http://test.winehq.org/data/200501151000/2000_JakobEriksson/gdi32:metafile.t...
This fails. It shouldn't, because I ran winetest manually.
http://test.winehq.org/data/200501151000/2000_JakobEriksson/version.txt
what's up with that?
regards, Jakob
"Jakob Eriksson" jakov@vmlinux.org wrote:
http://test.winehq.org/data/200501151000/2000_JakobEriksson/gdi32:metafile.t...
This fails. It shouldn't, because I ran winetest manually.
http://test.winehq.org/data/200501151000/2000_JakobEriksson/version.txt
what's up with that?
The test still passes for me under win2k SP4. You have to investigate what's going on. Although I'm compiling the metafile test separately using my small test environment, that should not change anything for the test itself.
"Dmitry Timoshkov" dmitry@baikal.ru writes:
"Jakob Eriksson" jakov@vmlinux.org wrote:
http://test.winehq.org/data/200501151000/2000_JakobEriksson/gdi32:metafile.t...
This fails. It shouldn't, because I ran winetest manually.
http://test.winehq.org/data/200501151000/2000_JakobEriksson/version.txt
what's up with that?
The test still passes for me under win2k SP4. You have to investigate what's going on. Although I'm compiling the metafile test separately using my small test environment, that should not change anything for the test itself.
It passes under XP, too. (submitted)