Austin English wrote: > On Tue, Jan 13, 2009 at 1:28 AM, Paul Vriens <paul.vriens.w...@gmail.com> > wrote: >> Austin English wrote: >>> Pointed out by Anastasius in bug 13011. Tested on XP SP2 & 2K SP4 (and >>> Wine, of course). >>> >>> >>> >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>> >>> >> Hi Austin, >> >> The test case that is pointed out in bug 13011 is different though: >> >> hr = CoInitializeEx(NULL, COINIT_APARTMENTTHREADED); >> ok(hr == S_OK, "CoInitializeEx failed with error 0x%08x\n", hr); >> hr = OleInitialize(NULL); >> ok(hr == S_OK, "OleInitialize failed with error 0x%08x\n", hr); >> >> The above succeeds on W2K3 but fails on Wine. >> >> -- >> Cheers, >> >> Paul. >> > > I was referring to this comment: > "Calling OleInitialize() for the first time should yield S_OK - even with > apartment already initialized by previous CoInitialize(Ex) calls. > Calling OleInitialize() more than once yields S_FALSE for the second and > following calls." > > Though that testcase should probably be added as well, in a todo_wine of > course. > > > So maybe we should do
hr = CoInitializeEx(NULL, COINIT_APARTMENTTHREADED); ok(hr == S_OK, "CoInitializeEx failed with error 0x%08x\n", hr); hr = OleInitialize(NULL); todo_wine ok(hr == S_OK, "OleInitialize failed with error 0x%08x\n", hr); hr = OleInitialize(NULL); ok(hr == S_FALSE, "Expected S_FALSE, hr = 0x%08x\n", hr); and move that to a separate test function? (Maybe in compobj.c?) I mean it's a ole32 basic thing that's wrong, not something that should be in a specific test I guess? -- Cheers, Paul.