Re: ieframe/tests: Some tests require that the user interface be in English.
Hi, While running your changed tests on Windows, 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 http://testbot.winehq.org/JobDetails.pl?Key=14214 Your paranoid android. === WNT4WSSP6 (32 bit webbrowser) === webbrowser.c:3062: Test failed: Creating WebBrowser object failed: 80040154 webbrowser.c:3062: Test failed: Creating WebBrowser object failed: 80040154 webbrowser.c:3062: Test failed: Creating WebBrowser object failed: 80040154 webbrowser.c:3062: Test failed: Creating WebBrowser object failed: 80040154 webbrowser.c:3138: Test failed: Creating WebBrowser object failed: 80040154 === W2KPROSP4 (32 bit webbrowser) === webbrowser.c:2455: Test failed: expected GetOverridesKeyPath webbrowser.c:2459: Test failed: expected Invoke_SETSECURELOCKICON webbrowser.c:2460: Test failed: expected Invoke_FILEDOWNLOAD webbrowser.c:2069: Test failed: put_Resizable failed: 80004001 webbrowser.c:2070: Test failed: expected Invoke_WINDOWSETRESIZABLE webbrowser.c:2074: Test failed: put_Resizable failed: 80004001 webbrowser.c:2075: Test failed: expected Invoke_WINDOWSETRESIZABLE webbrowser.c:2455: Test failed: expected GetOverridesKeyPath webbrowser.c:2459: Test failed: expected Invoke_SETSECURELOCKICON webbrowser.c:2460: Test failed: expected Invoke_FILEDOWNLOAD webbrowser.c:394: Test failed: unexpected call Exec_SETDOWNLOADSTATE_0 webbrowser.c:2069: Test failed: put_Resizable failed: 80004001 webbrowser.c:2070: Test failed: expected Invoke_WINDOWSETRESIZABLE webbrowser.c:2074: Test failed: put_Resizable failed: 80004001 webbrowser.c:2075: Test failed: expected Invoke_WINDOWSETRESIZABLE webbrowser.c:2455: Test failed: expected GetOverridesKeyPath webbrowser.c:2459: Test failed: expected Invoke_SETSECURELOCKICON webbrowser.c:2460: Test failed: expected Invoke_FILEDOWNLOAD webbrowser.c:447: Test failed: unexpected nCmdID 29 webbrowser.c:945: Test failed: unexpected call GetContainer webbrowser.c:495: Test failed: unexpected call webbrowser.c:945: Test failed: unexpected call GetContainer webbrowser.c:495: Test failed: unexpected call webbrowser.c:2605: Test failed: expected Invoke_SETSECURELOCKICON webbrowser.c:2725: Test failed: expected TranslateUrl webbrowser.c:2726: Test failed: expected Invoke_BEFORENAVIGATE2 webbrowser.c:2727: Test failed: expected Invoke_PROPERTYCHANGE webbrowser.c:2733: Test failed: ReadyState = 1, expected 4 webbrowser.c:2557: Test failed: ReadyState = 1, expected 4 webbrowser.c:777: Test failed: unexpected call Invoke_PROPERTYCHANGE webbrowser.c:793: Test failed: unexpected call Invoke_BEFORENAVIGATE2 webbrowser.c:800: Test failed: ReadyState = 1, expected 4 webbrowser.c:592: Test failed: unexpected call Invoke_AMBIENT_USERMODE webbrowser.c:592: Test failed: unexpected call Invoke_AMBIENT_USERMODE webbrowser.c:595: Test failed: unexpected call Invoke_AMBIENT_DLCONTROL webbrowser.c:599: Test failed: unexpected call Invoke_AMBIENT_USERAGENT webbrowser.c:603: Test failed: unexpected call Invoke_AMBIENT_PALETTE webbrowser.c:1495: Test failed: unexpected call GetOptionKeyPath webbrowser.c:343: Test failed: unexpected call QueryStatus_SETPROGRESSTEXT webbrowser.c:777: Test failed: unexpected call Invoke_PROPERTYCHANGE webbrowser.c:777: Test failed: unexpected call Invoke_PROPERTYCHANGE webbrowser.c:777: Test failed: unexpected call Invoke_PROPERTYCHANGE webbrowser.c:777: Test failed: unexpected call Invoke_PROPERTYCHANGE webbrowser.c:447: Test failed: unexpected nCmdID 26 webbrowser.c:447: Test failed: unexpected nCmdID 29 webbrowser.c:945: Test failed: unexpected call GetContainer webbrowser.c:495: Test failed: unexpected call webbrowser.c:878: Test failed: