24 Dec
2021
24 Dec
'21
1:43 a.m.
Needed for native mfc42u.dll.
Wine-Bug: https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=51850
Signed-off-by: Mohamad Al-Jaf <mohamadaljaf(a)gmail.com>
---
The bug report does not mention that the tool cannot
run without mfc42u.dll, which requires this API set.
---
configure.ac | 1 +
.../Makefile.in | 1 +
.../api-ms-win-core-privateprofile-l1-1-0.spec | 14 ++++++++++++++
3 files changed, 16 insertions(+)
create mode 100644 dlls/api-ms-win-core-privateprofile-l1-1-0/Makefile.in
create mode 100644
dlls/api-ms-win-core-privateprofile-l1-1-0/api-ms-win-core-privateprofile-l1-1-0.spec
diff --git a/configure.ac b/configure.ac
index 9b2c111119f..9630405bfcd 100644
--- a/configure.ac
+++ b/configure.ac
@@ -2416,6 +2416,7 @@ WINE_CONFIG_MAKEFILE(dlls/api-ms-win-core-namedpipe-l1-2-0)
WINE_CONFIG_MAKEFILE(dlls/api-ms-win-core-namespace-l1-1-0)
WINE_CONFIG_MAKEFILE(dlls/api-ms-win-core-normalization-l1-1-0)
WINE_CONFIG_MAKEFILE(dlls/api-ms-win-core-path-l1-1-0)
+WINE_CONFIG_MAKEFILE(dlls/api-ms-win-core-privateprofile-l1-1-0)
WINE_CONFIG_MAKEFILE(dlls/api-ms-win-core-privateprofile-l1-1-1)
WINE_CONFIG_MAKEFILE(dlls/api-ms-win-core-processenvironment-l1-1-0)
WINE_CONFIG_MAKEFILE(dlls/api-ms-win-core-processenvironment-l1-2-0)
diff --git a/dlls/api-ms-win-core-privateprofile-l1-1-0/Makefile.in
b/dlls/api-ms-win-core-privateprofile-l1-1-0/Makefile.in
new file mode 100644
index 00000000000..c8b8ef84aef
--- /dev/null
+++ b/dlls/api-ms-win-core-privateprofile-l1-1-0/Makefile.in
@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+MODULE = api-ms-win-core-privateprofile-l1-1-0.dll
diff --git
a/dlls/api-ms-win-core-privateprofile-l1-1-0/api-ms-win-core-privateprofile-l1-1-0.spec
b/dlls/api-ms-win-core-privateprofile-l1-1-0/api-ms-win-core-privateprofile-l1-1-0.spec
new file mode 100644
index 00000000000..c8153c3a296
--- /dev/null
+++
b/dlls/api-ms-win-core-privateprofile-l1-1-0/api-ms-win-core-privateprofile-l1-1-0.spec
@@ -0,0 +1,14 @@
+@ stdcall GetPrivateProfileIntA(str str long str) kernel32.GetPrivateProfileIntA
+@ stdcall GetPrivateProfileIntW(wstr wstr long wstr) kernel32.GetPrivateProfileIntW
+@ stdcall GetPrivateProfileSectionW(wstr ptr long wstr)
kernel32.GetPrivateProfileSectionW
+@ stdcall GetPrivateProfileStringA(str str str ptr long str)
kernel32.GetPrivateProfileStringA
+@ stdcall GetPrivateProfileStringW(wstr wstr wstr ptr long wstr)
kernel32.GetPrivateProfileStringW
+@ stdcall GetProfileIntA(str str long) kernel32.GetProfileIntA
+@ stdcall GetProfileIntW(wstr wstr long) kernel32.GetProfileIntW
+@ stdcall GetProfileSectionA(str ptr long) kernel32.GetProfileSectionA
+@ stdcall GetProfileSectionW(wstr ptr long) kernel32.GetProfileSectionW
+@ stdcall GetProfileStringA(str str str ptr long) kernel32.GetProfileStringA
+@ stdcall GetProfileStringW(wstr wstr wstr ptr long) kernel32.GetProfileStringW
+@ stdcall WritePrivateProfileSectionA(str str str) kernel32.WritePrivateProfileSectionA
+@ stdcall WritePrivateProfileStringA(str str str str)
kernel32.WritePrivateProfileStringA
+@ stdcall WritePrivateProfileStringW(wstr wstr wstr wstr)
kernel32.WritePrivateProfileStringW
--
2.34.1
24 Dec
24 Dec
1:43 a.m.
