On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 2:28 AM, Dan Kegel wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 9:51 PM, James Hawkins wrote:
>> I was wondering why you were getting so many msi test failures and
>> errors! Now I know. Yes, the msi tests can't be run in parallel,
>> even on windows.
>
> What if I use a different ms
On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 9:51 PM, James Hawkins wrote:
>> Some of the remaining reported errors in msi are probably my
>> fault - I'm running them in parallel.
> I was wondering why you were getting so many msi test failures and
> errors! Now I know. Yes, the msi tests can't be run in parallel,
>
On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 9:51 PM, James Hawkins wrote:
> I was wondering why you were getting so many msi test failures and
> errors! Now I know. Yes, the msi tests can't be run in parallel,
> even on windows.
What if I use a different msi database for each test? That'd be easy.
Otherwise I'll
On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 11:52 PM, James Hawkins wrote:
> Oops, spoke too soon. Thanks for fixing the problem Vincent! I guess
> we can close http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=20920 now.
>
> James
>
That wasn't me; I just removed the fixed code afterwards. ;)
--
Vincent Povirk
On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 9:51 PM, James Hawkins wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 9:01 PM, Dan Kegel wrote:
>> On Sat, Dec 5, 2009 at 7:39 AM, Dan Kegel wrote:
>>> With those changes, I now see 457 non-leak errors,
>>> (~134 of which are due to the fresh regression
>>> http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bu
On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 9:01 PM, Dan Kegel wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 5, 2009 at 7:39 AM, Dan Kegel wrote:
>> With those changes, I now see 457 non-leak errors,
>> (~134 of which are due to the fresh regression
>> http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=20920 )
>> and 1560 leak errors
>> (~300 of which a
On Sat, Dec 5, 2009 at 7:39 AM, Dan Kegel wrote:
> With those changes, I now see 457 non-leak errors,
> (~134 of which are due to the fresh regression
> http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=20920 )
> and 1560 leak errors
> (~300 of which are due to ntlm_auth, which I'm still
> trying to suppress
On Sat, Dec 5, 2009 at 1:24 PM, Dan Kegel wrote:
> I'm going to do one more quick run today, disabling three
> more d3d tests that crash, and (riskily) running with -j2
Done, see
http://kegel.com/wine/valgrind/logs/2009-12-05-15.20/
I checked in my recent script changes to
http://code.google.com
On Sat, Dec 5, 2009 at 7:39 AM, Dan Kegel wrote:
> http://kegel.com/wine/valgrind/logs/2009-12-05-01.15/
> shows the same results as
> http://kegel.com/wine/valgrind/logs/2009-12-04-18.45/
> but with a looser filter
And
http://kegel.com/wine/valgrind/logs/2009-12-05-08.01/
fixes a problem where I
On Sat, Dec 5, 2009 at 10:00 AM, Stefan Dösinger wrote:
> in vg-ddraw-d3d.txt:
> Conditional jump or move depends on uninitialised value(s)
> at ??? (in /dev/zero)
> by surface_load_ds_location (surface.c:4504)
> by IWineD3DDeviceImpl_SetDepthStencilSurface (device.c:6273)
> etc
>
> I
2009/12/5 Stefan Dösinger :
> Hi Dan,
>
> in vg-ddraw-d3d.txt:
> Conditional jump or move depends on uninitialised value(s)
> at ??? (in /dev/zero)
> by surface_load_ds_location (surface.c:4504)
> by IWineD3DDeviceImpl_SetDepthStencilSurface (device.c:6273)
> etc
>
> It seems that this
Hi Dan,
in vg-ddraw-d3d.txt:
Conditional jump or move depends on uninitialised value(s)
at ??? (in /dev/zero)
by surface_load_ds_location (surface.c:4504)
by IWineD3DDeviceImpl_SetDepthStencilSurface (device.c:6273)
etc
It seems that this happens in a function that the compiler in
http://kegel.com/wine/valgrind/logs/2009-12-05-01.15/
shows the same results as
http://kegel.com/wine/valgrind/logs/2009-12-04-18.45/
but with a looser filter, i.e. I now even show files whose
only sin is a memory leak (in the past, I had suppressed
those because I cared more about non-leak errors)
13 matches
Mail list logo
