| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
teidon
Apprentice
Joined: 22 Apr 2005
Posts: 195
Location: Finland
|
 Posted: Thu Jul 07, 2005 5:30 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
@ nachtmann
That's strange that OSS doesn't work with Wine. Try to play WoW without .asoundrc (it isn't needed) and see if it works then. The cure for choppy sounds is to add "SET SoundBufferSize "100"" to WoW/WTF/config.wtf file. If the sounds are still choppy, then just increase the number.
Wine doesn't have "MemoryLayoutOverride" setting so it's ingnored (it's a Cedega's setting) and you don't need alsa-driver package if you compiled ALSA in to kernel (or compiled it as modules).
@ Septor
There were a small patch today... but it was for test server.  And no, it didn't fix the memory/mouse bug.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Waywocket
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 16 Dec 2003
Posts: 84
Location: York
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 07, 2005 10:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| shamus13 wrote: |
It makes perfect sense for a memory bug to cause this, but what are the odds
of it trashing this one buffer...
|
Well on the other hand if it'd been trashing another buffer you'd be saying the same about that .
I suppose it's good that at least this is one bug with directly observable results, rather than the kind that are really hard to track down and be sure you've fixed...
To be honest I'm rather surprised Blizzard haven't done anything about this. Even if they don't care at all for the relatively small number of non-Windows/Mac players, it only makes sense to fix a bug like this that could well (for all we know) be causing other bugs that are more difficult to diagnose. Memory allocation bugs are always bad news - *especially* when they're minor enough that you can ignore them for a while. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kEiNsTeiN
Guru
Joined: 29 Apr 2005
Posts: 361
Location: Germany
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 08, 2005 12:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
@ teidon
THANKS!
Its working pretty good, with only 10 frames less than windows, which means ~15 
Any ideas how to get a little bit more performance?
Oh, I still have one annoying problem: my mouse is lagging... I dont know why and it doesnt fix it when I activate that checkbox in-game that should make my mouse smoother...
I can still play, but I can react really slow.
Oh, another thing: my 4th and 5th mousebuttons dont work. (Logitech MX-510) Any ideas? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
shamus13
n00b
Joined: 15 Jun 2005
Posts: 21
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 08, 2005 10:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
Ello all,
@Waywocket
I doubt blue has come to realize, that they have a memory corruption problem,
since they are still going on about hardware issues on the tech forums. Judging
from the postings, blue performs testing of wow by using a machine park with
different configurations of hardware and presumably software applying the
logic, that if wow runs on all machines in their park, it is bug free, and the
problem must be the users machine.....
Has anyone bugged blue about this lately? If not perhaps our illustrious leader
and caped crusader lord Darckness could post on the wow forums. I dont think,
we can really compile more evidence to convince blue, they have a problem.
Yours Shamus |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
legine
Guru
Joined: 27 May 2004
Posts: 555
Location: Germany
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 08, 2005 10:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
Well on the other hand if it'd been trashing another buffer you'd be saying the same about that .
I suppose it's good that at least this is one bug with directly observable results, rather than the kind that are really hard to track down and be sure you've fixed...
To be honest I'm rather surprised Blizzard haven't done anything about this. Even if they don't care at all for the relatively small number of non-Windows/Mac players, it only makes sense to fix a bug like this that could well (for all we know) be causing other bugs that are more difficult to diagnose. Memory allocation bugs are always bad news - *especially* when they're minor enough that you can ignore them for a while.
|
Waywocket I am sure blizzard is searching all the code for the solution. But the game is biiiiig. I expect that they did not solve it in days. I expect that they need some weeks.
The bad thing is that everyone who has the problem is still paying even if he cannot play
I didn't find time to set up a letter in which I collect all the stuff we found out by now. I hope with that I can iniciate a dialog or at least I can give them enoiugh hints for the debugging that it enhances.
But like I said no time atm .
This will change at the start of next week. I will post it here and on wine mailing list in order to enhance the formulation and technical correktness.
