On 12/15/2009 11:48 PM, Piotr Caban wrote:
dlls/urlmon/tests/sec_mgr.c | 31 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 files changed, 31 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
Hi Piotr,
Is there a way to avoid using lstrmcpW as that will always fail (or the !lstrcmpW case will always succeed) on Win9x/WinMe?
It looks like the rest of this file use memcmp to compare strings.
On 12/16/2009 10:44, Paul Vriens wrote:
On 12/15/2009 11:48 PM, Piotr Caban wrote:
dlls/urlmon/tests/sec_mgr.c | 31 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 files changed, 31 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
Hi Piotr,
Is there a way to avoid using lstrmcpW as that will always fail (or the !lstrcmpW case will always succeed) on Win9x/WinMe?
It looks like the rest of this file use memcmp to compare strings.
Maybe it's possible to add a rule to test makefile to assert on this call and suggest some replacement?
On 12/16/2009 08:54 AM, Nikolay Sivov wrote:
On 12/16/2009 10:44, Paul Vriens wrote:
On 12/15/2009 11:48 PM, Piotr Caban wrote:
dlls/urlmon/tests/sec_mgr.c | 31 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 files changed, 31 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
Hi Piotr,
Is there a way to avoid using lstrmcpW as that will always fail (or the !lstrcmpW case will always succeed) on Win9x/WinMe?
It looks like the rest of this file use memcmp to compare strings.
Maybe it's possible to add a rule to test makefile to assert on this call and suggest some replacement?
We could also introduce our own wine_strcmp_w (or any other name) to be globally usable. Lots of our tests have (or need) some kind of workaround for comparing W-strings on Win9x/WinMe.
Introducing that will mean loads of changes though and I'm not sure we want that. I guess it's Alexandre's call.
-
Nikolay Sivov -
Paul Vriens