New subject: [PATCH 2/2] wdscore: Add CurrentIP stub.
Wine-Bug: https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=51850
Signed-off-by: Mohamad Al-Jaf <mohamadaljaf(a)gmail.com>
---
The function is undocumented. It does not seem to
take any arguments, but I don't know how to verify
this without a doubt.
---
dlls/wdscore/Makefile.in | 3 +++
dlls/wdscore/main.c | 35 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
dlls/wdscore/wdscore.spec | 2 +-
3 files changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
create mode 100644 dlls/wdscore/main.c
diff --git a/dlls/wdscore/Makefile.in b/dlls/wdscore/Makefile.in
index 20ba1d3b1c9..92a733474f8 100644
--- a/dlls/wdscore/Makefile.in
+++ b/dlls/wdscore/Makefile.in
@@ -1,3 +1,6 @@
MODULE = wdscore.dll
EXTRADLLFLAGS = -Wb,--prefer-native
+
+C_SRCS = \
+ main.c
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/dlls/wdscore/main.c b/dlls/wdscore/main.c
new file mode 100644
index 00000000000..2bec81bcc92
--- /dev/null
+++ b/dlls/wdscore/main.c
@@ -0,0 +1,35 @@
+/*
+ * Copyright 2021 Mohamad Al-Jaf
+ *
+ * This library is free software; you can redistribute it and/or
+ * modify it under the terms of the GNU Lesser General Public
+ * License as published by the Free Software Foundation; either
+ * version 2.1 of the License, or (at your option) any later version.
+ *
+ * This library is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
+ * but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
+ * MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the GNU
+ * Lesser General Public License for more details.
+ *
+ * You should have received a copy of the GNU Lesser General Public
+ * License along with this library; if not, write to the Free Software
+ * Foundation, Inc., 51 Franklin St, Fifth Floor, Boston, MA 02110-1301, USA
+ */
+
+#include <stdarg.h>
+
+#include "windef.h"
+#include "winbase.h"
+
+#include "wine/debug.h"
+
+WINE_DEFAULT_DEBUG_CHANNEL(wdscore);
+
+/***********************************************************************
+ * CurrentIP (wdscore.@)
+ */
+DWORD WINAPI CurrentIP()
+{
+ FIXME("stub\n");
+ return 0;
+}
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/dlls/wdscore/wdscore.spec b/dlls/wdscore/wdscore.spec
index 15958b86aba..8b6febe6b3b 100644
--- a/dlls/wdscore/wdscore.spec
+++ b/dlls/wdscore/wdscore.spec
@@ -71,7 +71,7 @@
@ stub ConstructPartialMsgIfW
@ stub ConstructPartialMsgVA
@ stub ConstructPartialMsgVW
-@ stub CurrentIP
+@ stdcall CurrentIP()
@ stub EndMajorTask
@ stub EndMinorTask
@ stub GetMajorTask
--
2.34.1
10:27 p.m.
New subject: [PATCH 2/2] wdscore: Add CurrentIP stub.
On 12/23/21 19:43, Mohamad Al-Jaf wrote:
Wine-Bug:
https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=51850
Signed-off-by: Mohamad Al-Jaf <mohamadaljaf(a)gmail.com>
---
The function is undocumented. It does not seem to
take any arguments, but I don't know how to verify
this without a doubt.
The most effective way I'm aware of is to call it on i386 and check the
stack alignment.
25 Dec
25 Dec
2:54 a.m.
New subject: [PATCH 2/2] wdscore: Add CurrentIP stub.
Yeah, that's also what the wiki says:
https://wiki.winehq.org/Wine_Developer's_Guide/Other_Debugging_Techniqu…
But it also says that some functions can be wrongly interpreted as having
more arguments than originally thought.
Honestly, I have no idea how to begin this, my knowledge of assembly is
rudimentary. I see that WineDbg has a disassemble option, but I'm not sure
how to use it in this context.
If you could guide me through this so that I can learn, I'd really
appreciate it.
