http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=22356
--- Comment #26 from Wylda wylda@volny.cz 2010-05-13 17:40:19 ---
Hi Roderecik, this seems unfortunate... We are probably looking at wrong place. When i was working on this, i found out that:
* 1.1.38 <--GOOD * 1.1.39 <--BAD * 1.1.40 <--BAD * 1.1.41 <--GOOD * 1.1.42 <--GOOD * 1.1.43 <--BAD * 1.1.44 <--BAD
So i did the testing on git (shortly before release of 1.1.43) and check that again on 1.1.43. But regression testing led me to 1.1.38/39. The patches probably tried to fix the 38/39 issue, but the root is 42/43 issue.
So i filled up bug 22683 which covers the second regression.
Jeff, was the originally reported problem solved for you? If yes, than let's close this bug report.