RFC How to get rid of "always new" TestBot false positives?
fgouget at codeweavers.com
Fri Mar 27 17:44:41 CDT 2020
On Fri, 27 Mar 2020, Zebediah Figura wrote:
> Okay, so, some thoughts:
> (1) How many of these are there? Have you compiled a list? Maybe we should
> just bite the bullet and add broken() for them instead, and defer figuring out
> why it's actually broken for later.
I missed the broken() aspect initially. The problem is broken() calls
are not meant to be revisited. So we'd either need a /* FIXME */ comment
next to it, or an use an unreliable() macro, or better some sort of
It seems the first two options would make the test failure disappear
entirely so I'd prefer the third one which could issue some sort of
message that would not be counted as a failure.
But I'm not sure any of this is simpler or better than what I proposed.
Francois Gouget <fgouget at codeweavers.com>
More information about the wine-devel