[PATCH 1/3] gdi32/tests: Test BitBlt() to an enhanced metafile.

Austin English austinenglish at gmail.com
Sun Nov 22 12:02:05 CST 2009


On Sun, Nov 22, 2009 at 12:00 PM, Charles Davis <cdavis at mymail.mines.edu> wrote:
> Austin English wrote:
>> On Sat, Nov 21, 2009 at 11:15 PM, Charles Davis <cdavis at mymail.mines.edu> wrote:
>>> Dmitry Timoshkov wrote:
>>>> "Charles Davis" <cdavis at mymail.mines.edu> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> You forgot to remove if (1).
>>>>>>
>>>>> It goes away in patch #3. I thought I already had this discussion with
>>>>> Paul.
>>>>>
>>>>> There's a reason it's there. EMF_BITBLT contains two BitBlt() records,
>>>>> but the EMF we're comparing it to only has one. That's because one of
>>>>> them is if(0)'d out because it crashes on Wine. So, if we try to compare
>>>>> the EMF we produced to the EMF we expect, it will fail. Last I checked,
>>>>> Alexandre doesn't like it when tests fail. All tests must pass on his
>>>>> box.
>>>> There are 2 solutions for that:
>>>> 1. use todo_wine in the test, and remove it in a patch with the fix
>>> The test will fail on Windows if I do that.
>>
>> That won't affect windows. It will only fail on wine if it passes.
>>
> You don't understand. The expected EMF bits contain TWO BitBlt()
> records, but the EMF produced by the test contains only one. It will
> contain only one on both Wine and Windows, because one of the calls to
> BitBlt() is if(0)'d out. So the test will fail on Windows if the call to
> compare_emf_bits() is marked todo_wine.

Ah, my mistake.

> Oh, and you didn't reply to all. Was that intentional?

Yes, didn't think everyone needed to know what todo_wine did ;-).

-- 
-Austin



More information about the wine-devel mailing list