ReadyState = 1, expected 4 webbrowser.c:1506: Test failed: unexpected call GetDropTarget webbrowser.c:945: Test failed: unexpected call GetContainer webbrowser.c:495: Test failed: unexpected call webbrowser.c:2605: Test failed: expected Invoke_SETSECURELOCKICON webbrowser.c:3098: Test failed: doc != doc2 webbrowser.c:592: Test failed: unexpected call Invoke_AMBIENT_USERMODE webbrowser.c:592: Test failed: unexpected call Invoke_AMBIENT_USERMODE webbrowser.c:595: Test failed: unexpected call Invoke_AMBIENT_DLCONTROL webbrowser.c:599: Test failed: unexpected call Invoke_AMBIENT_USERAGENT webbrowser.c:603: Test failed: unexpected call Invoke_AMBIENT_PALETTE webbrowser.c:1495: Test failed: unexpected call GetOptionKeyPath webbrowser.c:343: Test failed: unexpected call QueryStatus_SETPROGRESSTEXT webbrowser.c:447: Test failed: unexpected nCmdID 26 webbrowser.c:447: Test failed: unexpected nCmdID 29 webbrowser.c:945: Test failed: unexpected call GetContainer webbrowser.c:495: Test failed: unexpected call webbrowser.c:1506: Test failed: unexpected call GetDropTarget webbrowser.c:945: Test failed: unexpected call GetContainer webbrowser.c:495: Test failed: unexpected call webbrowser.c:2598: Test failed: expected TranslateUrl webbro
Re: pdh/tests: Some tests require that the user interface be in English.
Hi, While running your changed tests on Windows, 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 http://testbot.winehq.org/JobDetails.pl?Key=14215 Your paranoid android. === W2KPROSP4 (32 bit pdh) === pdh.c:150: Test failed: PdhAddCounterA failed 0xcbc4 pdh.c:197: Test failed: PdhAddCounterW failed 0xcbc4
Re: shlwapi/tests: Some tests require that the user interface be in English.
Hi, While running your changed tests on Windows, 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 http://testbot.winehq.org/JobDetails.pl?Key=14213 Your paranoid android. === W2KPROSP4 (32 bit string) === string.c:562: Test failed: Formatted 027cf wrong: got 9,95 KB, expected 9.95 KB string.c:562: Test failed: Formatted 18801 wrong: got 98,0 KB, expected 98.0 KB string.c:562: Test failed: Formatted ff94e wrong: got 0,99 MB, expected 0.99 MB string.c:562: Test failed: Formatted 03fcf wrong: got 0,99 GB, expected 0.99 GB string.c:562: Test failed: Formatted fffa9b wrong: got 0,99 TB, expected 0.99 TB string.c:562: Test failed: Formatted 3fbe8 wrong: got 0,99 PB, expected 0.99 PB string.c:562: Test failed: Formatted a9b wrong: got 0,99 EB, expected 0.99 EB string.c:610: Test failed: Formatted ff94e wrong: got 1.023 KB, expected 1,023 KB string.c:610: Test failed: Formatted 03e7ffa9b wrong: got 1.023.999 KB, expected 1,023,999 KB string.c:610: Test failed: Formatted 03fcf wrong: got 1.048.576 KB, expected 1,048,576 KB string.c:610: Test failed: Formatted f9f94e wrong: got 1.048.575.999 KB, expected 1,048,575,999 KB string.c:610: Test failed: Formatted fffa9b wrong: got 1.073.741.823 KB, expected 1,073,741,823 KB string.c:610: Test failed: Formatted 3e7fffa9b wrong: got 1.073.741.823.999 KB, expected 1,073,741,823,999 KB string.c:610: Test failed: Formatted 3fbe8 wrong: got 1.099.511.627.775 KB, expected 1,099,511,627,775 KB string.c:610: Test failed: Formatted f9ffd35 wrong: got 1.099.511.627.776.000 KB, expected 1,099,511,627,776,000 KB string.c:610: Test failed: Formatted a9b wrong: got 1.125.899.906.842.623 KB, expected 1,125,899,906,842,623 KB string.c:587: Test failed: Formatted ff94e wrong: got 1.023 KB, expected 1,023 KB string.c:587: Test failed: Formatted 03e7ffa9b wrong: got 1.023.999 KB, expected 1,023,999 KB string.c:587: Test failed: Formatted 03fcf wrong: got 1.048.576 KB, expected 1,048,576 KB string.c:587: Test failed: Formatted f9f94e wrong: got 1.048.575.999 KB, expected 1,048,575,999 KB string.c:587: Test failed: Formatted fffa9b wrong: got 1.073.741.823 KB, expected 1,073,741,823 KB string.c:587: Test failed: Formatted 3e7fffa9b wrong: got 1.073.741.823.999 KB, expected 1,073,741,823,999 KB string.c:587: Test failed: Formatted 3fbe8 wrong: got 1.099.511.627.775 KB, expected 1,099,511,627,775 KB string.c:587: Test failed: Formatted f9ffd35 wrong: got 1.099.511.627.776.000 KB, expected 1,099,511,627,776,000 KB string.c:587: Test failed: Formatted a9b wrong: got 1.125.899.906.842.623 KB, expected 1,125,899,906,842,623 KB === WXPPROSP3 (32 bit string) === string.c:562: Test failed: Formatted 027cf wrong: got 9,95 KB, expected 9.95 KB string.c:562: Test failed: Formatted 18801 wrong: got 98,0 KB, expected 98.0 KB string.c:562: Test failed: Formatted ff94e wrong: got 0,99 MB, expected 0.99 MB string.c:562: Test failed: Formatted 03fcf wrong: got 0,99 GB, expected 0.99 GB string.c:562: Test failed: Formatted fffa9b wrong: got 0,99 TB, expected 0.99 TB string.c:562: Test failed: Formatted 3fbe8 wrong: got 0,99 PB, expected 0.99 PB string.c:562: Test failed: Formatted a9b wrong: got 0,99 EB, expected 0.99 EB string.c:610: Test failed: Formatted ff94e wrong: got 1.023 KB, expected 1,023 KB string.c:610: Test failed: Formatted 03e7ffa9b wrong: got 1.023.999 KB, expected 1,023,999 KB string.c:610: Test failed: Formatted 03fcf wrong: got 1.048.576 KB, expected 1,048,576 KB string.c:610: Test failed: Formatted f9f94e wrong: got 1.048.575.999 KB, expected 1,048,575,999 KB string.c:610: Test failed: Formatted fffa9b wrong: got 1.073.741.823 KB, expected 1,073,741,823 KB string.c:610: Test failed: Formatted 3e7fffa9b wrong: got 1.073.741.823.999 KB, expected 1,073,741,823,999 KB string.c:610: Test failed: Formatted 3fbe8 wrong: got 1.099.511.627.775 KB, expected 1,099,511,627,775 KB string.c:610: Test failed: Formatted f9ffd35 wrong: got 1.099.511.627.776.000 KB, expected 1,099,511,627,776,000 KB string.c:610: Test failed: Formatted a9b wrong: got 1.125.899.906.842.623 KB, expected 1,125,899,906,842,623 KB string.c:587: Test failed: Formatted ff94e wrong: got 1.023 KB, expected 1,023 KB string.c:587: Test failed: Formatted 03e7ffa9b wrong: got 1.023.999 KB, expected 1,023,999 KB string.c:587: Test failed: Formatted 03fcf wrong: got 1.048.576 KB, expected 1,048,576 KB string.c:587: Test failed: Formatted f9f94e wrong: got 1.048.575.999 KB, expected 1,048,575,999 KB string.c:587: Test failed: Formatted fffa9b wrong: got 1.073.741.823 KB, expected 1,073,741,823 KB string.c:587: Test failed: Formatte
Re: [1/3] msxml3: Add xmlparser interfaces
On Mon, 12 Sep 2011, Alistair Leslie-Hughes wrote: [...] > It shouldn't be a problem, this is the only place you can get a > reference to these interfaces. It appears that once these interfaces > were Deprecated they where removed from the SDK for msxml. See MSDN to > show that they now deprecated, and they aren't just for Mobile > Devices. > http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms757816%28VS.85%29.aspx > > It was part of the msxml3 at some point on windows, see bug > http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=5841 I could not find an xmlparser* file (case insensitive) in any of the following Windows SDKs: Visual C++ 6.0 Visual C++ 2005 Visual C++ 2008 Windows 003sp2 SDK 2006/03/15 Longhorn SDK 6.0.6001.16500.72 2007/04/25 Windows Vista SDK 6.0.6001.18000.367 2008/02/05 Windows 7 SDK 7.1 2010/05/19 So I'm not sure xmlparser.idl and xmlparser.h should be in the include directory. -- Francois Gouget http://fgouget.free.fr/ If it stinks, it's chemistry. If it moves, it's biology. If it does not work, it's computer science.
