How is 0.0.0.0 handled in Wine?
Austin English
austinenglish at gmail.com
Tue Jun 9 10:33:32 CDT 2009
FWIW, a user sent me this e-mail:
I was reading your post about wine and 0.0.0.0 and wanted to share a
bug a developer recently came across connected with networking, though
I was unsure if you would be interested and I am not confident enough
to post to bugzilla (I fear the vitamin<g>).
The developer involved is steve gibson - I think you can download his
test software that showed a repeatable crash but with info from the
discussion in the mailing list with numerous testters apparently using
the latest wine, I am hoping a test from him might not be necessary:
http://12078.net/grcnews/article.php?id=3293&group=grc.dns#3293
quote:
Calling "GetNetworkParams" with a null buffer size causes it to
fill in the size of the buffer it requires. This size should
never change from one call to another --- at least with nothing
else changing in the system -- since the requested data is
relatively fixed at that point.
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa365968(VS.85).aspx
But both Robin and Mark's logs reveal that the SECOND call to
the same function is -- inexplicably -- returning a smaller
value. That's not right.
..., what's more, in Robin's posted case, the call back to the
function using the smaller allocation that was all if said it
needed ... crashes the app!
end quote
I suspect they are talking about this <hopefull fingers crossed>
http://source.winehq.org/source/dlls/iphlpapi/iphlpapi_main.c#L1263
example of log of cause of suspected cause of crash
http://12078.net/grcnews/article.php?id=3286&group=grc.dns#3286
commentary by another programmer
http://12078.net/grcnews/article.php?id=3333&group=grc.dns#3333
Steve is quite amenable to getting his software working well in wine,
but is limited in his time. Apparently he does not test for wine, but
he has used a workaround to get it working.
HTH
regards
JHB
--
-Austin
More information about the wine-devel
mailing list