[mac] 4.1.0 Build 13850 release w/debug info?

[TOM_RUS]

I'm gonna try to port all those names to windows idb for upcoming 4.1 patch, but I guess it will take a while...

[Tanaris4]

I'm curious how you will try to do that? Not function by function I would hope, or by signatures?

[TOM_RUS]

I'm curious how you will try to do that? Not function by function I would hope, or by signatures?

I doubt it's possible to do using patterns, it's different compiler, debug build etc... Too much binary differences. I'll do it manually.

[caytchen]

Hey Blizzard, the 90s called, they want their debug information leak back. Oh my.

[TOM_RUS]

lol, they seems also included function names for WoW [Release] Build 13860 (Apr 10 2011) (Mac)

[jjaa]

Dam this is awesome. I wonder if this was an accident :O

[Chamele0n]

I was here to witness this epic thread.
****ing awesome! i think i jizzed in my pants.

+ 1
Should be relatively easy to build a list of opcodes now.

[Cypher]

They did it AGAIN? Hahahaha. Awesome!

[XTZGZoReX]

This is paradise for protocol reversers.

Is there a Battle.net Mac library somewhere? Does it have debug symbols too?

[hotpocket]

lol Tanaris ur so sexy!

[XTZGZoReX]

Just dumping this here for lulz, found by phazerz:

__common:0124C294 ?? ?? ??+ _EclipseObject_HuhHuhHuh_Huh dd ?

[greasemonkey]

I remember Win32 Version 4.0.0.11792 PTR already included the Debug information!
Go into your archive and try this version it really includes Debug Infromation. Its really similar to the newest Mac Version!

[Chamele0n]

I remember Win32 Version 4.0.0.11792 PTR already included the Debug information!
Go into your archive and try this version it really includes Debug Infromation. Its really similar to the newest Mac Version!

I've just checked the one posted here and it doesn't have all the function names like the new Mac version.
It does have a list of opcode names though.

[XTZGZoReX]

The reason why the Mac one has all the function names is that they exported virtually every single WoW function; this is not the case for 11792. Also, the opcodes you see in 11792 are old-style, and are pretty much worthless today.

[Robske]

I doubt it's possible to do using patterns, it's different compiler, debug build etc... Too much binary differences. I'll do it manually.

Godspeed soldier