Am Freitag, den 25.07.2008, 22:50 +0800 schrieb Huang, Zhangrong: > > ../../../tools/runtest -q -P wine -M gdi32.dll -T ../../.. -p > > gdi32_test.exe.so font.c && touch font.ok > > font.c:850: Test succeeded inside todo block: data index 2: expected font > > codepage 1252, got 1252 > > font.c:853: Test succeeded inside todo block: data index 2: GdiGetCodePage > > should have returned 1252, got 1252 [...] > > make[2]: *** [font.ok] Error 8 > > Sorry, it's weird, todo_wine doesn't work in "for" block statement?
todo_wine *did* work. But todo_wine does not mean "Wine *might* fail this, please ignore", but "Wine *is* *known* to fail this, and if it doesn't fail anymore, please tell me to update my statement about the quality of wine". It seems like you have written a test that fails or passes dependent on some external condition (I mean, you did make test on your machine first before sending in the patch, did you?), for example the installed fonts. Such a test can not be "fixed" by introducing a todo_wine into the test program. I don't know how to express "Wine does an unpredictable thing here, maybe it fails, maybe it doesn't" in a Wine testcase; this might have the reason that we don't want Wine to do unpredictable things at all. Regards, Michael Karcher