Correct me if I'm wrong (Alex?), but isn't the biggest difference
between kernel 5.2 and 6.x that 6.x is *paging the kernel* ?
(A huge design mistake if you ask me. One I bet will bite MS on the a**.
If the kernel gets too fat it needs liposuction, not paging.)
IMHO, adding new APIs, while keeping the (non-paging) kernel seems ideal.
Best Regards
// Neo
On 2016-05-19 05.43, ros-dev-request(a)reactos.org wrote:
> Subject:
> Re: [ros-dev] Pale Moon drops ReactOS support
> From:
> Alex Ionescu <ionucu(a)videotron.ca>
> Date:
> 2016-05-19 02.33
>
> To:
> ReactOS Development List <ros-dev(a)reactos.org>
>
>
> I don't believe I said 'let's add random exports to our DLLs'. In
> fact, in your old thread, I was totally FOR your idea, I even wrote
> that the only sane way of doing it is with the app compat work.
>
> On Wed, May 18, 2016 at 9:27 PM, Timo Kreuzer<timo.kreuzer(a)web.de> wrote:
>> >We have been discussing this before and I wonder that Alex is not heavily
>> >opposing the idea of randomly adding new exports to our user mode DLLs. It
>> >is a well known fact that applications check for existance of exports to
>> >decide how to behave, so ... not going to go over this again.
>> >
>> >To addess this issue I suggested to implement a compatibility layer. And
>> >there was a detailed discussion about that on this mailing list.
>> >https://www.reactos.org/pipermail/ros-dev/2015-March/017216.html
>> >
>> >Please take your time to read the whole thread again so we can avoid wasting
>> >time, talking about the same things again.
>> >
>> >Timo
--
There is one thing stronger than all the armies in the world,
and that's an idea whose time has come. [Victor Hugo]
Would it not be better to do all this in C++ and let wine write a C interface around it?
When we're trying to move to C++, it seems like a step backwards in order to support wine's insistence on using C
-----Original Message-----
From: Ros-diffs [mailto:ros-diffs-bounces@reactos.org] On Behalf Of mjansen(a)svn.reactos.org
Sent: 28 May 2016 17:43
To: ros-diffs(a)reactos.org
Subject: [ros-diffs] [mjansen] 71439: [APPHELP] Begin shimlib implementation. CORE-11329 Implement some macro's and functions that help when registering shims. These are all written in C, so that wine can use the shim ...
Author: mjansen
Date: Sat May 28 16:42:57 2016
New Revision: 71439
URL: http://svn.reactos.org/svn/reactos?rev=71439&view=rev
Log:
[APPHELP] Begin shimlib implementation. CORE-11329 Implement some macro's and functions that help when registering shims.
These are all written in C, so that wine can use the shim libraries as well.
Hello all,
It seems that our Wikipedia page seems to have somewhat incorrect information in some sections on the page. Some of it seems to come from IP address which means that they are unregistered. Some of the information could be correct but some of the other information added could be incorrect. I propose that we can see if the wiki page could be Semi-Protected. If the page is Semi-Protected, that means that non-registered users (People logged as IPs in the log) and newly registered users (people that have less than 10 edits and that have been only registered for 4 days). This would mean that people that have been registered for a while and have made edits could edit the page. I hope that this would help with some of the incorrect information on the web page. Not sure what your thoughts are on this but I think it would be nice to have.
Jared
Hello,
Let me invite you to the monthly status meeting taking place next
Thursday, 2nd of June, 19:00 UTC, as I was busy before and general
consensuss on the IRC channel was to move it one week further.
IRC service will only be started shortly before the meeting. Your
participation passwords and server address will be emailed to you
shortly before the meeting starts, and they are going to be different
once again as they are not stored in any database. Hopefully it's not
much of inconvenience.
Please send agenda proposals to me before the meeting.
Regards,
Aleksey Bragin
On 2016-05-25 19.00, I wrote:
> Unfortunately, ntdll.pdb only exports 'SymTagPublicSymbol', no
> 'SymTagFunction' symbols,
If any of you is rich or fortunate enough to have a full MSDN subscription
you ought to be able to use a checked build of Win7SP1 to generate
the whole '.spec' enchilada.. I would if I was, but alas I'm not :/
If you could *lend me* ISO's of checked W7SP1 x86/x64,
I'll build checked virtual machines and generate the whole shebang
(provided SymSrv will fetch checked symbols (which I don't know)).
Best Regards
// Neo
Forget this issue... It remains, but I've moved on.
Thanks anyway.
// Neo
On 2016-05-24 19.00, Love Nystrom <love.nystrom(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> SymSrvIsStore keeps failing with error 0x7E no matter what I do :-/
--
There is one thing stronger than all the armies in the world,
and that's an idea whose time has come. [Victor Hugo]
@Timo,
I uploaded an ntdll.spec for Win7SP1.
Unfortunately, ntdll.pdb only exports 'SymTagPublicSymbol', no
'SymTagFunction' symbols, so it's not possible to generate the parameter
lists. If they're needed they'll have to be inserted manually or I'll
have to write a tool that gets them from "wInternl.h" :/
++ At least I was able to resolve the names of the 8 ordinal functions.
I won't go into all the skull dredging details of getting thus far..
Suffice to say it involved uttering various sulphur reeking curses in
nine different languages and threatening the entire human race with
extinction, writing a dummy program and running it in WinDbg to make
SymSrv fetch ntdll.pdb, and hacking CreateSpec beyond recognition with
various hardcoded path names.
Best Regards
// Neo