On Fri, Dec 24, 2021 at 5:28 PM Zebediah Figura (she/her) <
zfigura(a)codeweavers.com> wrote:
On 12/23/21 19:43, Mohamad Al-Jaf wrote:
Wine-Bug:
https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=51850
Signed-off-by: Mohamad Al-Jaf <mohamadaljaf(a)gmail.com>
---
The function is undocumented. It does not seem to
take any arguments, but I don't know how to verify
this without a doubt.
The most effective way I'm aware of is to call it on i386 and check the
stack alignment.
28 Dec
28 Dec
4 a.m.
New subject: [PATCH 2/2] wdscore: Add CurrentIP stub.
I don't understand this, I thought disassembly of Microsoft DLLs wasn't
allowed? Why then does the example show assembly code of the undocumented
function?
On Fri, Dec 24, 2021 at 9:54 PM Mohamad Al-Jaf <mohamadaljaf(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
Yeah, that's also what the wiki says:
https://wiki.winehq.org/Wine_Developer's_Guide/Other_Debugging_Techniqu…
But it also says that some functions can be wrongly interpreted as having
more arguments than originally thought.
Honestly, I have no idea how to begin this, my knowledge of assembly is
rudimentary. I see that WineDbg has a disassemble option, but I'm not sure
how to use it in this context.
If you could guide me through this so that I can learn, I'd really
appreciate it.
On Fri, Dec 24, 2021 at 5:28 PM Zebediah Figura (she/her) <
zfigura(a)codeweavers.com> wrote:
> On 12/23/21 19:43, Mohamad Al-Jaf wrote:
> > Wine-Bug: https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=51850
> > Signed-off-by: Mohamad Al-Jaf <mohamadaljaf(a)gmail.com>
> > ---
> > The function is undocumented. It does not seem to
> > take any arguments, but I don't know how to verify
> > this without a doubt.
>
> The most effective way I'm aware of is to call it on i386 and check the
> stack alignment.
>
>
5:02 a.m.
New subject: [PATCH 2/2] wdscore: Add CurrentIP stub.
On Mon, Dec 27, 2021 at 9:00 PM Mohamad Al-Jaf <mohamadaljaf(a)gmail.com> wrote:
I don't understand this, I thought disassembly of Microsoft DLLs wasn't allowed?
Why then does the example show assembly code of the undocumented function?
They're just example functions that some Wine developer wrote and
compiled on their own to validate this method of guessing function
arguments. They're not Microsoft code.
-Alex
5:50 a.m.
New subject: [PATCH 2/2] wdscore: Add CurrentIP stub.
I see, but I still don't understand the method used here. How can you see
the stack entries if you don't disassemble the file? The only way I know of
is through WineDbg and that does not seem to be correct. The method on that
wiki page appears to require looking at the assembly code. Specifically, it
says "ret hhll (where hhll is the number of bytes to remove, i.e. the
number of arguments times 4)". As far as I know, ret is assembly code. So
the method listed requires disassembly, no?
On Tue, Dec 28, 2021 at 12:02 AM Alex Henrie <alexhenrie24(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On Mon, Dec 27, 2021 at 9:00 PM Mohamad Al-Jaf
<mohamadaljaf(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
I don't understand this, I thought disassembly of Microsoft DLLs wasn't
allowed? Why then does the example show assembly code of the undocumented
function?
They're just example functions that some Wine developer wrote and
compiled on their own to validate this method of guessing function
arguments. They're not Microsoft code.
-Alex
1:41 p.m.
New subject: [PATCH 2/2] wdscore: Add CurrentIP stub.
(I am not an I.P. lawyer and certainly not a binary reverser, and long
time Wine non-contributor already, but just my .02 €¢)
* On 2021-12-28 07:50, Mohamad Al-Jaf wrote:
How can you see the stack entries if you don't
disassemble the file?
The only way I know of is through WineDbg and that does not seem to be
correct. The method on that wiki page appears to require looking at the
assembly code.
(1) The stack doesn't belong to a binary file, it's an ephemeral,
entirely runtime entity. So looking at it is safe.
(2) A binary file saved onto disk and the one loaded into memory as
executable image are already a bit different things, IMO.
