http://bugs.winehq.com/show_bug.cgi?id=681
*** shadow/681 Fri May 17 09:44:16 2002 --- shadow/681.tmp.9277 Fri May 17 10:38:43 2002 *************** *** 7,13 **** | Severity: normal OS/Version: All | | Priority: P1 Component: wine-kernel | +----------------------------------------------------------------------------+ ! | Assigned To: juergen.schmied@debitel.net | | Reported By: paulm@astro.gla.ac.uk | | CC list: Cc: | +----------------------------------------------------------------------------+ --- 7,13 ---- | Severity: normal OS/Version: All | | Priority: P1 Component: wine-kernel | +----------------------------------------------------------------------------+ ! | Assigned To: wine-bugs@winehq.com | | Reported By: paulm@astro.gla.ac.uk | | CC list: Cc: | +----------------------------------------------------------------------------+ *************** *** 47,49 **** --- 47,82 ---- a deeper layer (advapi32 or ntdll).
juergen + + ------- Additional Comments From apa3a@yahoo.com 2002-05-17 10:38 ------- + Juergen, + thank you for the research. I assume now that bug does not belong to you. + + Paul, + as soon as a bug is filed to the bug tracking system the correct approach is + to put additional information here, in Bugzilla in the bug description instead + of wine-devel. This would greatly help developer working with the issue. + + Your comments from the last email: + ************************************************************** + As I put in my original (wine-devel) email + http://www.winehq.com/hypermail/wine-devel/2002/05/0364.html + I tracked this down to RegQueryValueExA. + + AFAIK, under NT-like modes, this is mapped to the advapi32 dll's + implementation (in dlls/advapi32/registry.c) whereas under Win95-like + modes the RegQueryValueExA in memory/registry.c is used instead. + Although the memory/registry.c RegQueryValueExA is also used when wine is in + NT-like mode. + + To progress any further would involve investing considerable amount of + time figuring out what all the calls are supposed to return (I'm not a + windows programmer!) I just don't have that time at the moment. + + It does look like this one cuts deep (ish). One possible gambit is that + the advapi32 looks like it was based on the memory/registry.c version. + If the two copies diverged after the copy, then this would give the + observed result. It might be possible to look for patches that effected + memory/registry.c that didn't alter dlls/advapi32/registry.c in the + same way. + ************************************************************** \ No newline at end of file