Re: [2/3] dinput: Prevent apps from hiding mouse cursor in the ConfigureDevices dialog.
Is there a way of doing what I want? Would using GetCursorInfo() to discover if it's hidden, and then show it, work? 2011/9/13 Alexandre Julliard : > Lucas Fialho Zawacki writes: > >> @@ -377,6 +377,12 @@ static INT_PTR CALLBACK ConfigureDevicesDlgProc(HWND >> dialog, UINT uMsg, WPARAM w >> break; >> } >> >> + case WM_ACTIVATE: >> + /* Prevent mouse cursor from disappearing inside the dialog */ >> + ShowCursor(1); >> + >> + break; > > That will screw up the cursor show count, you can receive multiple > WM_ACTIVATE. > > -- > Alexandre Julliard > julli...@winehq.org >
Re: cmd: Use NUL/0 instead of 0x00
Frédéric Delanoy writes: > Well IMHO '\0' clearly indicates a char value, while 0 could be an > integer (not in this obvioius example of course). > This way you've a visual indicator/differentiator with nearby integer > values assignments like "foo_integer_var = 0", and this could make the > code more readable IMO They both mean the same thing, and I don't think the extra line noise makes it more readable. But like I said, it's a matter of taste, and you can use the way you prefer in your own code; the corollary is that you can't change it in other people's code. -- Alexandre Julliard julli...@winehq.org
Re: [2/2] shell32: Handle the directory parameter in ShellExecute functions (try 2 resend)
Hi, While running your changed tests on Windows, 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 http://testbot.winehq.org/JobDetails.pl?Key=14201 Your paranoid android. === WNT4WSSP6 (32 bit shlexec) === shlexec.c:2242: Test failed: longPath expected 'C:\TEMP\wt1.tmp\newfolder\tmp\newfolder\tm', got 'C:\TEMP\wt1.tmp\newfolder\shell32_test.exe' === W2KPROSP4 (32 bit shlexec) === shlexec.c:2242: Test failed: longPath expected 'C:\DOCUME~1\winetest\LOCALS~1\Temp\wt1.tmp\newfolder\winetest\LOCALS~1\Temp\wt1.tmp\newfolder\winetest\LOCALS~', got 'C:\DOCUME~1\winetest\LOCALS~1\Temp\wt1.tmp\newfolder\shell32_test.exe' === WXPPROSP3 (32 bit shlexec) === shlexec.c:2242: Test failed: longPath expected 'C:\DOCUME~1\winetest\LOCALS~1\Temp\wt1.tmp\newfolder\winetest\LOCALS~1\Temp\wt1.tmp\newfolder\winetest\LOCALS~', got 'C:\DOCUME~1\winetest\LOCALS~1\Temp\wt1.tmp\newfolder\shell32_test.exe' === W2K3R2SESP2 (32 bit shlexec) === shlexec.c:2242: Test failed: longPath expected 'C:\DOCUME~1\winetest\LOCALS~1\Temp\wt1.tmp\newfolder\winetest\LOCALS~1\Temp\wt1.tmp\newfolder\winetest\LOCALS~', got 'C:\DOCUME~1\winetest\LOCALS~1\Temp\wt1.tmp\newfolder\shell32_test.exe' === WVISTAADM (32 bit shlexec) === shlexec.c:2242: Test failed: longPath expected 'C:\Users\winetest\AppData\Local\Temp\wt7926.tmp\newfolder\etest\AppData\Local\Temp\wt7926.tmp\newfolder\etest\AppData\Lo', got 'C:\Users\winetest\AppData\Local\Temp\wt7926.tmp\newfolder\shell32_test.exe' === W2K8SE (32 bit shlexec) === shlexec.c:2242: Test failed: longPath expected 'C:\Users\winetest\AppData\Local\Temp\wt4D32.tmp\newfolder\etest\AppData\Local\Temp\wt4D32.tmp\newfolder\etest\AppData\Lo', got 'C:\Users\winetest\AppData\Local\Temp\wt4D32.tmp\newfolder\shell32_test.exe' === W7PRO (32 bit shlexec) === shlexec.c:2242: Test failed: longPath expected 'C:\Users\winetest\AppData\Local\Temp\wt70C.tmp\newfolder\etest\AppData\Local\Temp\wt70C.tmp\newfolder\etest\AppData\Lo', got 'C:\Users\winetest\AppData\Local\Temp\wt70C.tmp\newfolder\shell32_test.exe' === W7PROX64 (32 bit shlexec) === shlexec.c:2242: Test failed: longPath expected 'C:\Users\winetest\AppData\Local\Temp\wt11E4.tmp\newfolder\etest\AppData\Local\Temp\wt11E4.tmp\newfolder\etest\AppData\Lo', got 'C:\Users\winetest\AppData\Local\Temp\wt11E4.tmp\newfolder\shell32_test.exe' === W7PROX64 (64 bit shlexec) === shlexec.c:2242: Test failed: longPath expected 'C:\Users\winetest\AppData\Local\Temp\wt329B.tmp\newfolder\etest\AppData\Local\Temp\wt329B.tmp\newfolder\etest\AppData\Loca', got 'C:\Users\winetest\AppData\Local\Temp\wt329B.tmp\newfolder\shell32_test64.exe'
Re: [1/2] shell32/tests: Fix path comparison (try 2)
Hi, While running your changed tests on Windows, 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 http://testbot.winehq.org/JobDetails.pl?Key=14200 Your paranoid android. === WNT4WSSP6 (32 bit shlexec) === shlexec.c:2242: Test failed: longPath expected 'C:\TEMP\wt1.tmp\newfolder\tmp\newfolder\tm', got 'C:\TEMP\wt1.tmp\newfolder\shell32_test.exe' === W2KPROSP4 (32 bit shlexec) === shlexec.c:2242: Test failed: longPath expected 'C:\DOCUME~1\winetest\LOCALS~1\Temp\wt1.tmp\newfolder\winetest\LOCALS~1\Temp\wt1.tmp\newfolder\winetest\LOCALS~', got 'C:\DOCUME~1\winetest\LOCALS~1\Temp\wt1.tmp\newfolder\shell32_test.exe' === WXPPROSP3 (32 bit shlexec) === shlexec.c:2242: Test failed: longPath expected 'C:\DOCUME~1\winetest\LOCALS~1\Temp\wt1.tmp\newfolder\winetest\LOCALS~1\Temp\wt1.tmp\newfolder\winetest\LOCALS~', got 'C:\DOCUME~1\winetest\LOCALS~1\Temp\wt1.tmp\newfolder\shell32_test.exe' === W2K3R2SESP2 (32 bit shlexec) === shlexec.c:2242: Test failed: longPath expected 'C:\DOCUME~1\winetest\LOCALS~1\Temp\wt1.tmp\newfolder\winetest\LOCALS~1\Temp\wt1.tmp\newfolder\winetest\LOCALS~', got 'C:\DOCUME~1\winetest\LOCALS~1\Temp\wt1.tmp\newfolder\shell32_test.exe' === WVISTAADM (32 bit shlexec) === shlexec.c:2242: Test failed: longPath expected 'C:\Users\winetest\AppData\Local\Temp\wtE6E8.tmp\newfolder\etest\AppData\Local\Temp\wtE6E8.tmp\newfolder\etest\AppData\Lo', got 'C:\Users\winetest\AppData\Local\Temp\wtE6E8.tmp\newfolder\shell32_test.exe' === W2K8SE (32 bit shlexec) === shlexec.c:2242: Test failed: longPath expected 'C:\Users\winetest\AppData\Local\Temp\wt7849.tmp\newfolder\etest\AppData\Local\Temp\wt7849.tmp\newfolder\etest\AppData\Lo', got 'C:\Users\winetest\AppData\Local\Temp\wt7849.tmp\newfolder\shell32_test.exe' === W7PRO (32 bit shlexec) === shlexec.c:2242: Test failed: longPath expected 'C:\Users\winetest\AppData\Local\Temp\wt6624.tmp\newfolder\etest\AppData\Local\Temp\wt6624.tmp\newfolder\etest\AppData\Lo', got 'C:\Users\winetest\AppData\Local\Temp\wt6624.tmp\newfolder\shell32_test.exe' === W7PROX64 (32 bit shlexec) === shlexec.c:2242: Test failed: longPath expected 'C:\Users\winetest\AppData\Local\Temp\wt2944.tmp\newfolder\etest\AppData\Local\Temp\wt2944.tmp\newfolder\etest\AppData\Lo', got 'C:\Users\winetest\AppData\Local\Temp\wt2944.tmp\newfolder\shell32_test.exe' === W7PROX64 (64 bit shlexec) === shlexec.c:2242: Test failed: longPath expected 'C:\Users\winetest\AppData\Local\Temp\wt188.tmp\newfolder\etest\AppData\Local\Temp\wt188.tmp\newfolder\etest\AppData\Loca', got 'C:\Users\winetest\AppData\Local\Temp\wt188.tmp\newfolder\shell32_test64.exe'
Re: cmd: Use NUL/0 instead of 0x00
