Patchwatcher: failed regression tests: [6/10 AcceptEx] Implements sock_close_handle

[Scott Lindeneau]

I don't understand, this patch doesn't cause any regressions on my
machine using the latest git (none of them do). The patch[6/10] is
(nearly) identical to the patch I submitted earlier (which did not
cause regressions). The only difference is in the hash. The next
patch[7/10] changes zero functionality because the function that is
implemented in [7/10] is unused at this point in time and patch [7/10]
passes the conformance tests.

scott at SocialSycotic:~/programming/wine/wine/patch$ diff
9.7.2/0006-Implements-sock_close_handle.txt
9-4.7/0006-Implements-sock_close_handle.txt
1c1
< From 40ae4098b66df1cb30dc77368ccfc1c495bb0b68 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
---
> From d1e0353beb8490bbd9b8818523c6d79daae510ff Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
scott at SocialSycotic:~/programming/wine/wine/patch$

Using only patches [1/10 - 6/10] (The patches applied by patchwatcher
when it displays the failure):

../../../tools/runtest -q -P wine -M urlmon.dll -T ../../.. -p
urlmon_test.exe.so protocol.c && touch protocol.ok
fixme:wininet:InternetLockRequestFile STUB
fixme:wininet:InternetLockRequestFile STUB
fixme:wininet:InternetLockRequestFile STUB
fixme:wininet:InternetLockRequestFile STUB
../../../tools/runtest -q -P wine -M urlmon.dll -T ../../.. -p
urlmon_test.exe.so stream.c && touch stream.ok

As for the conformance test. I will look into how I have to change the
sock.c test loop.

~Scott

On Sun, Sep 7, 2008 at 9:14 AM, Dan Kegel <dank at kegel.com> wrote:
> This is interesting.   It does seem like that patch changed
> an error code and added a new failure to urlmon:protocol.c.
> Was this just a case of "I should have combined two of the
> patches in the series"?
>
> BTW, if you end up resending the patch series again,
> you might send the test case first (with todo_wine's),
> and then after the errors are fixed, remove the todo_wine's.
>
>
> On Sat, Sep 6, 2008 at 4:42 PM, Patchwatcher <patchwatcher at kegel.com> wrote:
>> Hi!  This is the experimental automated wine patchwatcher thingy.
>> The latest git sources were built and tested with your patch
>> "[6/10 AcceptEx] Implements sock_close_handle"
>> Result: the patch failed regression tests.
>>
>> You can retrieve the full build results at
>>  http://kegel.com/wine/patchwatcher/results/1162.log
>> and see the patch as parsed at
>>  http://kegel.com/wine/patchwatcher/results/1162.txt
>> See
>>  http://kegel.com/wine/patchwatcher/results
>> for more info.
>>
>>
>