"Please test them, especially with the applications in Downloader, and write
your results to
http://www.reactos.org/wiki/index.php/Tests_for_0.3.8"
I have a suggestion - we should limit the amount of people that are allowed
to actually write the results to some designated people and let everyone
pass the results to them.
Hello everybody (and especially the testers),
After nobody complained about branching 0.3.8 from trunk now, I took the
initiative today and prepared the branch with our usual customizations and
hacks.
It's now again the time for application testing. Therefore I uploaded Boot
CD and Live CD of the current branch to http://reactos.colinfinck.de/
Please test them, especially with the applications in Downloader, and write
your results to http://www.reactos.org/wiki/index.php/Tests_for_0.3.8
I especially write this now, because we want the release to be ready some
days before FOSDEM.
Andrew wants to start burning the CDs for FOSDEM soon, so it would be great
if we could get the entire release done till *next Monday*.
Best regards,
Colin
I've been using the Winetests in Windows quite a lot recently, both XP and
Vista, and I've noticed that a lot of the tests fail in Windows.
For anyone using the Winetests in reactos to fix our code, it's worth
testing if these functions pass or fail in Windows first as we might be
breaking reactos to pass the winetests.
Also, one of the problems I've noticed is that some tests fail on XP but
pass in Vista, and vice versa.
Does anyone know Wine's target OS? It seems that more tests are passing in
Vista than XP these days, so maybe they've moved to a more recent target?
I think the best way to move forward with this is to find out what version
Wine target, fix any broken tests we come across and submit them to Wine.
I don't envisage any problem with Wine accepting fixed test cases, even from
the most hated of reactos devs.
Anyway, I just wanted to make people aware, _don't blindly trust Winetests
when fixing reactos_
Ged.
If you are going to do more work on rbuild, I'd suggest doing it in a
branch to avoid clean rebuilds every few revisions.
Timo
hyperion(a)svn.reactos.org schrieb:
> Author: hyperion
> Date: Mon Jan 26 08:26:15 2009
> New Revision: 39111
>
> URL: http://svn.reactos.org/svn/reactos?rev=39111&view=rev
> Log:
> Begin moving rules out of modulehandler.cpp and into makefile include rules.mak, where they will be more readable and manageable. Currently implemented: target C compiler and target C++ compiler rules. Please do a clean build if possible. Testing with unusual output paths appreciated
>
>
Hi,
The TEB in psdk/winternl.h does not match with the correct one in
ndk/pstypes.h. Does anyone else see that as a problem or is it just
me? If it is for wine, then it is wrong, need to implement it as it is
in the SDK. Use it for the Tls fields only......
Thanks,
James
A general remark for this revision and r39033.
FsRtlNotifyInitializeSync and CcInitializeCacheMap both raise exception in case of failure, instead of returning a status. Should we consider adding PSEH support and usage to the new driver?
P. Schweitzer
> Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2009 12:18:39 +0000
> To: ros-diffs(a)reactos.org
> From: pschweitzer(a)svn.reactos.org
> Subject: [ros-diffs] [pschweitzer] 39040: Added notifications stuff to VCB
>
> Author: pschweitzer
> Date: Fri Jan 23 06:18:38 2009
> New Revision: 39040
>
> URL: http://svn.reactos.org/svn/reactos?rev=39040&view=rev
> Log:
> Added notifications stuff to VCB
>
> Modified:
> trunk/reactos/drivers/filesystems/fastfat_new/fat.c
> trunk/reactos/drivers/filesystems/fastfat_new/fatstruc.h
>
_________________________________________________________________
Téléphonez gratuitement à tous vos proches avec Windows Live Messenger ! Téléchargez-le maintenant !
http://www.windowslive.fr/messenger/1.asp
Hi,
I am working on a project to parse the Windows image file. To do that,
I must understand the structure of some Windows components, like
_EPROCESS. So I took some headers from ReactOS, and write *userland*
code like below:
----
#include <pstypes.h>
#include <stdio.h>
int main()
{
printf("size of EPROCESS: %d\n", sizeof(struct _EPROCESS));
return 0;
}
----
The I got the problem: g++ reported that _EPROCESS is incomplete.
Clearly this means it doesnt see the structure _EPROCESS, so I took a
closer look, and found that _EPROCESS is not defined in user-mode
(NTOS_MODE_USER). I tried to fix it by putting
#undef NTOS_MODE_USER
in front of #include <pstypes>, but that doesnt help.
Anybody please tell me if there is any way to fix this?
I think I can fix that by modifying the original headers. but that is
way too ugly.
Many thanks,
Jun