This should probably be moved to \base\applications\cmdutils
-----Original Message-----
From: Ros-diffs [mailto:ros-diffs-bounces@reactos.org] On Behalf Of hbelusca(a)svn.reactos.org
Sent: 29 June 2016 01:39
To: ros-diffs(a)reactos.org
Subject: [ros-diffs] [hbelusca] 71695: [SUBST] - Update the resource program description. - Convert to full UNICODE. - Use Win32 functions where possible. - Factor-out the usage of QueryDosDevice into a QuerySubstedDri...
Author: hbelusca
Date: Wed Jun 29 00:38:51 2016
New Revision: 71695
URL: http://svn.reactos.org/svn/reactos?rev=71695&view=rev
Log:
[SUBST]
- Update the resource program description.
- Convert to full UNICODE.
- Use Win32 functions where possible.
- Factor-out the usage of QueryDosDevice into a QuerySubstedDrive function, that returns error codes according to whether the specified drive is a mapped (substed) drive, or is just an existing drive that is not a mapping, or if the drive does not exist. This allows us to detect attempts to use a drive letter that is not a mapped drive, to define a new mapping, and if so we reject such attempt.
This fixes CORE-10681 #resolve #comment Fixed with another patch according to my last remark.
Hello,
Let me invite you to the monthly status meeting taking place this
Thursday, 30rd of June, 19:00 UTC.
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.
Alternative place for the meeting is #reactos-meeting on Freenode.
Please send agenda proposals to me before the meeting. My proposal is
to discuss 0.4.2 release plans.
Regards,
Aleksey Bragin
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]
On 2016-06-15 12:10, zhu(a)svn.reactos.org wrote:
> --- branches/GSoC_2016/lwIP/drivers/network/tcpip/main.c [iso-8859-1] (original)
> +++ branches/GSoC_2016/lwIP/drivers/network/tcpip/main.c [iso-8859-1] Wed Jun 15 19:10:40 2016
> @@ -384,7 +384,9 @@
> Quickie:
> Irp->IoStatus.Status = Status;
>
> - return Irp->IoStatus.Status;
> + IoCompleteRequest(Irp, IO_NETWORK_INCREMENT);
> +
> + return Irp->IoStatus.Status;
> }
>
> static
This is illegal. IoCompleteRequest frees the IRP so you must not access
it afterwards, and use the local variable instead.
Hello developers,
After building ReactOS and Rostests successfully, I can't debug CoInitialize
function through Visual Studio 2015. It seems Visual Studio thinks I'm using
their CoInitialize of Windows kernel.
Anybody can help me?
Here is the steps I used to compile ReactOS and Rostests:
1. install Build Environment
https://reactos.org/wiki/ReactOS_Build_Environment
2. download code to the folder specified when by RosBE during installing
code: svn://svn.reactos.org/reactos/trunk/reactoshttp://svn.reactos.org/reactos/trunk/rostests/
reactOS directory -> E:\Work\reactos
rostests directory -> E:\Work\reactos\modules\rostests
3. generate reactos.sln for Visual Stdio
(a). Open a Windows DDK/WDK/Visual Studio 2015 command prompt.
(b). run the following command in the code root:
configure.cmd VSSolution
4. build the huge solutions
msbuild reactos.sln /m
5. open the 'ole32_winetest.vcxproj'
(E:\Work\reactos\output-VS-i386\modules\rostests\winetests\ole32)
Set the command arguments 'ole2', set breakpoint at CoInitialize
line, and start beginning by pressing F5, but Visual Studio can't get into
CoInitialize funtion
Best regards
Yonggang Chen
Hi,
Implementing MSAHCI would be "more correct" for the system, however MSAHCI
also doesn't use STORPORT, it uses ATAPORT, which requires changing our
PCIIDEX model to support that. Which I think would put Aman's work out of
scope.
Now, MSAHCI would be ported to use STORPORT instead, but then we'd
essentially be implementing a legacy component on top of a legacy port
driver.
At least, by implementing STORAHCI on top of STORPORT, we can implement a
'modern' component on top of the legacy port driver.
And for this, I would either recommend doing things like implementing
StorPortExtendedFunction
if Aman can do it -- or if someone can help him, or, avoiding its use with
temporary work/arounds, etc. _as long as those workarounds still work in
Windows_.