2011/9/13 Alexandre Julliard : > Frédéric Delanoy writes: > >> @@ -374,7 +374,7 @@ void WCMD_HandleTildaModifiers(WCHAR **start, const >> WCHAR *forVariable, >> points to the variable just after the modifiers. Process modifiers >> in a specific order, remembering there could be duplicates */ >> modifierLen = lastModifier - firstModifier; >> - finaloutput[0] = 0x00; >> + finaloutput[0] = '\0'; > > It's mostly a matter of taste, but I don't think '\0' is better than > 0x00, it's just another complicated way of writing 0. Well IMHO '\0' clearly indicates a char value, while 0 could be an integer (not in this obvioius example of course). This way you've a visual indicator/differentiator with nearby integer values assignments like "foo_integer_var = 0", and this could make the code more readable IMO
Re: audio: when is a "Resource temporarily unavailable"?
Hey, On 09/12/2011 02:14 PM, joerg-cyril.hoe...@t-systems.com wrote: > Hi, > > Bug #28056 involving FreeBSD and OSS exhibits: > warn:oss:AudioRenderClient_ReleaseBuffer write failed: 35 (Resource > temporarily unavailable) > > My own notes from times as old as wine-1.1.8 show the same error with ALSA: > err:wave:wodPlayer_WriteMaxFrags Error in writing wavehdr. Reason: Resource > temporarily unavailable > > The symbolic errno constant is EAGAIN=EWOULDBLOCK. So we look at write manpage.. EAGAIN or EWOULDBLOCK The file descriptor fd refers to a socket and has been marked nonblocking (O_NONBLOCK), and the write would block.POSIX.1-2001 allows either error to be returned for this case, and does not require these constants to have the same value, so a portable appli‐ cation should check for both possibilities. > Does anybody have a suspicion when/why this happens? > - is audio simply not reliable? > - is Wine not correctly driving audio output? > - ...? > > FWIW, my test experiments outside Wine recently produced EWOULDBLOCK > once despite non-blocking mode in ALSA, when attempting to write a small > number of frames, less than period_size. > > Is this failure really temporary or would it be safer > to close or reset the audio device given such an error value? > What's your experience? > Usually: you're trying to put more data in the audio buffer than the amount that can written. Similar errors happen on alsa, when trying to write > snd_pcm_avail(); Looks like a bug to me. ~Maarten
re: [2/2] msxml3: Support creating IXMLParser Interface
test fails here? xmlparser.c:41: Test failed: IXMLParser is not available (0x80040154) make: *** [xmlparser.ok] Error 1 -- Forwarded message -- From: Date: Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 7:45 AM Subject: Re: 78800: Subject: [2/2] msxml3: Support creating IXMLParser Interface To: d...@kegel.com This is an experimental automated build and test service. Please feel free to ignore this email while we work the kinks out. For more info about this message, see http://wiki.winehq.org/BuildBot The Buildbot has detected a failed build on builder runtests-default while building Wine. Full details are available at: http://buildbot.kegel.com/builders/runtests-default/builds/77 (though maybe not for long, as I'm still reinstalling the buildbot periodically while experimenting) BUILD FAILED: failed shell_3 Errors: xmlparser.c:41: Test failed: IXMLParser is not available (0x80040154) make: *** [xmlparser.ok] Error 1
Re: cmd: Use NUL/0 instead of 0x00
