Ros-dev October 2007

ros-dev@reactos.org

30 participants
45 discussions

Re: [ros-dev] [ros-diffs] [gedmurphy] 29469: add wine's wordpad as the default

by Aleksey Bragin

Is there a reason to keep the wordpad we have? Is it better, worse, differences mergeable, etc? WBR, Aleksey Bragin. On Oct 9, 2007, at 1:00 PM, gedmurphy(a)svn.reactos.org wrote: > Author: gedmurphy > Date: Tue Oct 9 13:00:56 2007 > New Revision: 29469 > > URL: http://svn.reactos.org/svn/reactos?rev=29469&view=rev > Log: > add wine's wordpad as the default

18 years

Re: [ros-dev] Clean-room reversing

by Aleksey Bragin

Yes. Either reverse engineer and write docs (which can be used by ReactOS developers, provided they contain no source code derived from disassembly), or reverse engineer and write test cases. The latter method is [presumably] used by Wine developers, and it provides a very good legal ground. With the best regards, Aleksey Bragin. On Oct 9, 2007, at 5:12 AM, Josh H. wrote: > Is it okay to reverse through disassembly as long as clean room > methods > are used(only writeing docs, not implementing it yourself)? > > http://www.computerworld.com/softwaretopics/software/appdev/story/ > 0,10801,65532,00.html > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clean_room_design

18 years

Clean-room reversing

by Josh H.

Is it okay to reverse through disassembly as long as clean room methods are used(only writeing docs, not implementing it yourself)? http://www.computerworld.com/softwaretopics/software/appdev/story/0,10801,6… http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clean_room_design -- Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/

18 years

Re: [ros-dev] rbuild problems/suggestions

by Marc Piulachs

Anyone wants to comment on this? _____ From: Marc Piulachs [mailto:marc.piulachs@codexchange.net] Sent: Saturday, October 06, 2007 10:24 PM To: 'ros-dev(a)reactos.org' Subject: rbuild problems/suggestions Having worked with rbuild for a few weeks I have identified some problems that would like to share. I also would like to hear the developers' opinions about all of these issues because I want to start working to solving them. A) The behavior of the "include" + "directory" tags are inconsistent when an "include" is placed inside a "directory" for example: Correct: (expected : ke/i386/boot.S) <directory name="ke"> <if property="ARCH" value="i386"> <directory name="i386"> <file first="true">boot.S</file> Incorrect: (expected : reactos/reactos.rbuild real : reactos/reactos/reactos.rbuild) <directory name="reactos"> <xi:include href="reactos/reactos.rbuild" /> </directory> should be: <directory name="reactos"> <xi:include href="reactos.rbuild" /> </directory> B) The "oldcrt" attribute is no longer used and can be removed. C) The module types "Iso" , "LiveIso" , "IsoRegTest" and "LiveIsoRegTest" are IMHO hacks introduced to be able use the makefile generation code. rbuild is C++ so with a small code refactor they can be easly removed. D) Any module is using the "EmbeddedTypeLib" module type , is really needed or can be removed? E) IMHO the "ElfExecutable" is incorrect . I posted my reasons some time ago: http://www.reactos.org/archives/public/ros-dev/2007-September/009770.html http://www.reactos.org/archives/public/ros-dev/2007-September/009771.html http://www.reactos.org/archives/public/ros-dev/2007-September/009779.html F) The module type "alias" is only used for HAL related modules and IMHO it isn't requiered because the problem it tries to solve can be easly solved using "if" tags and conditional compilation. http://www.reactos.org/archives/public/ros-dev/2007-September/009798.html There are several reasons for this change: - Currently every platform requires 3 new HAL modules. In the future if new platforms are supported for example (X86 , XBOX , PPC , AMD64 , MIPS , IA64 , ARM ... ) 3 x 7 = 21 modules .. see what I'm saying? - It simplifies backends work. No need to include logic for alias handling. - Conceptually wrong . every module represents a particular functionality when you compile the module it should just reconfigure itself to produce the appropriate image for the configured architecture .It a good idea to have a true componentized operating system. Regarding the ModuleType IMHO they should be used to provide information that describes the module output/target not the build process! Iso , LiveIso , Alias , ... all of them are meaningless they are not true metadata. Long term enhancements: X) tags like "linkerflag" or "compilerflag" are gcc/mingw specific and should be replaced with other tags that provide the equivalent functionality using a more abstract aproach so other backends/compilers could benefit from it. rbuild files should only describe the source code and the compilation process without including specific information. /Marc

