Win2000 Conformance Test Results...

[Kye Lewis]

XP Results Round 2:

** If a test is not listed here, then it has passed **

advapi32_test registry: No Change

Note: Test now always has 3 failures, 
No cases of more failures are apparent.

kernel32_test process: No Change

netapi32_test access: No Change

shell32_test shfileop: No Change

user32_test sysparams: No Change

Thanks,
Kye Lewis
LinksOS Project Administrator
LinksOS Web Team Leader
kyethespy at softhome.net
(New email address! kyethespy at liquid2k.com will still work, but please
send all emails now to new email)

"640k ought to be enough for anyone!"
- Bill Gates

=================================
LinksOS: Linking you to the world
http://linksos.cjb.net
http://linksos.sourceforge.net/
http://linksos.oxygen-x.net/
Now with Bugzilla and phpBB installed :)
=================================


-----Original Message-----
From: wine-devel-admin at winehq.com [mailto:wine-devel-admin at winehq.com]
On Behalf Of Francois Gouget
Sent: Friday, December 13, 2002 8:58 AM
To: David Fraser
Cc: Kye Lewis; wine-devel at winehq.org
Subject: Re: Win2000 Conformance Test Results...


Hmmm, I meant to send this two days ago...


On Tue, 10 Dec 2002, David Fraser wrote:
[...]
> for kernel32_test path, I got this additional error (before all the
others)

I have made tons of fixes to the kernel/path test and it should now work
much better. I just uploaded the new version of the tests compiled from
my sources. One can download them from the usual URL:

http://fgouget.free.fr/wine/winetests.zip


[...]
> >process: 116 tests executed, 0 marked as todo, 4 failures.
> >
> Exactly the same except I have 10 messages interspersed with these,
saying:
> tests/process.c: 1 tests executed, 0 marked as todo, 0 failures.
> Why these extra messages?

Because this executable invokes itself to test CreateProcess. And each
time it exits it prints statistics about how many tests passed and
failed, although the child processes are not actually performing any
test. So these messages can be ignored.


> >h:\wine\wine\dlls\shlwapi\tests\shreg.c:218: Test failed: (6)
> >h:\wine\wine\dlls\shlwapi\tests\shreg.c:219: Test failed: (6,43)
> >h:\wine\wine\dlls\shlwapi\tests\shreg.c:220: Test failed:
(3435973836)
[...]
> Same but I get 0 for all your 3435973836 which is 0xcccccccc. Must be
a
> debug/release build thing - variable not being initialized.

Should not be the case. The code does:
	dwType = -1;
	dwRet = SHQueryValueExA( hKey, "Test3", NULL, &dwType, NULL,
&dwSize);
	ok( dwType == REG_SZ, "(%lu)" , dwType);

So we should either get -1 or something that makes sense, not
0xcccccccc. This needs to be investigated more.


> Should we print out some of these results in hex as well to make life
> easier?

We should print them in just one format, decimal or hex, whichever makes
more sense.


> >I will now be concentrating on working out what is wrong with these
> >tests :)

Yep, I think this is priority number one now. Running the tests on more
platforms would only return pretty much the same list of bugs again and
again.


-- 
Francois Gouget         fgouget at free.fr        http://fgouget.free.fr/
      Any sufficiently advanced bug is indistinguishable from a feature.
                            -- from some indian guy