Frédéric Delanoy writes: > @@ -374,7 +374,7 @@ void WCMD_HandleTildaModifiers(WCHAR **start, const WCHAR > *forVariable, > points to the variable just after the modifiers. Process modifiers > in a specific order, remembering there could be duplicates */ >modifierLen = lastModifier - firstModifier; > - finaloutput[0] = 0x00; > + finaloutput[0] = '\0'; It's mostly a matter of taste, but I don't think '\0' is better than 0x00, it's just another complicated way of writing 0. -- Alexandre Julliard julli...@winehq.org
Re: [PATCH 03/22] vbscript: Added object member assignment tests
On Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 12:36 PM, Jacek Caban wrote:
+const char *debugstr_variant(const VARIANT *v)
+{
...
+case VT_I2:
+return wine_dbg_sprintf("{VT_I4: %d}", V_I2(v));
Should be "{VT_I2: %d}".
Octavian
Re: [PATCH 07/22] vbscript: Added support for variable assignment statements
Hi, While running your changed tests on Windows, 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 http://testbot.winehq.org/JobDetails.pl?Key=14182 Your paranoid android. === WNT4WSSP6 (32 bit) === No test summary line found === W2KPROSP4 (32 bit) === No test summary line found === WXPPROSP3 (32 bit) === No test summary line found === W2K3R2SESP2 (32 bit) === No test summary line found === WVISTAADM (32 bit) === No test summary line found === W2K8SE (32 bit) === No test summary line found === W7PRO (32 bit) === No test summary line found === W7PROX64 (32 bit) === No test summary line found === W7PROX64 (64 bit) === No test summary line found
Re: [PATCH 05/22] vbscript: Added dim statement compiler implementation
Hi, While running your changed tests on Windows, 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 http://testbot.winehq.org/JobDetails.pl?Key=14180 Your paranoid android. === WNT4WSSP6 (32 bit) === No test summary line found === W2KPROSP4 (32 bit) === No test summary line found === WXPPROSP3 (32 bit) === No test summary line found === W2K3R2SESP2 (32 bit) === No test summary line found === WVISTAADM (32 bit) === No test summary line found === W2K8SE (32 bit) === No test summary line found === W7PRO (32 bit) === No test summary line found === W7PROX64 (32 bit) === No test summary line found === W7PROX64 (64 bit) === No test summary line found
Re: [PATCH 06/22] vbscript: Added variable value expression support
Hi, While running your changed tests on Windows, 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 http://testbot.winehq.org/JobDetails.pl?Key=14181 Your paranoid android. === WNT4WSSP6 (32 bit) === No test summary line found === W2KPROSP4 (32 bit) === No test summary line found === WXPPROSP3 (32 bit) === No test summary line found === W2K3R2SESP2 (32 bit) === No test summary line found === WVISTAADM (32 bit) === No test summary line found === W2K8SE (32 bit) === No test summary line found === W7PRO (32 bit) === No test summary line found === W7PROX64 (32 bit) === No test summary line found === W7PROX64 (64 bit) === No test summary line found
Re: [PATCH 15/22] vbscript: Added interp_mod implementation
Hi, While running your changed tests on Windows, 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 http://testbot.winehq.org/JobDetails.pl?Key=14184 Your paranoid android. === WNT4WSSP6 (32 bit) === No test summary line found === W2KPROSP4 (32 bit) === No test summary line found === WXPPROSP3 (32 bit) === No test summary line found === W2K3R2SESP2 (32 bit) === No test summary line found === WVISTAADM (32 bit) === No test summary line found === W2K8SE (32 bit) === No test summary line found === W7PRO (32 bit) === No test summary line found === W7PROX64 (32 bit) === No test summary line found === W7PROX64 (64 bit) === No test summary line found