18 years

Re: [ros-dev] Bugzilla error when sending notifications

by carlo.bramix

Hello, I got this error too... and I made a little disaster. I got that message when writing into bug #2711. I cleaned the off-line cache, I posted my message again, I got success but the message has been posted twice, because the previous message had been accepted despite the error screen. Sorry... Carlo Bramini >I'm getting the same error since some time. > >But for me, it only occurs when hpoussin at reactos.org is >subscribed to the >bug report (by being the bug reporter or by being on the CC >list). Sending >notifications to other E-Mail addresses seems to work fine. >Also only the E-Mail notification part is affected by this >problem, the >other changes will be saved successfully. >Using Deskzilla with such bug reports also leads to the same >problem. > >Regards, > >Colin > > >> --- Original Message --- > From: ros-dev-bounces at reactos.org [mailto:ros-dev-bounces at reactos.org] On Behalf Of Marc Piulachs >> Sent: Tuesday, October 02, 2007 5:11 PM >> To: ros-dev at reactos.org >> Subject: [ros-dev] Bugzilla error when sending notifications >> >> I'm getting this error when posting/modifying a bugreport >> >> Bugzilla has suffered an internal error. Please save this page and send it to aleksey at reactos.org with details of what you were doing at the time this message appeared. >> >> URL: http://www.reactos.org/bugzilla/process_bug.cgi >> >> There was an error sending mail from 'ReactOS.Bugzilla' to 'hpoussin at reactos.org':error when closing pipe to /usr/lib/sendmail: ------------------------------------------------------ Leggi GRATIS le tue mail con il telefonino i-mode di Wind http://i-mode.wind.it/

18 years

Techwiki start

by Timo Kreuzer

I have started a techwiki inside our wiki. It can be found at http://www.reactos.org/wiki/index.php/Techwiki/main Currently only some stuff for win32k/gdi. Please add any info about nt functionality / links / tools you'd like to share there. I still think it would be a good idea to move it into it's own wiki, so our wiki doesn't get even more messed up ;-) Timo

18 years

Re: [ros-dev] [ros-diffs] [hpoussin] 29433: ntdll.dll is a native dll

by Alex Ionescu

Nope, it's not :) On 10/7/07, hpoussin(a)svn.reactos.org <hpoussin(a)svn.reactos.org> wrote: > > Author: hpoussin > Date: Sun Oct 7 16:14:02 2007 > New Revision: 29433 > > URL: http://svn.reactos.org/svn/reactos?rev=29433&view=rev > Log: > ntdll.dll is a native dll > > Modified: > trunk/reactos/dll/ntdll/ntdll.rbuild > > Modified: trunk/reactos/dll/ntdll/ntdll.rbuild > URL: > http://svn.reactos.org/svn/reactos/trunk/reactos/dll/ntdll/ntdll.rbuild?rev… > > ============================================================================== > --- trunk/reactos/dll/ntdll/ntdll.rbuild (original) > +++ trunk/reactos/dll/ntdll/ntdll.rbuild Sun Oct 7 16:14:02 2007 > @@ -1,6 +1,6 @@ > <?xml version="1.0"?> > <!DOCTYPE module SYSTEM "../../tools/rbuild/project.dtd"> > -<module name="ntdll" type="win32dll" entrypoint="0" > baseaddress="${BASEADDRESS_NTDLL}" installbase="system32" installname=" > ntdll.dll"> > +<module name="ntdll" type="nativedll" entrypoint="0" > baseaddress="${BASEADDRESS_NTDLL}" installbase="system32" installname=" > ntdll.dll"> > <bootstrap installbase="$(CDOUTPUT)/system32" /> > <importlibrary definition="def/ntdll.def" /> > <include base="ntdll">inc</include> > > > -- Best regards, Alex Ionescu

