Source release and download directory:
On August 31, 2003 01:18 pm, Jakob Eriksson wrote:
A few comments: -- The archive seems to be missing main.c -- I think it belongs in programs/ rather than tools -- Why do we need the entire xd distribution. It's public domain, just copy what you need from it. -- I'd rather have an explicit list of tests to include, rather than a dynamic find. -- For consistency we the other stuff we have, I'd name it winetests. -- We need to integrate it into our build system.
Dimitrie O. Paun wrote:
On August 31, 2003 01:18 pm, Jakob Eriksson wrote:
A few comments: -- The archive seems to be missing main.c
Yes, I missed something.
-- I think it belongs in programs/ rather than tools
Sure. I just guessed.
-- Why do we need the entire xd distribution. It's public domain, just copy what you need from it.
I already cut down stuff from the regular distribution. (Would you also like to get rid of the man page and html for instance? Just tell me.)
-- I'd rather have an explicit list of tests to include, rather than a dynamic find.
Ok. How? Send a patch or an example.
-- For consistency we the other stuff we have, I'd name it winetests.
Can do.
-- We need to integrate it into our build system.
Yes, I was thinking about that. How about waiting a little until the development has stabilized and everybody had their say?
regards, Jakob
On September 1, 2003 04:40 am, Jakob Eriksson wrote:
I already cut down stuff from the regular distribution. (Would you also like to get rid of the man page and html for instance? Just tell me.)
Yes, just get rid of everything but the xd.c file, and place that one in the same dir with the other stuff, no need for a subdir.
-- I'd rather have an explicit list of tests to include, rather than a dynamic find.
Ok. How? Send a patch or an example.
In the Makefile, have a variable with all the tests, like so:
TESTS = \ dlls/advapi32/tests/advapi32 \ dlls/comctl32/tests/comctl32 \ dlls/dsound/tests/dsound \ ...
Just include the base name in list, you can construct the actual .exe name from here:
CROSSTESTS = $(TESTS:%=%_crosstest.exe) WINETESTS = $(TESTS:%=%_test.exe.so)
BTW, we should do things in a portable manner, so that winetests builds and runs under Linux as well. That is to say, we should be able to build winetests under linux, in which case it should just package WINETESTS. The above will move us in the right direction.
-- We need to integrate it into our build system.
Yes, I was thinking about that. How about waiting a little until the development has stabilized and everybody had their say?
Sure, but the faster we get it into the tree, the better. Witness winecfg for why this is the case :)
Dimitrie O. Paun wrote:
On September 1, 2003 04:40 am, Jakob Eriksson wrote:
Yes, just get rid of everything but the xd.c file, and place that one in the same dir with the other stuff, no need for a subdir.
ok.
In the Makefile, have a variable with all the tests, like so:
TESTS = \ dlls/advapi32/tests/advapi32 \ dlls/comctl32/tests/comctl32 \ dlls/dsound/tests/dsound \ ...
Just include the base name in list, you can construct the actual .exe name from here:
CROSSTESTS = $(TESTS:%=%_crosstest.exe)
ok.
This is what is in my queue of requests so far:
http://vmlinux.org/cgi-bin/aegis.cgi?file@chan_awdev+project@regression-buil...
WINETESTS = $(TESTS:%=%_test.exe.so)
BTW, we should do things in a portable manner, so that winetests builds and runs under Linux as well. That is to say, we should be able to build winetests under linux, in which case it should just package WINETESTS. The above will move us in the right direction.
But why? I thought running the regrtest.exe with Wine was sufficient. Or is the problem Wine is reporting itself as Windows NT and we can not tell the difference in the mail?
Sure, but the faster we get it into the tree, the better. Witness winecfg for why this is the case :)
True, but I have also learnt from elsewhere that it is best that there is something substantial before it is handed over. ;-)
Jakob
On September 1, 2003 01:00 pm, Jakob Eriksson wrote:
This is what is in my queue of requests so far:
http://vmlinux.org/cgi-bin/aegis.cgi?file@chan_awdev+project@regression-bui lder
Looks good.
But why? I thought running the regrtest.exe with Wine was sufficient. Or is the problem Wine is reporting itself as Windows NT and we can not tell the difference in the mail?
No, there's no problem, but the question is more why not? It may be just for aethetics, but I think that counts in OSS :)
If there are big problem, we can drop it, but if it's just a minimal attention to detail... Also, the big advantage is that would alow it's development and testing under Linux which is a big plus for people (like me) that don't develop under Windows.
True, but I have also learnt from elsewhere that it is best that there is something substantial before it is handed over. ;-)
No problem -- as long as we're moving forward ;)
Dimitrie O. Paun wrote:
No, there's no problem, but the question is more why not? It may be just for aethetics, but I think that counts in OSS :)
If there are big problem, we can drop it, but if it's just a minimal attention to detail... Also, the big advantage is that would alow it's development and testing under Linux which is a big plus for people (like me) that don't develop under Windows.
Sure. A reason as good as any. I assume you mean as a Winelib app? Maybe someone can show me later how that is done.
True, but I have also learnt from elsewhere that it is best that there is something substantial before it is handed over. ;-)
No problem -- as long as we're moving forward ;)
I am coding today aswell... ;-)
Jakob
On September 1, 2003 02:29 pm, Jakob Eriksson wrote:
Sure. A reason as good as any. I assume you mean as a Winelib app? Maybe someone can show me later how that is done.
Yes, I mean a Winelib app. We can worry about this later, but for now, please keep it in mind.
-
Dimitrie O. Paun -
Jakob Eriksson -
Jakob Eriksson