Cheers
Legine
_________________
quote from Spaceballs:
Dark Helmet:[...] we were told to comb the desert, so we're combing it! [puts down bullhorn] Find anything yet?!
Soldier: Nothing yet, sir. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
legine
Guru
Joined: 27 May 2004
Posts: 555
Location: Germany
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 08, 2005 10:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
| shamus13 wrote: | Ello all,
@Waywocket
I doubt blue has come to realize, that they have a memory corruption problem,
since they are still going on about hardware issues on the tech forums. Judging
from the postings, blue performs testing of wow by using a machine park with
different configurations of hardware and presumably software applying the
logic, that if wow runs on all machines in their park, it is bug free, and the
problem must be the users machine.....
Has anyone bugged blue about this lately? If not perhaps our illustrious leader
and caped crusader lord Darckness could post on the wow forums. I dont think,
we can really compile more evidence to convince blue, they have a problem.
Yours Shamus |
No. On EU forum is a small post where they said that they are knowing about a problem (refering to a #132 problem). But I think that you are in the fact halfright since they may not believe the Problem of wine users and their problem could be linked.
And I think that Windows is reacting different then Wine to the Problem. They react on some machines with #132 crash and on others not at all. Thats makes it very weired to me.
I.E.: On Linux I have the 132 bug. on Windows the game runs flawlessly. No Problem at all. Even over hours not. (Thought I didn't try openGL mode there.
Anyone knows how to start WoW in Opengl on Windoze?)
Cheers Legine
_________________
quote from Spaceballs:
Dark Helmet:[...] we were told to comb the desert, so we're combing it! [puts down bullhorn] Find anything yet?!
Soldier: Nothing yet, sir. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ikataii
n00b
Joined: 21 Apr 2005
Posts: 59
Location: CA
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 08, 2005 11:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
edit your Config.wtf file to include
somewhere, probably at the top.
That should switch WoW into opengl mode. Failing that, you can still pass it the -opengl flag from a command prompt, or edit the shortcut you use to launch it to include the flag.
_________________
"War is the Tao of deception." -Sun Tzu |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ninjin
n00b
Joined: 30 May 2005
Posts: 18
Location: /home/Ninjin
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 08, 2005 2:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ikataii wrote: | edit your Config.wtf file to include
somewhere, probably at the top.
That should switch WoW into opengl mode. Failing that, you can still pass it the -opengl flag from a command prompt, or edit the shortcut you use to launch it to include the flag. |
Starting WoW without the OpenGL flag even with makes my games crash after the login screen. Not a problem, just an observation. Not really sure why it acts that way for me in Linux but not in Windows.
_________________
*User behaviour when your O/S isn't working properly*
WINuser: "Now what have my O/S done!?"
LINuser: "Now what have I done to my O/S!?" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ikataii
n00b
Joined: 21 Apr 2005
Posts: 59
Location: CA
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 08, 2005 11:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I might have that syntax wrong. If you google for 'world of warcraft opengl' without the quotes you'll get the Blizz page that says how to do it.
_________________
"War is the Tao of deception." -Sun Tzu |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kEiNsTeiN
Guru
Joined: 29 Apr 2005
Posts: 361
Location: Germany
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 09, 2005 1:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
Anybody got an idea about that "Make my mouse run smoother"-Thingy?
In windows, the mouse works independently from the frames the game produces, even in the huge "enter Ironforge"-lag (10 secs), I was able to move my mouse around, but in wine, I cant. Is there any way to "fix" that? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ninjin
n00b
Joined: 30 May 2005
Posts: 18
Location: /home/Ninjin
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 09, 2005 1:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
| ikataii wrote: | | I might have that syntax wrong. If you google for 'world of warcraft opengl' without the quotes you'll get the Blizz page that says how to do it. |
I am sure that it is a WINE/Cedega issue and nothing else. Perhaps it somehow reacts badly to the way WoW loads the gfx settings without the flag.
_________________
*User behaviour when your O/S isn't working properly*
WINuser: "Now what have my O/S done!?"
