dlls/advapi32/tests/security.c - Bugfix in test!
jakov at vmlinux.org
Sat Mar 19 03:13:57 CST 2005
Jakob Eriksson wrote:
> Alexandre Julliard wrote:
>> Jakob Eriksson <jakov at vmlinux.org> writes:
>>> --- dlls/advapi32/tests/security.c 14 Mar 2005 17:20:58 -0000
>>> +++ dlls/advapi32/tests/security.c 16 Mar 2005 09:32:28 -0000
>>> @@ -289,8 +289,8 @@
>>> luid.LowPart = i;
>>> cchName = sizeof(buf);
>>> ret = pLookupPrivilegeNameA(NULL, &luid, buf, &cchName);
>>> - ok( ret && GetLastError() != ERROR_NO_SUCH_PRIVILEGE,
>>> - "LookupPrivilegeNameA(0.%ld) failed: %ld\n", i,
>>> + if (GetLastError() != ERROR_NO_SUCH_PRIVILEGE)
>>> + ok( ret, "LookupPrivilegeNameA(0.%ld) failed: %ld\n",
>>> i, GetLastError());
>> It doesn't really make sense to check the last error if the function
> True. Don't know what I was thinking.
Now I know. If the error was ERROR_NO_SUCH_PRIVILEGE, it's ok, we don't
Move on. NT4 has this behaviour.
If it isn't, but ret is 0, AKA LookupPrivilegeName() failed, I wan't to
what the error was. It's a trace.
So I think the patch is valid, there is method to the madness.
More information about the wine-devel