Best regards,
Alex Ionescu
On Sun, Jun 5, 2016 at 9:10 PM, Thomas Faber <thomas.faber(a)reactos.org>
wrote:
> I'm not an expert so I'm not sure what way is best. But I see at least
> 4 solutions:
> * There seems to be a way to get the extended function table through
> StorPortNotification/GetExtendedFunctionTable. This would provide
> some of the newer functionality even with older storport, but is
> potentially an undocumented hack
> * Avoid using the modern functionality and implement an old-storport
> compatible storahci, which implies using only memory from the adapter
> extension, and probably a few more things
> * Rely on a "modern" storport and do the testing in a newer Windows
> version. Then when ROS gets storport it simply needs to be a "modern"
> version
> * Do not use storport and implement msahci rather than storahci
>
> Option 2 would give the greatest compatibility but I can't pretend to
> understand what limitations it will imply.
>
>
> On 2016-06-05 21:43, Aman Priyadarshi wrote:
> > Yeah msahci is ataport miniport driver.
> > Then what would be the best idea? Leave it with the implementation I made
> > there. "Allocated memory for all port extension within device extension?"
> > ᐧ
> >
> >
> > Regards
> > *Aman Priyadarshi*
> > *www.atomixos.com <http://www.atomixos.com>*
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Jun 6, 2016 at 1:02 AM, Thomas Faber <thomas.faber(a)reactos.org>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> On 2016-06-05 14:40, apriyadarshi(a)svn.reactos.org wrote:
> >>> Author: apriyadarshi
> >>> Date: Sun Jun 5 12:40:49 2016
> >>> New Revision: 71530
> >>>
> >>> URL: http://svn.reactos.org/svn/reactos?rev=71530&view=rev
> >>> Log:
> >>> Added INF File for driver installation with minimal configuration.
> >>> Device Detection and Initialization working -- tested on VMware.
> >>> StorPortAllocatePool not working, so asked Storport to allocate all
> >> memory just after loading up the driver -- Bad idea (will change it
> later).
> >>
> >> StorPortAllocatePool uses StorPortExtendedFunction, which indeed is not
> >> implemented in Win2003. As you can see in WDK samples, 2003's msahci is
> >> not a storport miniport driver. Maybe storport wasn't advanced enough
> >> for complex drivers back then?
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ros-dev mailing list
> Ros-dev(a)reactos.org
> http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
>
On 2016-06-05 14:40, apriyadarshi(a)svn.reactos.org wrote:
> Author: apriyadarshi
> Date: Sun Jun 5 12:40:49 2016
> New Revision: 71530
>
> URL: http://svn.reactos.org/svn/reactos?rev=71530&view=rev
> Log:
> Added INF File for driver installation with minimal configuration.
> Device Detection and Initialization working -- tested on VMware.
> StorPortAllocatePool not working, so asked Storport to allocate all memory just after loading up the driver -- Bad idea (will change it later).
StorPortAllocatePool uses StorPortExtendedFunction, which indeed is not
implemented in Win2003. As you can see in WDK samples, 2003's msahci is
not a storport miniport driver. Maybe storport wasn't advanced enough
for complex drivers back then?
On 2016-06-05 01:29, hbelusca(a)svn.reactos.org wrote:
> - rcDesk.left = GetSystemMetrics(SM_XVIRTUALSCREEN);
> - rcDesk.top = GetSystemMetrics(SM_YVIRTUALSCREEN);
> - rcDesk.right = rcDesk.left + GetSystemMetrics(SM_CXVIRTUALSCREEN);
> - rcDesk.bottom = rcDesk.top + GetSystemMetrics(SM_CYVIRTUALSCREEN);
> + rcDesk.left = GetSystemMetrics(SM_XVIRTUALSCREEN);
> + rcDesk.top = GetSystemMetrics(SM_YVIRTUALSCREEN);
> + rcDesk.right = GetSystemMetrics(SM_CXVIRTUALSCREEN);
> + rcDesk.bottom = GetSystemMetrics(SM_CYVIRTUALSCREEN);
Are you sure about this? "CX" normally means width, so right = left + cx
seems more logical. And SM_XVIRUTALSCREEN is probably 0 most of the
time so it would be hard to notice.