winetest reporting http://test.winehq.org/data/200404192305/

[Jakob Eriksson]

First of all, the report on http://test.winehq.org/data/200404192305/  
is VERY pretty.

Almost get misty eyed here. ;-)

Things are coming along very nicely.

Anyway, I am curious what happens if I run winetest.exe in Wine.
Will it get reported accurately as Wine, or will it get misrepresented
in for instance the XP column?

regards,
Jakob

[Ferenc Wagner]

Jakob Eriksson  writes:
> Anyway, I am curious what happens if I run winetest.exe in
> Wine.  Will it get reported accurately as Wine, or will it
> get misrepresented in for instance the XP column?

Yes, it will get misrepresented as the emulated Windows
version.  We simply use GetVersionEx.

[Jakob Eriksson]

Ferenc Wagner wrote:
> Jakob Eriksson  writes:
> > Anyway, I am curious what happens if I run winetest.exe in
> > Wine.  Will it get reported accurately as Wine, or will it
> > get misrepresented in for instance the XP column?
>
> Yes, it will get misrepresented as the emulated Windows
> version.  We simply use GetVersionEx.

That's what I figured...
Ooops. Because then I think some of the XP results are actually me 
running the test in Wine.
I should have thought of that way back in august...

I will try to find a way for winetest.exe to detect Wine...

Jakob

[Jakob Eriksson]

Ferenc Wagner wrote:
> Jakob Eriksson  writes:
> > Anyway, I am curious what happens if I run winetest.exe in
> > Wine.  Will it get reported accurately as Wine, or will it
> > get misrepresented in for instance the XP column?
>
> Yes, it will get misrepresented as the emulated Windows
> version.  We simply use GetVersionEx.

The FAQ is still lacking... I agree, it is kind of tacky to not give a 
straight answer.

http://www.winehq.com/hypermail/wine-devel/2002/10/0715.html

http://www.winehq.org/site/docs/wine-faq/index

regards,
Jakob

[Francois Gouget]

On Tue, 20 Apr 2004, Jakob Eriksson wrote:
> First of all, the report on http://test.winehq.org/data/200404192305/
> is VERY pretty.

Hmmm, I know beauty is in the eye of the beholder and all but... I would
suggest reusing the same green, orange and red colors (1) as on the
status page:

http://www.winehq.org/site/status

Yeah, let's say it's for consistency's sake<g>.

(1) E.g., take green, orange and red from the Good, Poor and Nonexistent
cells.

PS: I just noticed that there's a bug in the status page. 'Good' is not
readable. The text must have got the same color as the background
somehow.

[Jakob Eriksson]

Francois Gouget wrote:
> On Tue, 20 Apr 2004, Jakob Eriksson wrote:
> > First of all, the report on http://test.winehq.org/data/200404192305/
> > is VERY pretty.
>
> Hmmm, I know beauty is in the eye of the beholder and all but... I would
> suggest reusing the same green, orange and red colors (1) as on the
> status page:
>
> http://www.winehq.org/site/status
>
> Yeah, let's say it's for consistency's sake<g>.

That sounds good.  Can we also ditch the zero (0), since it doesn't add 
any information.
Naturally, 0 tests failed if it is OK.

regards,
Jakob

[Dimitrie O. Paun]

On April 20, 2004 7:50 pm, Jakob Eriksson wrote:
> That sounds good.  Can we also ditch the zero (0), since it doesn't add
> any information.
> Naturally, 0 tests failed if it is OK.

Well, I kinda like the 0.

[Jakob Eriksson]

Dimitrie O. Paun wrote:
> On April 20, 2004 7:50 pm, Jakob Eriksson wrote:
> > That sounds good.  Can we also ditch the zero (0), since it doesn't add
> > any information.
> > Naturally, 0 tests failed if it is OK.
>
> Well, I kinda like the 0.

The fanboy I am, I better start liking it too, then. :-)

regards,
Jakob