Hello.
Subject says it all. I suppose the tests I added may fail on other
locales, but there is no other way to test my patch?
Should i send it without the tests?
Thanks in advance.
Jan
-- Forwarded message --
From: Jan de Mooij jandemo...@gmail.com
Date: Mon, Aug 31, 2009 at
Hi Jan,
Subject says it all.
Well, you haven't waited nearly long enough. Sending it in today and
expecting it to be committed the same day is a bit much.
--Juan
Jan de Mooij wrote:
Hello.
Subject says it all. I suppose the tests I added may fail on other
locales, but there is no other way to test my patch?
Should i send it without the tests?
Thanks in advance.
Jan
I can't speak much to the patch itself, but the patch file you attached
has an
On Mon, Aug 31, 2009 at 6:25 PM, Juan Langjuan.l...@gmail.com wrote:
Well, you haven't waited nearly long enough. Sending it in today and
expecting it to be committed the same day is a bit much.
I saw that AJ committed patches sent before and after my email, so I
assumed he goes through them
I saw that AJ committed patches sent before and after my email, so I
assumed he goes through them in order.
It also depends on whether your patch is obviously correct, and your
Julliard rank. Since you're new around here, it's likely your patch
will be subject to more scrutiny. Plus Andrew
Hello,
I've submitted a patch to wine-patches 5 days ago which has not been added yet:
Added wrapper dll for ct-api(CardTerminal API)
http://www.winehq.org/pipermail/wine-patches/2007-October/045716.html
I think that most of the code has already been reviewed:
The 1st version has already been
Hello.
I've sent a patch that changes X11DRV_GetSystemPaletteEntries behavior and a
test something like a week ago. I guess they fell into that so called not
obviously correct category (or maybe not correct at all one). I'll appreciate
any comments or suggestions on possible improvements.
В сообщении от 30 апреля 2007 16:26 вы написали:
Hi,
A week ago I've sent a patch which fixes console input/output codepages
handling.
http://www.winehq.org/pipermail/wine-patches/2007-April/038429.html
It is still not applied, so please, explain, what is wrong with it? It even
fixes 2
Hi,
A week ago I've sent a patch which fixes console input/output codepages
handling.
http://www.winehq.org/pipermail/wine-patches/2007-April/038429.html
It is still not applied, so please, explain, what is wrong with it? It even
fixes 2 tests:
$wine kernel32_test.exe.so process
before:
Now, I am writing tests for this.
Windows crashes if I pass NULL pointer to these function.
Crash can be easily avoided in wine.
Should we crash too?
And how the windows crash can be caught? Or just I should not write such
test-case?
Thanks,
--
Kirill
Hi,
I've sent the patch:
http://www.winehq.com/pipermail/wine-patches/2007-April/038205.html
about a week ago and it has not been applied. Please, explain, what is wrong
with it?
Thanks
--
Kirill
On 4/24/07, Kirill K. Smirnov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
I've sent the patch:
http://www.winehq.com/pipermail/wine-patches/2007-April/038205.html
about a week ago and it has not been applied. Please, explain, what is wrong
with it?
You haven't sent in any tests for this function. Is
On 4/24/07, Kirill K. Smirnov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
I've sent the patch:
http://www.winehq.com/pipermail/wine-patches/2007-April/038205.html
about a week ago and it has not been applied. Please, explain, what is
wrong with it?
You haven't sent in any tests for this function.
On 4/25/07, Kirill K. Smirnov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 4/24/07, Kirill K. Smirnov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
I've sent the patch:
http://www.winehq.com/pipermail/wine-patches/2007-April/038205.html
about a week ago and it has not been applied. Please, explain, what is
wrong
For containing backshash. Yes, comment must be better.
A comment that states you're looking for a backslash is superfluous;
the code makes that obvious. A better comment would be 'check for
filename only' or something along those lines.
Maybe, 'MSDN claims that if filename contains
Hi,
I've asked before:
What's wrong with them? Maybe, unnecessary PeekMessage in tests???
http://www.winehq.org/pipermail/wine-patches/2007-January/035044.html
http://www.winehq.org/pipermail/wine-patches/2007-January/035043.html
Please, answer! Do not ignore!
--
Kirill
Anything wrong with them again?
http://www.winehq.org/pipermail/wine-patches/2007-January/035044.html
http://www.winehq.org/pipermail/wine-patches/2007-January/035043.html
Thanks,
Kirill
Hi,
Traditional questions from rejected patch-sender:
1) What's wrong with the patch:
http://www.winehq.org/pipermail/wine-patches/2007-January/034949.html
2) What can be done to improve it?
-- Kirill
Kirill K. Smirnov [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Traditional questions from rejected patch-sender:
1) What's wrong with the patch:
http://www.winehq.org/pipermail/wine-patches/2007-January/034949.html
2) What can be done to improve it?
The test fails on Windows XP:
msg.c:3944: Test failed
Hi,
Traditional questions from rejected patch-sender:
1) What's wrong with the following patches?
http://www.winehq.org/pipermail/wine-patches/2007-January/034758.html
http://www.winehq.org/pipermail/wine-patches/2007-January/034790.html
2) What can be done to improve them?
Those patches let
Kirill K. Smirnov [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Traditional questions from rejected patch-sender:
1) What's wrong with the following patches?
http://www.winehq.org/pipermail/wine-patches/2007-January/034758.html
http://www.winehq.org/pipermail/wine-patches/2007-January/034790.html
2) What can
Hi!
Please, tell me what's wrong with the patch?
http://www.winehq.org/pipermail/wine-patches/2006-November/032984.html
-- Kirill K. Smirnov
Hi,
I've sent patch several times, but it has not been applied.
Patch is reasonable, MIME type is OK.
patch -p0 mbox works ;-) (as recommended at
http://winehq.org/site/docs/winedev-guide/style-notes)
Please, tell what I must do to this patch to be applied?
Thanks a lot
-- HolyLich
Subject:
2006/8/11, HolyLich [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I've sent patch several times, but it has not been applied.
Why not use memmove() instead?
В сообщении от Friday 11 August 2006 17:17 вы написали:
2006/8/11, HolyLich [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I've sent patch several times, but it has not been applied.
Why not use memmove() instead?
Heh, this problem was discussed before
HolyLich [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I've sent patch several times, but it has not been applied.
Patch is reasonable, MIME type is OK.
patch -p0 mbox works ;-) (as recommended at
http://winehq.org/site/docs/winedev-guide/style-notes)
Please, tell what I must do to this patch to be applied?
2006/8/11, HolyLich [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Why not use memmove() instead?
Heh, this problem was discussed before
http://www.winehq.org/pipermail/wine-devel/2006-August/050133.html,
http://www.winehq.org/pipermail/wine-devel/2006-August/050139.html
I've sent patches to implement the trashing of files (starting from
http://www.winehq.org/pipermail/wine-patches/2006-July/028782.html ) and
they were rejected. Could someone tell me what's wrong with them?
Mikolaj Zalewski
On 7/19/06, Mikołaj Zalewski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I've sent patches to implement the trashing of files (starting from
http://www.winehq.org/pipermail/wine-patches/2006-July/028782.html ) and
they were rejected. Could someone tell me what's wrong with them?
I normally follow wine-patches
29 matches
Mail list logo
