On Sat, 7 May 2005 10:06 pm, Alexandre Julliard wrote:
> Robert Lunnon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > The first patch addresses a problem I have found where Windows
> > applications under wine exceed the allocated stack. By default wine
> > allocates the same 1MB stack that windows does but wine h
Robert Lunnon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The first patch addresses a problem I have found where Windows applications
> under wine exceed the allocated stack. By default wine allocates the same 1MB
> stack that windows does but wine has a different stack consumption that does
> windows, addi
On Sat, 07 May 2005 18:13:41 +1000, Robert Lunnon wrote:
> Comments anyone ?
I have to echo Joris, why don't we just increase the default stack size if
this is causing problems? Does it cost us anything?
thanks -mike
On Sat, 7 May 2005 07:47 pm, Joris Huizer wrote:
> Robert Lunnon wrote:
> > I wish to propose two changes that I currently have in my Solaris
> > patchkit. I'll use two separate e-mails here to avoid confusion.
> >
> > Both changes add environment variables controlling the way wine does
> > things.
On Sat, 07 May 2005 18:13:41 +1000, Robert Lunnon wrote:
> Comments anyone ?
Robert Lunnon wrote:
I wish to propose two changes that I currently have in my Solaris patchkit.
I'll use two separate e-mails here to avoid confusion.
Both changes add environment variables controlling the way wine does things.
The first patch addresses a problem I have found where Windows appli
I wish to propose two changes that I currently have in my Solaris patchkit.
I'll use two separate e-mails here to avoid confusion.
Both changes add environment variables controlling the way wine does things.
The first patch addresses a problem I have found where Windows applications
under wine
