The report should show that some tests were skipped and why.
Signed-off-by: Francois Gouget fgouget@free.fr --- Or maybe these checks should be removed entirely since they date back to 2002 and Cygwin/XFree86 may be better behaved nowadays. --- dlls/user32/tests/sysparams.c | 6 ++++++ 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
diff --git a/dlls/user32/tests/sysparams.c b/dlls/user32/tests/sysparams.c index d49d69989f6..2eedf1f629b 100644 --- a/dlls/user32/tests/sysparams.c +++ b/dlls/user32/tests/sysparams.c @@ -826,7 +826,10 @@ static void test_SPI_SETBORDER( void ) /* 6 */ * running. */ if (FindWindowA( NULL, "Cygwin/XFree86" )) + { + win_skip("skipping due to Cygwin/XFree86\n"); return; + }
trace("testing SPI_{GET,SET}BORDER\n");
@@ -1132,7 +1135,10 @@ static void test_SPI_SETICONTITLEWRAP( void ) /* 26 */ * running. */ if (FindWindowA( NULL, "Cygwin/XFree86" )) + { + win_skip("skipping due to Cygwin/XFree86\n"); return; + }
trace("testing SPI_{GET,SET}ICONTITLEWRAP\n"); SetLastError(0xdeadbeef);
Hi,
While running your changed tests, I think I found new failures. Being a bot and all I'm not very good at pattern recognition, so I might be wrong, but could you please double-check?
Full results can be found at: https://testbot.winehq.org/JobDetails.pl?Key=90070
Your paranoid android.
=== w8 (32 bit report) ===
user32: sysparams.c:2514: Test failed: Waiting for the WM_DISPLAYCHANGE message timed out sysparams.c:2525: Test failed: Set bpp 32, but WM_DISPLAYCHANGE reported bpp -1
=== w8adm (32 bit report) ===
user32: sysparams.c:2514: Test failed: Waiting for the WM_DISPLAYCHANGE message timed out sysparams.c:2525: Test failed: Set bpp 32, but WM_DISPLAYCHANGE reported bpp -1
=== w864 (32 bit report) ===
user32: sysparams.c:2514: Test failed: Waiting for the WM_DISPLAYCHANGE message timed out sysparams.c:2525: Test failed: Set bpp 32, but WM_DISPLAYCHANGE reported bpp -1
=== w1064v1809 (32 bit report) ===
user32: sysparams.c:2514: Test failed: Waiting for the WM_DISPLAYCHANGE message timed out sysparams.c:2525: Test failed: Set bpp 32, but WM_DISPLAYCHANGE reported bpp -1
=== w1064 (32 bit report) ===
user32: sysparams.c:2514: Test failed: Waiting for the WM_DISPLAYCHANGE message timed out sysparams.c:2525: Test failed: Set bpp 32, but WM_DISPLAYCHANGE reported bpp -1
=== w1064_tsign (32 bit report) ===
user32: sysparams.c:224: Test failed: Unexpected WM_DISPLAYCHANGE message sysparams.c:2514: Test failed: Waiting for the WM_DISPLAYCHANGE message timed out sysparams.c:2525: Test failed: Set bpp 32, but WM_DISPLAYCHANGE reported bpp -1
=== w10pro64 (32 bit report) ===
user32: sysparams.c:2514: Test failed: Waiting for the WM_DISPLAYCHANGE message timed out sysparams.c:2525: Test failed: Set bpp 32, but WM_DISPLAYCHANGE reported bpp -1
Francois Gouget fgouget@free.fr writes:
The report should show that some tests were skipped and why.
Signed-off-by: Francois Gouget fgouget@free.fr
Or maybe these checks should be removed entirely since they date back to 2002 and Cygwin/XFree86 may be better behaved nowadays.
They can definitely be removed.