[PATCH 1/5] user32/tests: Add tests for GetWindowPlacement() and SetWindowPlacement().

[Gabriel Ivăncescu]

On 2/14/19 6:17 AM, Zebediah Figura wrote:
> On 2/13/19 2:16 PM, Alexandre Julliard wrote:
>> Zebediah Figura <z.figura12 at gmail.com> writes:
>>
>>> On 2/10/19 1:39 PM, Marvin wrote:
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> While running your changed tests on Windows, I think I found new 
>>>> failures.
>>>> Being a bot and all I'm not very good at pattern recognition, so I 
>>>> might be
>>>> wrong, but could you please double-check?
>>>>
>>>> Full results can be found at:
>>>> https://testbot.winehq.org/JobDetails.pl?Key=47392
>>>>
>>>> Your paranoid android.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> === wvistau64 (32 bit report) ===
>>>>
>>>> user32:
>>>> win.c:10796: Test failed: got minimized pos (0,713)
>>>> win.c:10808: Test failed: got minimized pos (0,713)
>>>> win.c:10820: Test failed: got minimized pos (0,713)
>>>> win.c:10833: Test failed: got minimized pos (0,713)
>>>> win.c:10846: Test failed: got minimized pos (0,713)
>>>> win.c:10859: Test failed: got minimized pos (0,713)
>>>> win.c:10872: Test failed: got minimized pos (0,713)
>>>> win.c:10906: Test failed: got minimized pos (100,100)
>>>> win.c:10928: Test failed: got minimized pos (100,100)
>>>>
>>>
>>> *snip*
>>>
>>> This fails because test_shell_window(), which is pretty pathological,
>>> kills explorer.exe, and that doesn't restart itself until the test
>>> program terminates. What can be done about this, if anything?
>>
>> The obvious fix is to run your test before the one that kills the shell
>> window. Though if the behavior depends on having a shell window, it may
>> be interesting to test both cases.
>>
> 
> Thanks. I guess I wasn't sure if that was an acceptable solution.
> 
> I guess the behaviour here makes sense—if there's no shell window, there 
> won't be a taskbar, and so windows would have no way of being restored 
> if they're minimized offscreen. But I'm also not sure it's something 
> that there's any point replicating in Wine (either windows are offscreen 
> anyway due to WM integration, or explorer.exe is necessary to run the 
> virtual desktop), so I'll leave off testing this, unless you think it'd 
> be better to do so.
> 
> 

Hi Zeb,

Just wondering, could this (missing) behavior have something to do with 
https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15346