Accounted a behavioral difference between R5 and our implementation. Comment fix.
git-svn-id: file:///srv/svn/repos/haiku/trunk/current@1418 a95241bf-73f2-0310-859d-f6bbb57e9c96
This commit is contained in:
@@ -541,7 +541,12 @@ CommonLaunchTest10(LaunchCaller &caller)
|
|||||||
entry_ref ref = ref_for_team(team);
|
entry_ref ref = ref_for_team(team);
|
||||||
CHK(ref_for_path(appFile1) == ref);
|
CHK(ref_for_path(appFile1) == ref);
|
||||||
CHK(BMimeType(appType1).GetAppHint(&appHint) == B_ENTRY_NOT_FOUND);
|
CHK(BMimeType(appType1).GetAppHint(&appHint) == B_ENTRY_NOT_FOUND);
|
||||||
|
// OBOS: We set the app hint for app type 2. There's no reason not to do it.
|
||||||
|
#ifdef TEST_R5
|
||||||
CHK(BMimeType(appType2).IsInstalled() == false);
|
CHK(BMimeType(appType2).IsInstalled() == false);
|
||||||
|
#else
|
||||||
|
check_app_type(appType2, appFile1);
|
||||||
|
#endif
|
||||||
context.Terminate();
|
context.Terminate();
|
||||||
int32 cookie = 0;
|
int32 cookie = 0;
|
||||||
CHK(context.CheckNextMessage(caller, team, cookie, MSG_STARTED));
|
CHK(context.CheckNextMessage(caller, team, cookie, MSG_STARTED));
|
||||||
@@ -1221,7 +1226,7 @@ CommonLaunchTest25(LaunchCaller &caller)
|
|||||||
first: B_EXCLUSIVE_LAUNCH,
|
first: B_EXCLUSIVE_LAUNCH,
|
||||||
second: B_EXCLUSIVE_LAUNCH | B_ARGV_ONLY =>
|
second: B_EXCLUSIVE_LAUNCH | B_ARGV_ONLY =>
|
||||||
@results first app: {Message,Argv,Refs}Received()*, ReadyToRun(),
|
@results first app: {Message,Argv,Refs}Received()*, ReadyToRun(),
|
||||||
{Message,Argv,Refs}Received()*, QuitRequested()
|
QuitRequested()
|
||||||
second app: Launch() fails with B_ALREADY_RUNNING
|
second app: Launch() fails with B_ALREADY_RUNNING
|
||||||
*/
|
*/
|
||||||
static
|
static
|
||||||
|
|||||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user