Feel free to reread LGPL 2.1 here :
http://svn.reactos.com/viewcvs/trunk/reactos/LGPL.txt
--- Magnus Olsen <magnus(a)itkonsult-olsen.com> wrote:
> ReactOS are not a LPGL but GPL
> it is big diffrent in the licen type
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Sylvain Petreolle" <spetreolle(a)yahoo.fr>
> To: "ReactOS Development List" <ros-dev(a)reactos.com>
> Sent: Sunday, March 13, 2005 8:39 PM
> Subject: Re: [ros-dev] Vote: Allow 3rd-party distribution of ROS through
> XDCCBot.
>
>
> > If all legal conditions are fulfilled :
> > - give link to the source
> > - (alex's idea) provide md5sum of the file(s)
> >
> > As some people already said, 3d point cant exist.
> > (ros is a LGPL system, some magazines already distribute it, etc.)
> > > [ ] Yes, allow 3rd-party distribution of the OS through the #ros-xdcc
> > > channel and ROS-XDCC-001 bot. (support and encourage this distribution)
> > >
> > > [X] Yes, allow 3rd-party distribution of the OS, but it must clearly
> > > distance itself from officially supported releases (tolerate but do not
> > > support this distribution)
> > >
> > > [ ] No, only sourceforge and other official ReactOS distribution points
> > > should be used.
> >
> >
> > Kind regards,
> >
> > Usurp (aka Sylvain Petreolle)
> >
> > humans are like computers,
> > yesterday the BIOS was all
> > - today its just a word
> > _______________________________________________
> > Ros-dev mailing list
> > Ros-dev(a)reactos.com
> > http://reactos.com:8080/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
>
>
Kind regards,
Usurp (aka Sylvain Petreolle)
humans are like computers,
yesterday the BIOS was all
- today its just a word
chorns(a)svn.reactos.com wrote:
>* GNU make don't support depending on a directory, so simulate the dependency using a file
>
How not? It works on my box as well as on arty's. :(
There is a little piece of code I left in reactos/subsys/smss/initss.c
that looks like harmless, but that actually crashes smss.exe and
therefore the whole system. The code is in the function
SmpRegisterSmss/0. I can't find myself the bug. The code is currently
wrapped by a #if 0 ... #endif but it is needed to make the SM self
register (to avoid other processaes claim they are the SM). Any hint is
welcome!
Emanuele
WARNING: This e-mail has been altered by MIMEDefang. Following this
paragraph are indications of the actual changes made. For more
information about your site's MIMEDefang policy, contact
MIMEDefang Administrator <mimedefang(a)deos.tudelft.nl>. For more information about MIMEDefang, see:
http://www.roaringpenguin.com/mimedefang/enduser.php3
An attachment of type message/rfc822, named [ros-svn] [hbirr] 13963: Lock the kernel address space instead the process'one, if the pages are located in kernel space. was removed from this document as it
constituted a security hazard. If you require this document, please contact
the sender and arrange an alternate means of receiving it.
> Let me make it clear that the vote is about wether or not to allow
> a particular type of branch which have some bad consequences. Not
> branches in general. See
> http://reactos.com:8080/archives/public/ros-dev/2005-March/002083.html
> for a description of the common branch types.
I did read it (otherwise I wouldnt vote)
"Bugs that that could have been fixed on trunk are annoying to trunk
developers. The bugfixes that go only to the branch are not in trunk (until
merged there from the branch"
=> trunk developers are free to ask for a merge or use ros-diffs to speed up the merge process.
"* Risk of duplicating work. We'll have more branches to track bugfixes on
so it's harder to know which bugs has been fixed and which hasn't."
you can use ros-svn to track it. And you can fix bugs in bugzilla too.
"Fixed in branch my_branch, feel free to merge."
>
> Do you have commit access?
>
> Casper
Kind regards,
Usurp (aka Sylvain Petreolle)
humans are like computers,
yesterday the BIOS was all
- today its just a word
If all legal conditions are fulfilled :
- give link to the source
- (alex's idea) provide md5sum of the file(s)
As some people already said, 3d point cant exist.
(ros is a LGPL system, some magazines already distribute it, etc.)
> [ ] Yes, allow 3rd-party distribution of the OS through the #ros-xdcc
> channel and ROS-XDCC-001 bot. (support and encourage this distribution)
>
> [X] Yes, allow 3rd-party distribution of the OS, but it must clearly
> distance itself from officially supported releases (tolerate but do not
> support this distribution)
>
> [ ] No, only sourceforge and other official ReactOS distribution points
> should be used.
Kind regards,
Usurp (aka Sylvain Petreolle)
humans are like computers,
yesterday the BIOS was all
- today its just a word
Hi!
hbirr(a)svn.reactos.com wrote:
> Added a keep-alive reference to each key object.
> Lock the registry while accessing sub keys of a key object.
> Implemented a worker thread which removes all unused key objects.
> Fixed a bug which shows keys twice if a key is already opened.
>
>
>
> Updated files:
> trunk/reactos/ntoskrnl/cm/cm.h
> trunk/reactos/ntoskrnl/cm/ntfunc.c
> trunk/reactos/ntoskrnl/cm/registry.c
> trunk/reactos/ntoskrnl/cm/regobj.c
>
ntoskrnl: [CC] cm/regobj.c
cm/regobj.c: In function `CmiObjectParse':
cm/regobj.c:244: error: parse error before '<<' token
cm/regobj.c:763: error: parse error at end of input
cm/regobj.c:23: warning: `CmiGetLinkTarget' declared `static' but never defined
make[1]: *** [cm/regobj.o] Error 1
make: *** [ntoskrnl] Error 2
8^),
James
--- Casper Hornstrup <ch(a)csh-consult.dk> wrote:
> I'd like to close this discussion with a vote.
>
> Should we allow branches (other than trunk) with mixed new development and bugfixes
> unrelated to the new development that is on the branch (miscelanea branches) ?
>
> [X] Yes, do allow miscelanea branches
>
> [ ] No, don't allow miscelanea branches
>
> Casper
>
Have an svn branch gives a nice way to revert/update
and permits others to work with a different POV on the project.
Even if only some are using it, it can help ros a lot.
(look at the xmlbuildsystem branch that speeds up the compilation a lot)
Kind regards,
Usurp (aka Sylvain Petreolle)
humans are like computers,
yesterday the BIOS was all
- today its just a word
I don't think we've ever formalised our voting procedures.
All I seem to remember about this is that committers can vote.
I've drafted an initial version here:
http://reactos.com/wiki/index.php/Voting
Please comment on that.
Casper