Differences are introduced at least during runtime relocations of (the
position-dependent) sections of an executable image.
(3) Actually there are two methods here:
- 3a, creating the wrapper + looking at the stack pointer change after
the call, and
- 3b, finding the function epilogues [1], the `ret` instructions.
(3a) It doesn't require disassembly of the function, reading an ESP
value just before the call and after it.
As this is not a low-level dll (like `ntdll.dll`), there would be
probably no BSODs during the wrapper run.
It even could be done using `winedbg` and the `br` + `next` commands,
IIRC, in debug session of the Media Creation Tool.
Maybe it would just do for you. (ie. maybe you'll see that the ESP
register remains the same right before and just after the call)
(3b) The epilogue reflects only a small, non-core part of the function
implementation. It merely shows how the interface between caller (an
app) and callee (native lib) is organized.
And as the saying goes,
https://www.google.com/search?q=interfaces+cannot+be+copyrighted
(4) Main concern here seems to be about "submitting disassembled or
decompiled code" + "what the code does generally". [2]
--- quote ---
While in theory it is still possible for someone that has disassembled
Microsoft code to document what the code does generally, in their own
words, this can become a legal grey area.
--- quote ---
Specifically, it says "ret hhll (where hhll is
the number of bytes to
remove, i.e. the number of arguments times 4)". As far as I know, ret
is
assembly code. So the method listed requires disassembly, no?
Umm, yes and no. My summary would be following:
By looking at the disassembled calling points of the function and its'
epilogues [1] _and_ by avoiding to memorize what does core of the
function do (particularly which other WinAPI functions does it call),
you stay safe and in compliance with copyrights and other stuff of
Intellectual Property law.
This is my personal interpretation.
S.
[1]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Function_prologue_and_epilogue#Epilogue
[2]
https://wiki.winehq.org/Disassembly#:~:text=While%20in%20theory,legal%20gre….
4:22 p.m.
New subject: [PATCH 2/2] wdscore: Add CurrentIP stub.
Saulius Krasuckas <saulius2(a)ar-fi.lt> writes:
No, you should never look at a disassembly of a Windows dll, period.
Please read https://wiki.winehq.org/Clean_Room_Guidelines for details.
--
Alexandre Julliard
julliard(a)winehq.org
Specifically,
it says "ret hhll (where hhll is the number of bytes to
remove, i.e. the number of arguments times 4)". As far as I know,
ret is
assembly code. So the method listed requires disassembly, no?
Umm, yes and no. My summary would be following:
By looking at the disassembled calling points of the function and its'
epilogues [1] _and_ by avoiding to memorize what does core of the
function do (particularly which other WinAPI functions does it call),
you stay safe and in compliance with copyrights and other stuff of
Intellectual Property law.
6:24 p.m.
New subject: [PATCH 2/2] wdscore: Add CurrentIP stub.
On 2021-12-28 18:22, Alexandre Julliard wrote:
Saulius Krasuckas <saulius2(a)ar-fi.lt> writes:
Alexandre, I have read it before my answer and I found it to be
contradicting other documentation page. So I had to interpret this
contradiction.
Do you and other folks agree that part of the documentation is
misleading or even incorrect in that regard?
Namely this block:
https://wiki.winehq.org/Wine_Developer's_Guide/Other_Debugging_Techniqu…
--- quote ---
Another method that has been much more successful is to attempt to
figure out how many arguments each function is removing from the stack.
This instruction, ret hhll (where hhll is the number of bytes to remove,
i.e. the number of arguments times 4), contains the bytes 0xc2 ll hh in
memory. It is a reasonable assumption that few, if any, functions take
more than 16 arguments; therefore, simply searching for hh == 0 and ll <
0x40 starting from the address of a function yields the correct number
of arguments most of the time.
Of course, this is not without errors. ret 00ll is not the only
instruction that can can have the byte sequence 0xc2 ll 0x0; for
example, push 0x000040c2 has the byte sequence 0x68 0xc2 0x40 0x0 0x0,
which matches the above. Properly, the utility should look for this
sequence only on an instruction boundary; unfortunately, finding
instruction boundaries on an i386 requires implementing a full
disassembler -- quite a daunting task. Besides, the probability of
having such a byte sequence that is not the actual return instruction is
fairly low.