LINuser: "Now what have I done to my O/S!?" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Waywocket
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 16 Dec 2003
Posts: 84
Location: York
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 09, 2005 11:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
| nachtmann wrote: | Anybody got an idea about that "Make my mouse run smoother"-Thingy?
In windows, the mouse works independently from the frames the game produces, even in the huge "enter Ironforge"-lag (10 secs), I was able to move my mouse around, but in wine, I cant. Is there any way to "fix" that? |
Assuming you mean disk thrashing upon entering Ironforge, you might find there is no solution. Personally I've found that when my system is under very heavy disk load I can't move the mouse in X at all, regardless of whether I'm running Wine. This might be connected to different tyes of disks and their drivers though. Actually, this is one of the things that most annoys me about Linux; whenever there's extreme disk activity it seems to block absolutely everything else, so the machine pretty much freezes until it's over. I kinda hoped a CK kernel might be better at that, but it doesn't seem to be.
I'm sure somebody will take offense at this, but I have to say I'm distinctly unimpressed with the performance of most things in Linux. I use the OS because I find it easier and less frustrating to use than Windows, but it doesn't seem to be able to measure up in terms of performance. It always seems a little odd to me that most people say the opposite:). <random example>I really can't figure out how memory management has been tuned - some things seem to be a little more efficient than Windows, but most of the time it's unpleasantly slow at doing anything - a pity since most Linux programs with a graphical component are absurdly heavyweight. On the plus side, it does seem to be happier with lots of small processes running, so perhaps there's a trade-off here.</random example>
Anyway, I'll stop rambling off-topic. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ikataii
n00b
Joined: 21 Apr 2005
Posts: 59
Location: CA
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 09, 2005 11:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
Sorry to stay off-topic, but Waywocket's disk-problem sounds kind of like what I had for awhile when I didn't have DMA support for my hard drive compiled into my kernel. I'm not 100% sure where in the config that option is, though, so I won't attempt to say what exactly might need to be toggled.
Anywho, just a random thought. Overall, I've seen better performance in Linux than under windows, if only because I can track what's going on better.
_________________
"War is the Tao of deception." -Sun Tzu |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Waywocket
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 16 Dec 2003
Posts: 84
Location: York
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 09, 2005 3:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
According to hdparm, DMA is turned on (that was the first thing I looked at when it started to annoy me). Of course, it could be lying, but I doubt Debian's stock kernels would have that option turned off. I reckon maybe my IDE controller or disk is just not very good, to be honest.
On-topic: Did anybody figure out what the latest mini-patch on the test server did (or is it documented and I missed it somehow)?. Either way it doesn't seem to have affected anything for me, just to confirm what some people have said. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
MasterMind
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 16 Sep 2003
Posts: 84
Location: Ljubljana, Kozarje
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 09, 2005 3:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I too have that annoying thingy with mouse. My hdparm output:
| Code: | root@francl:/home/mastermind# hdparm -i /dev/hda
/dev/hda:
Model=MAXTOR 6L080J4, FwRev=A93.0500, SerialNo=664206952044
Config={ HardSect NotMFM HdSw>15uSec Fixed DTR>10Mbs }
RawCHS=16383/16/63, TrkSize=32256, SectSize=21298, ECCbytes=4
BuffType=DualPortCache, BuffSize=1819kB, MaxMultSect=16, MultSect=16
CurCHS=16383/16/63, CurSects=16514064, LBA=yes, LBAsects=156355584
IORDY=on/off, tPIO={min:120,w/IORDY:120}, tDMA={min:120,rec:120}
PIO modes: pio0 pio1 pio2 pio3 pio4
DMA modes: mdma0 mdma1 mdma2
UDMA modes: udma0 udma1 udma2
AdvancedPM=no WriteCache=enabled
Drive conforms to: ATA/ATAPI-5 T13 1321D revision 1:
* signifies the current active mode
root@francl:/home/mastermind# hdparm -d /dev/hda
/dev/hda:
using_dma = 1 (on) |
What could be wrong? While using LiveCD, it signes as UDMA5.
