WTLIB99 with wine-010510 tar ball broken again

[Eike Lantzsch]

g.patel at wanadoo.fr wrote:
>  On Tue, 15 May 2001 17:38:08 -0400, eikelan at gmx.net (Eike Lantzsch)
>  wrote:
>  
> >return 0;
> >}
> >
> >DbgUserBreakPoint();
> >
> >after a stepi with "info locals" I get only one
> >parent == 0x00000000
>  
>  'info local' is not very reliable. My guess is that optimization
>  (Wine is compiled with maximal optimization) is not doing 
>  much good for the general accuracy of debugger information.
>  Sometimes using the x command does not give the same
>  result as 'info local'.
>  
> >If I do the same with the later version from 01-05-11
> >
> >I get TWO
> >
> >parent == 0x00000000
> >parent == 0x0000008c
> >
> >The values for pWndParent and wndPtr are the same in both cases.
> >How can I get two local variables with the same name?
>  
>  I don't know. I use winedbg mostly to get backtraces. 
>  Other than that, I try to stay away of it.
>  
>  Gerard

OK, "info reg" anyway showed eax == 0x0000008c so I think that
this value was correct. Thanks for pointing this behaviour of
winedbg out.

What do you suggest for "some interesting traces"? I'm on a lose
here. The fact that I'm looking into the sources and debugging
does not mean that I'm a crack yet, it's just some system support
tricks that I'm applying ;-)
And yes, I too have the impression that the real bug is lying
buried in some other code section. This is curing the symptoms.
Problem is that most workings of Win32(16) and X-window are still
enigmatic for me. Have to read up a lot and have not enough time.

Eike

-- 
Eike Lantzsch             Casilla de Correo 1509, ASUNCION Paraguay