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=11882
Your paranoid android
Hello everyone. As you may know I'm working on the dinput8 action
mapping support and at the moment I've pretty much finished the mouse
and keyboard and just need to get my patches in.
For the next part, however, I'm going to need to analyze lot's of data
generated by different joysticks to figure
On 21 June 2011 23:49, Matteo Bruni wrote:
> Here I modified surface_get_gl_buffer() to fix backbuffer ORM, an
> alternative approach would be to modify
> context_apply_[blit|clear|draw]_state() in a similar fashion instead.
>
Yeah, I think I'd prefer the alternative. We handle onscreen and
offscr
(From the "keeping AF happy" and "metabugs are evil" departments.)
Anyone watching wine-bugs already knows this, but just in case:
As AF suggested in
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=24745#c11
bugs about apps needing msvcr90 or the
like should identify the particular function in the bug sub
On Tuesday 21 June 2011 12:32:28 Michael Mc Donnell wrote:
> Note that two of the helper functions and a struct in the test were
> also included in my UpdateSemantics patch. I'll remove them once my
> UpdateSemantics patch is in the official tree.
Your patches aren't applied yet and http://source.w
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=11874
Your paranoid android
Mariusz Pluciński writes:
> Would you explain me, what is wrong with this patches series? I've
> submitted it last week and for some reason it's status is
> untouched. (the "failed" status seems to be temporal testbot's problem
> rather than my patch's, so this is not the reason). I have no idea
On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 6:32 AM, Michael Mc Donnell
wrote:
> Here is my test and implementation of ConvertAdjacencyToPointReps.
> + hr = iface->lpVtbl->LockIndexBuffer(iface, D3DLOCK_READONLY,
> (void**)&indices);
> + if (FAILED(hr)) goto cleanup;
> + memcpy(new_indices, indices, This-
Hello
Would you explain me, what is wrong with this patches series? I've
submitted it last week and for some reason it's status is untouched.
(the "failed" status seems to be temporal testbot's problem rather than
my patch's, so this is not the reason). I have no idea how to fix them.
Best r
Hey Susan,
On 06/21/2011 01:03 PM, Susan Cragin wrote:
> >Susan Cragin wrote:
> >> I think a regression was introduced today. I got the following trying to
> >> run NatSpeak 11.0 with today's git.
> >> wine-1.3.22-255-g4c0c0d3
> >> Should I do a regression test and file a bug, or is it obvious fr
>Susan Cragin wrote:>> I think a regression was introduced today. I got the following trying to run NatSpeak 11.0 with today's git. >> wine-1.3.22-255-g4c0c0d3>> Should I do a regression test and file a bug, or is it obvious from this? >> Or is it me -- something to do with my new Oneiric Ocelot? O
Here is my test and implementation of ConvertAdjacencyToPointReps.
Note that two of the helper functions and a struct in the test were
also included in my UpdateSemantics patch. I'll remove them once my
UpdateSemantics patch is in the official tree.
Any comments?
Thanks,
Michael Mc Donnell
From
Susan Cragin wrote:
> I think a regression was introduced today. I got the following trying to run
> NatSpeak 11.0 with today's git.
> wine-1.3.22-255-g4c0c0d3
> Should I do a regression test and file a bug, or is it obvious from this?
> Or is it me -- something to do with my new Oneiric Ocelot?
13 matches
Mail list logo
