2009/2/20 Hans Leidekker :
> On Friday 20 February 2009 08:38:09 James Hawkins wrote:
>
>> > It would hurt overall performance if we do it at the directory API
>> > level, so the same logic does not apply.
>> >
>>
>> I'm not advocating adding it to the directory API. I'm saying if we
>> don't care
On Friday 20 February 2009 08:38:09 James Hawkins wrote:
> > It would hurt overall performance if we do it at the directory API
> > level, so the same logic does not apply.
> >
>
> I'm not advocating adding it to the directory API. I'm saying if we
> don't care about it at that level, then we sh
On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 11:30 PM, Hans Leidekker wrote:
> On Thursday 19 February 2009 22:36:25 James Hawkins wrote:
>
>> > I don't see how it would hurt if we do match the sort order on Windows,
>> > even if we achieve it by other means.
>> >
>>
>> The reason it hurts in this case is because the
On Thursday 19 February 2009 22:36:25 James Hawkins wrote:
> > I don't see how it would hurt if we do match the sort order on Windows,
> > even if we achieve it by other means.
> >
>
> The reason it hurts in this case is because the sorting happens at the
> File/Directory API level and not in fus
On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 1:14 PM, Hans Leidekker wrote:
>
> > This isn't how it's done on Windows. On Windows, the order is based
> > solely on directory enumeration, which we don't try to match in Wine.
>
> I don't see how it would hurt if we do match the sort order on Windows,
> even if we achie
> This isn't how it's done on Windows. On Windows, the order is based
> solely on directory enumeration, which we don't try to match in Wine.
I don't see how it would hurt if we do match the sort order on Windows,
even if we achieve it by other means.
-Hans
On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 5:06 AM, Hans Leidekker wrote:
>
> This hopefully fixes the test failures on Alexandre's machine.
>
This isn't how it's done on Windows. On Windows, the order is based
solely on directory enumeration, which we don't try to match in Wine.
The fix is to check for all N resu
