RFC: Missing entry points -> skip or failure?

[Francois Gouget]

TestLauncher now detects missing entry points. For instance:

https://testbot.winehq.org/JobDetails.pl?Key=87361&f201=exe32.report#k201

rtworkq.c:0: Tests skipped: missing entry point (details below)
| rtworkq_test.exe - Entry Point Not Found
| The procedure entry point CoGetApartmentType could not be located in the dynamic link library ole32.dll.

The two lines starting with "|" are extracted from the Windows critical 
error dialog and clearly show the issue.

The remaining question is whether this case should really be a skip 
or a failure.

If a dll is missing the past policy was to just skip the test so I 
carried on for missing entry points, ordinals, and indirectly missing 
dlls (when a test links with a dll which links with a missing dll).

Reporting missing entry points as failures would make it more obvious 
that the test needs fixing to use GetProcAddress(). But in some cases, 
such as rtworkq:rtworkq here, that may be somewhat pointless (it would 
be unable to perform any of the current tests without 
CoGetApartmentType()).

So what's the general consensus on this?


See also:
https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=48208

-- 
Francois Gouget <fgouget at codeweavers.com>