On-topic: I also didn't got that mini patch  (but my brother did), right when Daggerspine went down.
_________________
Want the best subtitles?
Podnapisi.NET, we support only quality! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Peregrine
n00b
Joined: 16 Jun 2003
Posts: 67
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 09, 2005 6:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
MasterMind: Hmm, usually i'd expect to see which mode your hard drive is in (denoted by `*`)
What do you see if you try: hdparm -I /dev/hda
According to that info, it looks like your drive supports up to UDMA2.
If you want to try and force it, this is what I do (YMMV - Always read the docs for potential issues as although i've never been hit with file corruption or hardware failure, it could happen):
hdparm -X udma2 /dev/hda
I personally also use: hdparm -c 1 -d 1 /dev/hda
If you want to test the changes, run this before you make the change and after:
hdparm -tT /dev/hda
Hope this helps. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
MasterMind
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 16 Sep 2003
Posts: 84
Location: Ljubljana, Kozarje
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 09, 2005 6:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I know. That's why it looked strange to me. In LiveCD it checked, which one is used. Tried hdparm -I /dev/hda and I got this. (not pasting the whole output.)
| Code: | Capabilities:
LBA, IORDY(can be disabled)
bytes avail on r/w long: 4 Queue depth: 1
Standby timer values: spec'd by Vendor, no device specific minimum
R/W multiple sector transfer: Max = 16 Current = 16
Recommended acoustic management value: 128, current value: 254
DMA: mdma0 mdma1 mdma2 udma0 udma1 udma2 udma3 udma4 *udma5 udma6
Cycle time: min=120ns recommended=120ns
PIO: pio0 pio1 pio2 pio3 pio4
Cycle time: no flow control=120ns IORDY flow control=120ns
Commands/features:
Enabled Supported:
* READ BUFFER cmd
* WRITE BUFFER cmd
* Host Protected Area feature set
* Look-ahead
* Write cache
* Power Management feature set
Security Mode feature set
SMART feature set
* Mandatory FLUSH CACHE command
* Device Configuration Overlay feature set
* Automatic Acoustic Management feature set
SET MAX security extension
* DOWNLOAD MICROCODE cmd
* SMART self-test
* SMART error logging |
As you can see. UDMA5 here is checked... That means everything is ok?
_________________
Want the best subtitles?
Podnapisi.NET, we support only quality! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Peregrine
n00b
Joined: 16 Jun 2003
Posts: 67
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 09, 2005 7:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| That should be ok - -I requests the information directly from the drive itself. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jengu
Guru
Joined: 28 Oct 2004
Posts: 384
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 09, 2005 8:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Waywocket wrote: |
Assuming you mean disk thrashing upon entering Ironforge, you might find there is no solution. Personally I've found that when my system is under very heavy disk load I can't move the mouse in X at all, regardless of whether I'm running Wine. This might be connected to different tyes of disks and their drivers though. Actually, this is one of the things that most annoys me about Linux; whenever there's extreme disk activity it seems to block absolutely everything else, so the machine pretty much freezes until it's over. I kinda hoped a CK kernel might be better at that, but it doesn't seem to be.
I'm sure somebody will take offense at this, but I have to say I'm distinctly unimpressed with the performance of most things in Linux. I use the OS because I find it easier and less frustrating to use than Windows, but it doesn't seem to be able to measure up in terms of performance. It always seems a little odd to me that most people say the opposite:). <random example>I really can't figure out how memory management has been tuned - some things seem to be a little more efficient than Windows, but most of the time it's unpleasantly slow at doing anything - a pity since most Linux programs with a graphical component are absurdly heavyweight. On the plus side, it does seem to be happier with lots of small processes running, so perhaps there's a trade-off here.</random example>
Anyway, I'll stop rambling off-topic. |
That's weird, because I've always thought it was cool that Linux seemed to stay responsive even when there was tons of disk/cpu activity. My old p3 700mhz laptop can be running several compiles at once and although load times for apps maybe longer, the system always stays responsive. Definitely sounds like an issue with your configuration.
