> From: Brandon Turner
>
> I just released 0.2.9 to sf.net. A lot of bug fixes since
> RC1 so get out there and check it out. File any bugs in in
> bugzilla or give us any feedback on the ml.
Reminder to devs: with the release of 0.2.9-RC2 we're now in code freeze for
the branch. During code freeze, the only allowed commits are bugfixes to
release-blocking bugs. These fixes are generally discussed on the mailing
list prior to committing a fix.
GvG
Hey all,
I was about to publish all the files for 0.2.9 RC2 when i releazied that
my network is not working in qemu. It worked a few days ago(friday?).
But it isnt working for me now. Is anyone else having this problem?
www.brandonturner.org/rc2.PNG
Brandon
The program below (when compiled with MSVC6, multithreaded DLL runtime) only
prints "in first handler" on ReactOS and then gets into an endless exception
loop:
int
main(int argc, char *argv[])
{
__try
{
RaiseException(0x55aa, 0, 0, NULL);
}
__except(EXCEPTION_EXECUTE_HANDLER)
{
printf("in first handler\n");
}
__try
{
RaiseException(0xaacc, 0, 0, NULL);
}
__except(EXCEPTION_EXECUTE_HANDLER)
{
printf("in second handler\n");
}
return 0;
}
I believe the reason is that our RtlUnwind removes the target exception
frame too, which it shouldn't do. The following patch seems to solve the
issue:
Index: lib/rtl/i386/exception.c
===================================================================
--- lib/rtl/i386/exception.c (revision 20225)
+++ lib/rtl/i386/exception.c (working copy)
@@ -333,7 +333,10 @@
RegistrationFrame2 = RegistrationFrame2->Next;
/* Remove this handler */
- RtlpSetExceptionList(OldFrame);
+ if (RegistrationFrame2 != RegistrationFrame)
+ {
+ RtlpSetExceptionList(OldFrame);
+ }
}
}
but I'm no expert on exception issues. Is this indeed the correct fix?
GvG
I quote from the ReactOS Weekly Newsletter - Volume 1, Issue 8
"0.2.9? Another One?
Yup, we have another release planned for you all. 0.2.9 is our last
release before the very-much-anticipated 0.3.0 release."
Could we stop saying that? 0.3.0 is not the release after 0.2.9, nor
0.2.8, nor 0.2.5! 0.3.0 will happen when we hit the stated goals, and
unless networking gets some serious attention, we will see 0.2.10.
So, please, can we stop saying "This is the last release before
0.3.0"? It makes us look bad, and confuses people when we release yet
another 0.2.x.
Don't get me wrong, we are closer to 0.3.0 than ever before, but there
are still many bugs.
WD
--
<Russell> argh
<Russell> iterator shenanigans :/
FYI. svn.reactos.org may be affected.
Casper
> -----Original Message-----
> From: WEBPARTNER Drift Information [mailto:drift@webpartner.dk]
> Sent: 15. december 2005 08:21
> To: driftinfo(a)webpartner.dk
> Subject: Strømarbejde i Serverpark Østerbro
>
> Affected customers : Serverpark Østerbro
>
> We are in the finishing phase of several improvement to our powersupply. Improvements witch gives
> us added capacity, to supply current and future power and cooling needs.
>
> Københavns Energi handle the last part of the work witch is done d. 19.12.2005 at 24:00 to d.
> 20.12.2005 at 04:00, while the work is done we are operating on disel generator. We dont expect any
> interuptions but in the period above there is an increased risc for outage.
>
> We are at your disposal if you need our assistance in relation to this work.
>
> Best regards
> WEBPARTNER A/S
>
> Visit us: http://www.webpartner.dk
> Mailing list removal: http://www.webpartner.dk/336
"insecure-by-inattention" - by that I mean software that must run as super-user
or otherwise (otherstupidly) it won't run at all. ReactOS is not only intended
as a plug-in replacement for MS Windows, if I read this-and-that correctly, it's
also intended to "get it done right". And so we can't have super-user as
default user, because that is Microsoft's thorn-in-the-flesh, and they can have
it. I don't want it.
What I've been thinking is there is quite a bit of useful information and
knowledge being actively developed and used in the Unix/BSD/Linux field for
handling that sort of problem. The BSD chroot jail is one such implementation -
there are even some aspects of the MS Windows directory structure that would
simplify the adaption of the chroot jail to the ReactOS.
[hardware]\Program Files\Abracadabra-Malware-Magnet\
"Abracadabra-Malware-Magnet" is a separate subdirectory within the Program Files
directory. Chroot jail, if I remember correctly, requires a separate directory
for each chrooted program so it sees itself as the one-and-only love of its
kernel's uptime. The MS Windows directory structure already has this separable
directory structure.
What needs to be done is to ensure that it thinks it's the only one around.
There would be some sizeable problems - ensuring that the dlls would be
sufficiently robust to avoid being hijacked, is just one, ensuring that it
couldn't make any changes to dlls outside its directory is a bigger one, but
that could be handled by making sure it installed all its (uniquely) needed dlls
in its chroot jail. Which a lot of Win32 programs do anyway.
What do people think?
Wesley Parish
"Sharpened hands are happy hands.
"Brim the tinfall with mirthful bands"
- A Deepness in the Sky, Vernor Vinge
"I me. Shape middled me. I would come out into hot!"
I from the spicy that day was overcasked mockingly - it's a symbol of the
other horizon. - emacs : meta x dissociated-press
Latest SVN is crashing with the following message:
Assertion 'Class->refs == 0' failed at ./subsys/win32k/ntuser/class.c
line 69
I created bug report here:
http://www.reactos.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1145
This bug only occurs on ANSI build of app, and is 100% reproduceable for
me. I suspect this bug may effect 0.2.9...
Hi,
I would like to attend the GPLv3 launch event to gain more knowlege
about it and how it will affect us. If you guys would like me to go on
the FSF dime then please drop my name here
http://gplv3.fsf.org/recommend
Thanks
--
Steven Edwards - ReactOS and Wine developer
"There is one thing stronger than all the armies in the world, and
that is an idea whose time has come." - Victor Hugo