Re: [PATCH 12/22] vbscript: Added if statement tests
Hi, While running your changed tests on Windows, 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 http://testbot.winehq.org/JobDetails.pl?Key=14183 Your paranoid android. === WNT4WSSP6 (32 bit) === No test summary line found === W2KPROSP4 (32 bit) === No test summary line found === WXPPROSP3 (32 bit) === No test summary line found === W2K3R2SESP2 (32 bit) === No test summary line found === WVISTAADM (32 bit) === No test summary line found === W2K8SE (32 bit) === No test summary line found === W7PRO (32 bit) === No test summary line found === W7PROX64 (32 bit) === No test summary line found === W7PROX64 (64 bit) === No test summary line found
Re: [PATCH 17/22] vbscript: Added interp_idiv implementation
Hi, While running your changed tests on Windows, 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 http://testbot.winehq.org/JobDetails.pl?Key=14185 Your paranoid android. === WNT4WSSP6 (32 bit) === No test summary line found === W2KPROSP4 (32 bit) === No test summary line found === WXPPROSP3 (32 bit) === No test summary line found === W2K3R2SESP2 (32 bit) === No test summary line found === WVISTAADM (32 bit) === No test summary line found === W2K8SE (32 bit) === No test summary line found === W7PRO (32 bit) === No test summary line found === W7PROX64 (32 bit) === No test summary line found === W7PROX64 (64 bit) === No test summary line found
Re: [PATCH 20/22] vbscript: Added interp_div implementation
Hi, While running your changed tests on Windows, 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 http://testbot.winehq.org/JobDetails.pl?Key=14186 Your paranoid android. === WNT4WSSP6 (32 bit) === No test summary line found === W2KPROSP4 (32 bit) === No test summary line found === WXPPROSP3 (32 bit) === No test summary line found === W2K3R2SESP2 (32 bit) === No test summary line found === WVISTAADM (32 bit) === No test summary line found === W2K8SE (32 bit) === No test summary line found === W7PRO (32 bit) === No test summary line found === W7PROX64 (32 bit) === No test summary line found === W7PROX64 (64 bit) === No test summary line found
Re: [PATCH 22/22] vbscript: Added interp_exp implementation
Hi, While running your changed tests on Windows, 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 http://testbot.winehq.org/JobDetails.pl?Key=14188 Your paranoid android. === WNT4WSSP6 (32 bit) === No test summary line found === W2KPROSP4 (32 bit) === No test summary line found === WXPPROSP3 (32 bit) === No test summary line found === W2K3R2SESP2 (32 bit) === No test summary line found === WVISTAADM (32 bit) === No test summary line found === W2K8SE (32 bit) === No test summary line found === W7PRO (32 bit) === No test summary line found === W7PROX64 (32 bit) === No test summary line found === W7PROX64 (64 bit) === No test summary line found
Re: [2/3] dinput: Prevent apps from hiding mouse cursor in the ConfigureDevices dialog.
Lucas Fialho Zawacki writes: > @@ -377,6 +377,12 @@ static INT_PTR CALLBACK ConfigureDevicesDlgProc(HWND > dialog, UINT uMsg, WPARAM w > break; > } > > +case WM_ACTIVATE: > +/* Prevent mouse cursor from disappearing inside the dialog */ > +ShowCursor(1); > + > +break; That will screw up the cursor show count, you can receive multiple WM_ACTIVATE. -- Alexandre Julliard julli...@winehq.org