Much more troublesome is the non-linear flow of a function. For example,
consider the following two functions:
somefunction1:
jmp somefunction1_impl
somefunction2:
ret 0004
somefunction1_impl:
ret 0008
In this case, we would incorrectly detect both somefunction1 and
somefunction2 as taking only a single argument, whereas somefunction1
really takes two arguments.
--- quote ---
That would help to answer the original question by Mohamad. And would
indicate the page to be fixed.
Sadly the content seems to be imported into Wiki on 13:47, 3 February
2016 from the static docs, and now I am not sure how to trace back
author of the quoted lines.
S.
By looking at the disassembled calling points of
the function and its'
epilogues [1] _and_ by avoiding to memorize what does core of the
function do (particularly which other WinAPI functions does it call),
you stay safe and in compliance with copyrights and other stuff of
Intellectual Property law.
No, you should never look at a disassembly of a Windows dll, period.
Please read https://wiki.winehq.org/Clean_Room_Guidelines for details.
6:31 p.m.
New subject: [PATCH 2/2] wdscore: Add CurrentIP stub.
On 12/28/21 12:24, Saulius Krasuckas wrote:
On 2021-12-28 18:22, Alexandre Julliard wrote:
It doesn't seem clear to me whether that page advises disassembling the
function or its caller, but since it's ambiguous (and not particularly
helpful) I've just removed the entire section.
Saulius Krasuckas <saulius2(a)ar-fi.lt>
writes:
Alexandre, I have read it before my answer and I found it to be
contradicting other documentation page. So I had to interpret this
contradiction.
Do you and other folks agree that part of the documentation is
misleading or even incorrect in that regard? By looking at the disassembled calling points of
the function and its'
epilogues [1] _and_ by avoiding to memorize what does core of the
function do (particularly which other WinAPI functions does it call),
you stay safe and in compliance with copyrights and other stuff of
Intellectual Property law.
No, you should never look at a disassembly of a Windows dll, period.
Please read https://wiki.winehq.org/Clean_Room_Guidelines for details.
30 Dec
30 Dec
12:41 a.m.
New subject: [PATCH 2/2] wdscore: Add CurrentIP stub.
Interesting discussion, but it looks like Zebediah's method is superior in
all respects.
I can confirm that CurrentIP takes 0 arguments. I also tested her method
with other, documented functions, that I know the argument counts of and it
works perfectly.
On Tue, Dec 28, 2021 at 1:31 PM Zebediah Figura (she/her) <
zfigura(a)codeweavers.com> wrote:
On 12/28/21 12:24, Saulius Krasuckas wrote:
On 2021-12-28 18:22, Alexandre Julliard wrote:
It doesn't seem clear to me whether that page advises disassembling the
function or its caller, but since it's ambiguous (and not particularly
helpful) I've just removed the entire section.
Saulius Krasuckas <saulius2(a)ar-fi.lt>
writes:
Alexandre, I have read it before my answer and I found it to be
contradicting other documentation page. So I had to interpret this
contradiction.
Do you and other folks agree that part of the documentation is
misleading or even incorrect in that regard? By looking at the disassembled calling points of
the function and its'
epilogues [1] _and_ by avoiding to memorize what does core of the
function do (particularly which other WinAPI functions does it call),
you stay safe and in compliance with copyrights and other stuff of
Intellectual Property law.
No, you should never look at a disassembly of a Windows dll, period.
Please read https://wiki.winehq.org/Clean_Room_Guidelines for details.
12:47 a.m.
New subject: [PATCH 2/2] wdscore: Add CurrentIP stub.
Whoops, I was simultaneously thinking of "in every respect" and "in all
aspects" and mangled them together haha. I meant to say "Zebediah's method
is superior in all aspects".
On Wed, Dec 29, 2021 at 7:41 PM Mohamad Al-Jaf <mohamadaljaf(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
Interesting discussion, but it looks like
Zebediah's method is superior in
all respects.
I can confirm that CurrentIP takes 0 arguments. I also tested her method
with other, documented functions, that I know the argument counts of and it
works perfectly.
