http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15424
--- Comment #19 from Claudio sick_soul@yahoo.it 2009-01-05 20:05:49 --- (In reply to comment #15)
(In reply to comment #14)
(In reply to comment #11)
(In reply to comment #10)
the keyword 'regression' should be added to this one. Wine versions 2005* and at least until 0.9.5 did not have this problem.
the keyword in itself is not much help unless you can run a regression test to identify the change which broke the program
I tired, but unfortunately after a couple iterations I ended up with a non-building version. I tried cleaning the tree and starting with a clean .wine for each step, but I still eventually end up with a non-building version, which I cannot test, and therefore I don't know whether to mark it as bad or good.
http://wiki.winehq.org/ReverseRegressionTesting
We'll need the regression test results, but not gonna lie...it's gonna be a pain in the butt.
Here's the result I got:
9ddb9294da45ef17c315b355f123bb2c635ba18b is first bad commit commit 9ddb9294da45ef17c315b355f123bb2c635ba18b Author: Alexandre Julliard julliard@winehq.org Date: Fri Nov 3 11:38:44 2006 +0100
ntdll: Added a server_get_unix_fd function that avoids doing a dup() of the fd when not required.
:040000 040000 e5131d8d6a2280014f94a2ab2dcb40b62aa117a5 dc8c1c0b9d420989b2eda7f6894e4a6b9e2ad410 M dlls
It should be considered that the error reporting in newer wine versions is very different (this 'exception frame is not in stack limits' is only in the later wine versions). I attach the older error reported, which I assumed to be the old representation of the same issue reported as 'exception frame is not in stack limits' of the newer wine versions.