks.

For example, for FreeBSD 11.2:

sock.c:2509: Test failed: Expected 10044, received 10041 The different error is reported by FreeBSD's network stack for invalid socket() parameters.

sock.c:6689: Test failed: WSASendMsg should have failed FreeBSD allows unconnected TCP sockets to successfully sendmsg() data! Windows and Linux don't.

sock.c:7275: Test failed: fdWrite socket events incorrect Probably a regression in FreeBSD, where closing a socket doesn't get poll() to report POLLHUP on the socket on the other end: https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=227259 I think they fixed it in a newer version of FreeBSD.

and lots more :(

-- Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.

WineHQ Bugzilla

12 May 12 May

6:45 p.m.

New subject: [Bug 14831] ws2_32:sock fails in Solaris, but not Linux

François Gouget fgouget@codeweavers.com changed:

-- Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.

WineHQ Bugzilla

4 Dec 4 Dec

3:23 p.m.

New subject: [Bug 14831] ws2_32:sock fails in Solaris, but not Linux

François Gouget fgouget@codeweavers.com changed:

--- Comment #12 from François Gouget fgouget@codeweavers.com --- Does Wine still even build on Solaris? I propose closing this bug. New bugs should be opened for specific failure modes on still supported platforms.

-- Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.

WineHQ Bugzilla

11 Dec 11 Dec

8:49 a.m.

New subject: [Bug 14831] ws2_32:sock fails in Solaris, but not Linux

--- Comment #13 from Austin English austinenglish@gmail.com --- (In reply to François Gouget from comment #12)

Does Wine still even build on Solaris?

People still care, see bug 53392 (opened in July). Not sure if it builds or not though.

I propose closing this bug. New bugs should be opened for specific failure modes on still supported platforms.

I must've missed the note about Solaris no longer being supported? It's still in the codebase, and I don't see any recent commits stripping it out?

I don't have strong feelings about this bug. I don't have a (Open)Solaris VM available, so it's fine for me that it's closed. But in general, I think we should stick to asking someone if a bug is still a problem, and giving them time to check, and when there's no reply for a long time, then mark the bug abandoned :).

-- Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.

WineHQ Bugzilla

28 Jan 28 Jan

1:12 a.m.

New subject: [Bug 14831] ws2_32:sock fails in Solaris, but not Linux