Also, don't complain about Linux performance when it's not running a Linux game. That's just stupid. You're trying to run software that was designed to run on a different OS. That it runs at all shows the wine team has some serious hacking prowess. Also, some things, like "tuning memory management" are harder to find under linux because unlike windows, linux has smarter defaults and largely doesn't need tweaking in this area. For example, linux won't use swap until you're completely out of RAM, while windows will start using swap even if you have hundreds of MBs left, something a lot of gamers tweak.
Go find a game written for linux and measure it's performance. Assuming you have an nvidia card (good drivers) you'll find windows/linux performance to be largely the same. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Waywocket
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 16 Dec 2003
Posts: 84
Location: York
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 09, 2005 11:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Jengu wrote: |
That's weird, because I've always thought it was cool that Linux seemed to stay responsive even when there was tons of disk/cpu activity. My old p3 700mhz laptop can be running several compiles at once and although load times for apps maybe longer, the system always stays responsive. Definitely sounds like an issue with your configuration.
|
Yes, it does seem wierd. Since I've tried a multitude of configurations (and distributions) however, I think it's probably that some driver just doesn't play too well with my hardware for some reason. I think it was better using 2.4 though - stability was far better, but alas support for it is waning. CPU activity is no problem of course, it's just disk activity that seems to block everything else. It would be nice if the scheduler took into account disk usage in the same way as processor usage. I'm not saying Windows is any better in this particular regard (I may have strongly implied it earlier, but now I've tried and failed to recall similar cases where Windows handled it better ), but I've definately not had as good an experience as some people report in Linux with disk IO.
This could be imagined (wishful thinking FTW), but it actually feels a bit better since switching from udma6 to udma 5. I'll have to try it in the daytime when there are more players around, but I do appear to be able to log in significantly faster now - even in Ironforge. Previously it would sit and thrash for quite some time. I'll also have to try it when I've not just restarted X, since it seems to slow down over the course of a few days/weeks.
| Quote: |
Also, don't complain about Linux performance when it's not running a Linux game. That's just stupid. You're trying to run software that was designed to run on a different OS. That it runs at all shows the wine team has some serious hacking prowess.
|
Well, I didn't. There *is* a slight issue that Nvidia's drivers still aren't quite as good as their Windows ones, but there's very little in it - graphically I don't have any performance problems. Plus, obviously that's no fault of the OS.
| Quote: |
Also, some things, like "tuning memory management" are harder to find under linux because unlike windows, linux has smarter defaults and largely doesn't need tweaking in this area. For example, linux won't use swap until you're completely out of RAM, while windows will start using swap even if you have hundreds of MBs left, something a lot of gamers tweak.
|
I think you'll find you're kind of mistaken here, in a way[Edit: That sentence came out sounding ruder than was intended, my apologies]. When I say 'in a way', I mean that Linux (2.6 at least) seems to have some fairly complex algorithms deciding when to swap (plus there are always diferent kernel patches, and different options at compile and run-time). For example, it appears to consider itself out of memory for swapping purposes if it's all filled up with buffered/cached data. Whether that's good or bad depends entirely on the situation. As far as I recall (and that's not too far, since I've barely used Windows in years), there's very little configurability in Windows for this. Without doing any tweaking myself, I've found that Linux is much happier to give you a more averaged performance - every application feels about the same, whereas Windows aggressively swaps out unused applications. This is great until you want to switch, at which point I always get annoyed and forget the bad part of the Linux way . It's a matter of aims, really. Linux is unsurprisingly attempting to treat every application equally (modulo some minor CPU priority boosts for 'interactive' processes).
| Quote: |
Go find a game written for linux and measure it's performance. Assuming you have an nvidia card (good drivers) you'll find windows/linux performance to be largely the same. |
Well the only game I have with a native Linux version is Neverwinter Nights, and the Linux client for that is so bad it wouldn't really be a fair test  . Plus that's the only game I bought which left me feeling like I'd been robbed.
