truiken at gmail.com
Wed Dec 9 23:52:56 CST 2009
On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 9:51 PM, James Hawkins <truiken at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 9:01 PM, Dan Kegel <dank at kegel.com> wrote:
>> On Sat, Dec 5, 2009 at 7:39 AM, Dan Kegel <dank at 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
>> 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.
More information about the wine-devel