Alexandre Julliard wrote:
Paul Vriens paul.vriens.wine@gmail.com writes:
exception: 42 tests executed (0 marked as todo, 0 failures), 0 skipped. exception: 279 tests executed (0 marked as todo, 5 failures), 0 skipped.
The first one triggers the 'end of this test' in dissect. The second one is thus not accepted as dissect expects a 'start' line (and a line in between actually).
The question now is: should dissect handle these cases or is this particular test-case wrong?
It's because some of the tests are run in a child process. dissect should probably handle it, ideally by reporting the sum of the test counts as the results for the whole test.
So what's the difference between this one and for example the following ones running in child processes:
kernel32:process start dlls/kernel32/tests/process.c 1.10 tests/process.c: 1 tests executed (0 marked as todo, 0 failures), 0 skipped. tests/process.c: 1 tests executed (0 marked as todo, 0 failures), 0 skipped. tests/process.c: 1 tests executed (0 marked as todo, 0 failures), 0 skipped. tests/process.c: 1 tests executed (0 marked as todo, 0 failures), 0 skipped. tests/process.c: 1 tests executed (0 marked as todo, 0 failures), 0 skipped. tests/process.c: 1 tests executed (0 marked as todo, 0 failures), 0 skipped. tests/process.c: 1 tests executed (0 marked as todo, 0 failures), 0 skipped. tests/process.c: 1 tests executed (0 marked as todo, 0 failures), 0 skipped. tests/process.c: 1 tests executed (0 marked as todo, 0 failures), 0 skipped. tests/process.c: 1 tests executed (0 marked as todo, 0 failures), 0 skipped. tests/process.c: 1 tests executed (0 marked as todo, 0 failures), 0 skipped. tests/process.c: 1 tests executed (0 marked as todo, 0 failures), 0 skipped. tests/process.c: 1 tests executed (0 marked as todo, 0 failures), 0 skipped. tests/process.c: 1 tests executed (0 marked as todo, 0 failures), 0 skipped. tests/process.c: 1 tests executed (0 marked as todo, 0 failures), 0 skipped. tests/process.c: 1 tests executed (0 marked as todo, 0 failures), 0 skipped. tests/process.c: 1 tests executed (0 marked as todo, 0 failures), 0 skipped. process: 396 tests executed (0 marked as todo, 6 failures), 0 skipped.
or:
msvcrt:file start dlls/msvcrt/tests/file.c 1.45 tests/file.c: 3 tests executed (0 marked as todo, 0 failures), 0 skipped. tests/file.c: 1 tests executed (0 marked as todo, 0 failures), 0 skipped. file: 361 tests executed (0 marked as todo, 0 failures), 0 skipped.
or better yet:
shell32:shellpath start dlls/shell32/tests/shellpath.c 1.16 tests/shellpath.c: 10 tests executed (0 marked as todo, 4 failures), 0 skipped. tests/shellpath.c: 4 tests executed (0 marked as todo, 0 failures), 0 skipped. shellpath: 452 tests executed (0 marked as todo, 0 failures), 0 skipped.
Obviously the start of line is a filename for these ones, whereas the start of the line for the exception one is the test itself.
Should we consolidate the above ones as well? I think yes, cause the shell32 example is reflected as 0 errors on test.winehq.org.
Cheers,
Paul.