On Tue, Dec 28, 2021 at 1:31 PM Zebediah Figura (she/her) <
zfigura(a)codeweavers.com> wrote:
> On 12/28/21 12:24, Saulius Krasuckas wrote:
> > On 2021-12-28 18:22, Alexandre Julliard wrote:
> >> Saulius Krasuckas <saulius2(a)ar-fi.lt> writes:
> >>
> >>> By looking at the disassembled calling points of the function and
its'
> >>> epilogues [1] _and_ by avoiding to memorize what does core of the
> >>> function do (particularly which other WinAPI functions does it call),
> >>> you stay safe and in compliance with copyrights and other stuff of
> >>> Intellectual Property law.
> >>
> >> No, you should never look at a disassembly of a Windows dll, period.
> >>
> >> Please read https://wiki.winehq.org/Clean_Room_Guidelines for details.
> >
> > Alexandre, I have read it before my answer and I found it to be
> > contradicting other documentation page. So I had to interpret this
> > contradiction.
> >
> > Do you and other folks agree that part of the documentation is
> > misleading or even incorrect in that regard?
>
> It doesn't seem clear to me whether that page advises disassembling the
> function or its caller, but since it's ambiguous (and not particularly
> helpful) I've just removed the entire section.
>
>
29 Mar
29 Mar
7 a.m.
New subject: [PATCH 2/2] wdscore: Add CurrentIP stub.
On Tue, Dec 28, 2021 at 11:31 AM Zebediah Figura (she/her)
<zfigura(a)codeweavers.com> wrote:
It doesn't seem clear to me whether that page advises disassembling the
function or its caller, but since it's ambiguous (and not particularly
helpful) I've just removed the entire section.
I've been meaning to look at this for a while and finally did it
today. The first half of the original section (the half that explains
the stdcall calling convention) was helpful to me, and what's even
more helpful is the example code that you posted earlier in this
thread. Consequently, I have restored the first half and added an
example based on your code, as well as an explicit warning against
disassembly:
https://wiki.winehq.org/Wine_Developer%27s_Guide/Other_Debugging_Techniques
Please let me know if you think that more changes are necessary.
-Alex
30 Mar
30 Mar
7:39 a.m.
New subject: [PATCH 2/2] wdscore: Add CurrentIP stub.
Hi Alex,
On Tue, Mar 29, 2022 at 3:00 AM Alex Henrie <alexhenrie24(a)gmail.com> wrote:
I've been meaning to look at this for a while and
finally did it
today. The first half of the original section (the half that explains
the stdcall calling convention) was helpful to me, and what's even
more helpful is the example code that you posted earlier in this
thread. Consequently, I have restored the first half and added an
example based on your code, as well as an explicit warning against
disassembly:
https://wiki.winehq.org/Wine_Developer%27s_Guide/Other_Debugging_Techniques
Thanks for adding that section, it looks great.
Please let me know if you think that more changes are
necessary.
I'd also add in Zebediah's suggestion if one cannot reasonably guess their type:
If you can't tell I'd recommend using
"void *" or
"DWORD_PTR" so that the entire value is captured.
--
Kind regards,
Mohamad
28 Dec
28 Dec
4:43 p.m.
New subject: [PATCH 2/2] wdscore: Add CurrentIP stub.
On 12/27/21 23:50, Mohamad Al-Jaf wrote:
I see, but I still don't understand the method
used here. How can you see
the stack entries if you don't disassemble the file? The only way I know of
is through WineDbg and that does not seem to be correct. The method on that
wiki page appears to require looking at the assembly code. Specifically, it
says "ret hhll (where hhll is the number of bytes to remove, i.e. the
number of arguments times 4)". As far as I know, ret is assembly code. So
the method listed requires disassembly, no?
The page is confusingly written, and I'm not sure whether it's telling
the user to disassemble the function or its caller. Doing the latter is
usually okay, provided you don't have some other reason to avoid it
(e.g. it's also a Microsoft DLL).
Anyway, what I was proposing is something like the attached patch.
Running it on the testbot yields an argument count of zero for
CurrentIP() [1].
[1] https://testbot.winehq.org/JobDetails.pl?Key=104544
764
days inactive
860
days old
15 comments
5 participants
participants (5)
-
Alex Henrie -
Alexandre Julliard -
Mohamad Al-Jaf -
Saulius Krasuckas -
Zebediah Figura (she/her)