On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 9:51 PM, James Hawkins <trui...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 9:01 PM, Dan Kegel <d...@kegel.com> wrote: >> On Sat, Dec 5, 2009 at 7:39 AM, Dan Kegel <d...@kegel.com> 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), in the wine conformance test suite. >> >> I had a build problem (script error) that made test results >> from Monday through this morning funny. I reran after >> fixing the error; results at >> http://kegel.com/wine/valgrind/logs/2009-12-09-17.02/ >> >> I now count 289 non-leak errors and 981 leak errors. >> Some of the remaining reported errors in msi are probably my >> fault - I'm running them in parallel. Probably making >> them all use different data files would do the trick... >> - Dan >> > > 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. Vincent stated that he thinks the > StorageImpl_Construct bug is fixed, yet I'm still seeing the errors. > Vincent, can you take a look at the results? >
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