For those who didn't feel like reading all of that, the on-topic part was that the game appears subjectively to load faster when logging in/zoning since I switched from udma6 to udma5. I've not come under the kind of load yet that would normally give me mouse issues, and MasterMind seems to have the same issue with udma5, but it might be worth a try for anyone feeling lucky. Lookup the hdparm -X switch and as Peregrine said | Quote: | | YMMV - Always read the docs for potential issues as although i've never been hit with file corruption or hardware failure, it could happen |
Last edited by Waywocket on Sun Jul 10, 2005 1:02 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
MasterMind
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 16 Sep 2003
Posts: 84
Location: Ljubljana, Kozarje
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 10, 2005 12:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
I believe that my problem is not in disk (well, when the system starts writing into swap, then I can't do anything). My problem might be in CPU (Pentium 4 1.9 GHz) and that my FSB is 100 MHz. I could increase performance by lowering my resolution, but I'll stick with 17-20 FPS .
More off-topic: Oh yea. I tried using winearts, but it doesn't work. And winealsa can't use dmix, could anyone had a solution to this problem? In the meantime, I'll just use winealsa, without mixing...
_________________
Want the best subtitles?
Podnapisi.NET, we support only quality! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Waywocket
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 16 Dec 2003
Posts: 84
Location: York
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 10, 2005 12:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
| MasterMind wrote: |
More off-topic: Oh yea. I tried using winearts, but it doesn't work. And winealsa can't use dmix, could anyone had a solution to this problem? In the meantime, I'll just use winealsa, without mixing... |
Can you not use wineoss? It should work even if your system uses ALSA, since there's a backward compatability layer. Quite a few people have had more success with OSS than ALSA in WoW. (Apologies if you've already mentioned this, I didn't notice anything in a brief skim.) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
MasterMind
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 16 Sep 2003
Posts: 84
Location: Ljubljana, Kozarje
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 10, 2005 8:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
No I didn't. That means.. I'll have to recompile with oss flag
_________________
Want the best subtitles?
Podnapisi.NET, we support only quality! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
chimera26
n00b
Joined: 24 Mar 2004
Posts: 6
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 10, 2005 11:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
| I just emerged the latest version of wine and applied the shamus fix (from page 9 I guess) and WoW seems to work for me now |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Thi3f
n00b
Joined: 10 Jul 2005
Posts: 9
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 10, 2005 11:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
Mmm, I'm quite the noob when it comes to linux, and I'm trying to get WoW to work with Wine.
When I run wine WoW.exe I get this:
| Code: | wine: creating configuration directory '/home/thi3f/.wine'...
Xlib: extension "GLX" missing on display ":0.0".
Xlib: extension "GLX" missing on display ":0.0".
wine: Unhandled exception (thread 0009), starting debugger...
WineDbg starting on pid 0x8
Unhandled exception: page fault on read access to 0x00000000 in 32-bit code (0x7fa85bea).
In 32 bit mode.
Register dump:
CS:0073 SS:007b DS:007b ES:007b FS:003b GS:0033
EIP:7fa85bea ESP:77adfcbc EBP:00000001 EFLAGS:00210246( - 00 -RIZP1)
EAX:00000000 EBX:780dadb0 ECX:00000001 EDX:78013630
ESI:78013630 EDI:78013630
Stack dump:
0x77adfcbc: 78013630 7fab7540 78013630 7fa87ed6
0x77adfccc: 78013630 78013630 7fe5258c 780dadc8
0x77adfcdc: 7fd9e57d 78013630 780dadcc 77ec43d1
0x77adfcec: 7ff091d4 7ff0f9d4 7febd674 77adfd0c
0x77adfcfc: 7fedd3cc 78013630 7ff091d4 00000001
0x77adfd0c: 77adfd1c 7fef117f 7fcf1238 7ff091d4
Backtrace:
=>1 0x7fa85bea in libgl.so.1 (+0x30bea) (0x00000001)
2 0x00000000 (0x00000000)
0x7fa85bea: movl 0x0(%eax),%eax
Wine-dbg>
|
I would be more than greatful for any pointers or advice |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
Gamers & Players
