All:
Upon examining other test code that creates a variable called is_win9x, I realized that using get_version and comparing it to a fixed value may not be best for the riched20 tests and have attached a proposed change to how this variable is set. It uses a called function, lstrcmpW and if it does not exist, the variable is set to a false value. This change has been tested on the testbot for Windows95/98/98SE/2K/2K3/XP/XP_64/Vista/Vista64/Win7/Win7_64 and no discrepancies were found.
Comments on this patch are appreciated. I would like to submit this for inclusion into the Wine code base on Friday.
James McKenzie
On 02/22/2011 01:21 AM, James McKenzie wrote:
All:
Upon examining other test code that creates a variable called is_win9x, I realized that using get_version and comparing it to a fixed value may not be best for the riched20 tests and have attached a proposed change to how this variable is set. It uses a called function, lstrcmpW and if it does not exist, the variable is set to a false value. This change has been tested on the testbot for Windows95/98/98SE/2K/2K3/XP/XP_64/Vista/Vista64/Win7/Win7_64 and no discrepancies were found.
Win9x tests are no longer run with winetest. I also see that Austin sent some 9x cleanup patches. That said, I think the best way is to get rid of all the win9x 'hacks' in editor.c and rely on the fact that we have NT4+.
On 2/22/11 12:42 AM, Paul Vriens wrote:
On 02/22/2011 01:21 AM, James McKenzie wrote:
All:
Upon examining other test code that creates a variable called is_win9x, I realized that using get_version and comparing it to a fixed value may not be best for the riched20 tests and have attached a proposed change to how this variable is set. It uses a called function, lstrcmpW and if it does not exist, the variable is set to a false value. This change has been tested on the testbot for Windows95/98/98SE/2K/2K3/XP/XP_64/Vista/Vista64/Win7/Win7_64 and no discrepancies were found.
Win9x tests are no longer run with winetest. I also see that Austin sent some 9x cleanup patches. That said, I think the best way is to get rid of all the win9x 'hacks' in editor.c and rely on the fact that we have NT4+.
Paul:
While that is true, I thought the consensus was that testing would still be available for Window9X/ME. There are users (like me) that are running Windows9x/ME programs and don't want to loose the ability to run them under Wine.
This function may not exist in Windows versions after Windows2K either, that is why I proposed changing this from a version check to actually checking for the called function.
And lastly, I agree with adding tests to specifically check what happens in the riched20.dll for UNICODE calls.
James McKenzie
-
James McKenzie -
Paul Vriens