On 2015-05-14 06:00, tkreuzer(a)svn.reactos.org wrote:
> - int sign = (copysignf(1, in) < 0);
> + int sign = (in < 0);
> - if (copysignf(1.0f, value) < 0.0f)
> + if (value < 0.0f)
> ++idx;
I believe the behavior would be different here for negative zero:
copysignf(1.0f, -0.0f) should be < 0.0f
-0.0f should be == 0.0f
Maybe that's the reason for having these calls?
On 2015-05-12 06:57, akhaldi(a)svn.reactos.org wrote:
> +/* FIXME: ntifs.h */
> +#define FILE_READ_ONLY_VOLUME 0x00080000
This should go in ndk/iotypes.h inside an NTOS_MODE_USER ifdef.
Hi all,
Today, the motherboard in our Fezile server has finally failed after
many hick-ups over the year. This causes an outage for the following
services:
* doxygen.reactos.org
* cppcheck.reactos.org
* VMware Player Test slave
* VMware Player Patchbot
As this is not the first time we struggle with such problems,
iso.reactos.org is routed to a different server right now and not affected.
We have already ordered replacement hardware for this system and hope to
be able to get it back to a working state soon. Even if this machine is
from 2007, we have decided to revive it with replacement parts instead
of going for a brand-new one as this is much cheaper and quicker to
realize. Also there is a huge pile of replacement hardware available.
Sorry for the inconveniences!
Cheers,
Colin
Manually uploaded.
On 10/05/2015 19:28, buildbot(a)reactos.org wrote:
> The Buildbot has detected a failed build on builder Trunk_x86_GCCLin Release while building ReactOS.
> Full details are available at:
> https://build.reactos.org/builders/Trunk_x86_GCCLin%20Release/builds/1177
>
> Buildbot URL: https://build.reactos.org/
>
> Buildslave for this Build: Debug
>
> Build Reason: The Periodic scheduler named 'Release' triggered this build
> Build Source Stamp: HEAD
> Blamelist:
>
> BUILD FAILED: failed shell
>
> sincerely,
> -The Buildbot
>
>
>
>
>
--
Pierre Schweitzer <pierre at reactos.org>
System & Network Administrator
Senior Kernel Developer
ReactOS Deutschland e.V.
Whats the difference between DPRINT and DbgPrint? I wrote a little
program that I can use to observe pipes, which I use for debugging. The
text from DPRINT is there, but where does DbgPrint go and why are there
multiple different debugging aids?
Well this is a weird one, the DDK says these callbacks are cdecl (missing NTAPI) and anyone building against the DDK will obviously declare their callbacks to match this convention. However internally, windows uses stdcall for these callbacks.
I can't find much by way of problems people have encountered with this, so why aren't people seeing problems with the way the stack is cleaned up? Anyone have any ideas before I blindly revert this change?
Ged.
-----Original Message-----
From: Ros-diffs [mailto:ros-diffs-bounces@reactos.org] On Behalf Of gedmurphy(a)svn.reactos.org
Sent: 05 May 2015 19:54
To: ros-diffs(a)reactos.org
Subject: [ros-diffs] [gedmurphy] 67563: [DDK] Fix the FS filter callback definitions
Author: gedmurphy
Date: Tue May 5 18:54:28 2015
New Revision: 67563
URL: http://svn.reactos.org/svn/reactos?rev=67563&view=rev
Log:
[DDK]
Fix the FS filter callback definitions
Modified:
trunk/reactos/include/ddk/ntifs.h
Modified: trunk/reactos/include/ddk/ntifs.h
URL: http://svn.reactos.org/svn/reactos/trunk/reactos/include/ddk/ntifs.h?rev=67…
==============================================================================
--- trunk/reactos/include/ddk/ntifs.h [iso-8859-1] (original)
+++ trunk/reactos/include/ddk/ntifs.h [iso-8859-1] Tue May 5 18:54:28 2015
@@ -4890,12 +4890,12 @@
} FS_FILTER_CALLBACK_DATA, *PFS_FILTER_CALLBACK_DATA;
typedef NTSTATUS
-(NTAPI *PFS_FILTER_CALLBACK) (
+(*PFS_FILTER_CALLBACK) (
_In_ PFS_FILTER_CALLBACK_DATA Data,
_Out_ PVOID *CompletionContext);
typedef VOID
-(NTAPI *PFS_FILTER_COMPLETION_CALLBACK) (
+(*PFS_FILTER_COMPLETION_CALLBACK) (
_In_ PFS_FILTER_CALLBACK_DATA Data,
_In_ NTSTATUS OperationStatus,
_In_ PVOID CompletionContext);
Hi
I'm new to ReactOS development and started to look into some issues I
noticed with the setup. When I tried to install it I experimented a bit
and noticed that you can create extended partitions during the setup.
The setup also accepts such a partition for installation, but the actual
installations fails with an error.
Now I wondered, what would be the correct way to fix it. I checked with
Windows 7 installation, and it apparently doesn't allow you to install
on an extended partition either, at least it only allows you to create
primary partitions. So if this shouldn't be possible, then I would add
an error message to the setup, when the user chooses an extended partition.
If this should be possible though, I would look into it, why it fails
and try to fix it. Not sure if XP or others allow installations on
extended partitions, I have to check this (been a long time since I last
installed an XP :) ).
regards,
Gerhard Gruber