18 years

rbuild problems/suggestions

by Marc Piulachs

Having worked with rbuild for a few weeks I have identified some problems that would like to share. I also would like to hear the developers' opinions about all of these issues because I want to start working to solving them. A) The behavior of the "include" + "directory" tags are inconsistent when an "include" is placed inside a "directory" for example: Correct: (expected : ke/i386/boot.S) <directory name="ke"> <if property="ARCH" value="i386"> <directory name="i386"> <file first="true">boot.S</file> Incorrect: (expected : reactos/reactos.rbuild real : reactos/reactos/reactos.rbuild) <directory name="reactos"> <xi:include href="reactos/reactos.rbuild" /> </directory> should be: <directory name="reactos"> <xi:include href="reactos.rbuild" /> </directory> B) The "oldcrt" attribute is no longer used and can be removed. C) The module types "Iso" , "LiveIso" , "IsoRegTest" and "LiveIsoRegTest" are IMHO hacks introduced to be able use the makefile generation code. rbuild is C++ so with a small code refactor they can be easly removed. D) Any module is using the "EmbeddedTypeLib" module type , is really needed or can be removed? E) IMHO the "ElfExecutable" is incorrect . I posted my reasons some time ago: http://www.reactos.org/archives/public/ros-dev/2007-September/009770.html http://www.reactos.org/archives/public/ros-dev/2007-September/009771.html http://www.reactos.org/archives/public/ros-dev/2007-September/009779.html F) The module type "alias" is only used for HAL related modules and IMHO it isn't requiered because the problem it tries to solve can be easly solved using "if" tags and conditional compilation. http://www.reactos.org/archives/public/ros-dev/2007-September/009798.html There are several reasons for this change: - Currently every platform requires 3 new HAL modules. In the future if new platforms are supported for example (X86 , XBOX , PPC , AMD64 , MIPS , IA64 , ARM ... ) 3 x 7 = 21 modules .. see what I'm saying? - It simplifies backends work. No need to include logic for alias handling. - Conceptually wrong . every module represents a particular functionality when you compile the module it should just reconfigure itself to produce the appropriate image for the configured architecture .It a good idea to have a true componentized operating system. Regarding the ModuleType IMHO they should be used to provide information that describes the module output/target not the build process! Iso , LiveIso , Alias , ... all of them are meaningless they are not true metadata. Long term enhancements: X) tags like "linkerflag" or "compilerflag" are gcc/mingw specific and should be replaced with other tags that provide the equivalent functionality using a more abstract aproach so other backends/compilers could benefit from it. rbuild files should only describe the source code and the compilation process without including specific information. /Marc

18 years

Re: [ros-dev] [ros-diffs] [hpoussin] 29378: Add back windres, it is still used after wrc invocation

by Steven Edwards

speaking of resources, Alexandre is now allowing binary resources in winehq git as it actually handles them in a sane way as opposed to cvs. This means you guys can drop bin2res if your using it anywhere and keeping shell32 resources in sync with Wine will be less of a diff now. Thanks Steven On 10/3/07, hpoussin(a)svn.reactos.org <hpoussin(a)svn.reactos.org> wrote: > Author: hpoussin > Date: Wed Oct 3 18:17:46 2007 > New Revision: 29378 > > URL: http://svn.reactos.org/svn/reactos?rev=29378&view=rev > Log: > Add back windres, it is still used after wrc invocation > > Modified: > trunk/reactos/Makefile > > Modified: trunk/reactos/Makefile > URL: http://svn.reactos.org/svn/reactos/trunk/reactos/Makefile?rev=29378&r1=2937… > ============================================================================== > --- trunk/reactos/Makefile (original) > +++ trunk/reactos/Makefile Wed Oct 3 18:17:46 2007 > @@ -298,6 +298,7 @@ > objcopy = $(Q)$(PREFIX_)objcopy > dlltool = $(Q)$(PREFIX_)dlltool > strip = $(Q)$(PREFIX_)strip > +windres = $(Q)$(PREFIX_)windres > > # Set utilities > ifeq ($(OSTYPE),msys) > > > -- Steven Edwards "There is one thing stronger than all the armies in the world, and that is an idea whose time has come." - Victor Hugo

18 years, 1 month

ReactOS Development Process

by Aleksey Bragin

Hello, recently, different people raised a question: How should development process evolve with time, when ReactOS has more (much more) developers willing to contribute code? There are many possibilities, however all of them assume more or less an overhead, and need additional human resources. I will outline one suggested method, and want you (developers) to "constructively criticize it", improve it, or offer a better method. Even if it involves changing current version control system, or anything - suggest the method. So, the suggestion I've already got is this: Trunk is writable only by a so-called Integrator person (maybe a few persons). Branches are writable by a big amount of developers. Typical development process is as follows: 1. A developer creates a ticket in issue-tracking system (currently Bugzilla), where he describes what's wrong and what his change fixes/ improves. 2. He creates a branch with a name BZ-XYZ (where XYZ is ticket's number), and commits his changes there. 3. An integrator, daily, goes through all BZ-... branches, does svn merge to trunk of each branch, test it, if no regression occurs, he commits changes to trunk and svn deletes the respective BZ-... branch. Some kind of integration system is definitely needed, so please avoid fast answers like "Let's stay as we do now". Better approach is needed, and I'm looking for it. If you can offer something - do so. With the best regards, Aleksey Bragin.

18 years, 1 month

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

Ros-dev October 2007