On 04/06/16 15:04, Dmitry Timoshkov wrote:
Jacek Caban jacek@codeweavers.com wrote:
--- a/dlls/user32/controls.h +++ b/dlls/user32/controls.h @@ -241,7 +241,6 @@ typedef struct tagDIALOGINFO } DIALOGINFO;
#define DF_END 0x0001 -#define DF_OWNERENABLED 0x0002
As I already mentioned during our conversation in wine-devel my (not yet submitted) tests show that completely removing DF_OWNERENABLED handling is wrong.
Well, you mentioned it in context of your patches where you remove it and always enable owner. I agree that's wrong, my tests show that. I remove it in a different way. Could you share those tests (WIP is fine) or run my patches against them?
And once again I'd like to see the tests submitted first with todo_wine statements in appropriate places, and the patches sent only after that with separate fixes for every failure found by the tests. Sending a bunch of tests as the final patch doesn't show what didn't actually work before, and what exactly has been fixed by the patch series.
Not really, those tests heavily depend on WM_ENTERIDLE being sent to the right window. Otherwise tests would hang so todo_wine won't help much.
Jacek