http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195
--- Comment #82 from Daniel Jelinski djelinski1@gmail.com 2012-12-17 02:14:05 CST --- (In reply to comment #81)
When I submitted them they were ignored, so unless Alexandre expresses an interest in getting them in I don't see it happening.
Patch sequences are usually reviewed in order, and your first patch is way too large for reviewing. This is probably why the others were ignored. Patch 3 is is just about the right size. You are removing a comment in SetNamedPipeHandleState and adding a FIXME. You should probably add a note in your patch stating that you verified that the comment is no longer applicable. Tests from patch 2 should probably be moved into a separate patch. Other than that it looks good to me. Patch 4 also needs splitting. Keep in mind that usually the patches are reviewed, not the resulting code. As long as the code changes are obviously related to patch title, they should be okay.
Other than that, I was able to connect to MS SQL Server using named pipes protocol with these patches applied, so they are probably doing the right thing. I'd love to see them accepted. Will you split them?