http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=30849
Erich Hoover erich.e.hoover@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Attachment #47754|0 |1 is obsolete| |
--- Comment #103 from Erich Hoover erich.e.hoover@gmail.com --- Created attachment 47756 --> http://bugs.winehq.org/attachment.cgi?id=47756 Try to start the virtual address space at a lower address
(In reply to Jerome Leclanche from comment #102)
(In reply to Erich Hoover from comment #101)
I have to double check I didn't mess something up, but I think your patch caused a crash.
Problem is, there seems to be a regression from the other day.. looking into it. ...
It's probably the patch, it's a very dirty hack that tries to grab a smaller address for the virtual memory start address by using the smallest reserved memory address instead of the largest. Try this dirty hack instead, it should be more predictable ;)