>Sorry for waiting until now to reply.
It's all good. : )
>What do you think?
I think we should convert to BE, but not away from PE-COFF. There are too
many differences between them, and while it would be less work in the short
term to switch to ELF, in the long term, implementing all of the features of
PE would be very troublesome. Not the least concern is that information
such as import data and file headers aren't even mapped into a process's
address space with ELF. As I understand it, when you get an IHANDLE to a
linked in DLL it's just a pointer to the mapped in PE file header. I'm sure
there are programs that require this on a source level to run (which, for
quite some time will be the only thing that affects us on the PowerPC side
of things).
That being said, a proper pe-powerpcbe target in gcc should then be the
first priority. Binutils already more or less properly creates pe-powercbe
files (with what I assume are your patches on the wiki, and a little
monkeying to make sure that the MZ header and PE signature are always
written as little-endian regardless of the target architecture). What kind
of issues had you had on the EABI side of things, and what was your plan in
more detail for emulating the features of PE in ELF?
Also how much progress had you made in the port up to now?
~Tristan Miller
(monocasa)
Dear friends,
We are 3 undergrad comp sc. and IT students from India. We have some coding
experience but have never worked for the Open Source Community as
developers. Yet we have always admired the concept and used FLOSS stuff like
GNU/Linux.
We came across ReactOS project and got really interested in it. We really
want to contribute to the development of React OS and since we are new in
Open Source development, we would require your guidance and support in stuff
like understanding the code, building the build environment etc.
Among other shortfalls that we have, we haven't programmed much on Windows
platform (almost always Linux ie) and hence know little about the Windows
API. But we are eager to learn and can definitely learn parts of the API as
long as you can guide us.
We humbly request you to guide us and give us some problems so that we can
try and support this community. A lot is left to be done in ReactOS and it
would be great being a part of such a project.
Also we are better at writing C codes than reading them ( like almost
everyone ;) ) and hence would request you to give us some problems that we
can write from stratch rather than bug fixing that would require reading all
codes.
But we are ready to contribute in any way you feel we can as developers and
support this community.
Regards
Arko Provo Mukherjee
Abhishek Biswas
Biswanath Banik
Hi Guys
I have recently discovered ReactOS through my research for Linuxforums.org,
I have written an article on ReactOS, which should show up online in the
near future. Basically I like your work and I would be keen to contribute
some of my (unfortunately limited) time and skills to your project. I cant
code but I can write ok.
Could I be of any use to you guys?
Cheers
Sam
--
Did you know that if you play a Windows XP cd backwards, you
will hear the voice of Satan?
That's nothing! If you play it forward, it'll install Windows XP.
Hey,
Sorry, having problems with internet or else I'd ask this on IRC. I was
curious as to why the emphasis on little-endian mode in powerpc. Mac G5's
don't even have le-mode, and it definitely seems that (although im not
totally sure, as theres not much info out in the wild yet) that the XBox360
lacks le-mode as well. Also, on the processors that support le-mode, it
seems in all cases (although theres probably some embedded guy that I'm
missing : P) that do support it, it's selectable at the minimum at the
user/supervisor level with only a bit of work. Perhaps eventually a
thunking layer (maybe a part of NTVDM, would it need to be that complex?)
that would translate the calls from le usermode to a be kernel could be
written, allowing one to run NT-PPC applications that are out there. We
wouldn't be able to load drivers (or any le kernel code), but are there
actually any PPC drivers out in the wild? Plus, it seems that it would
definitely be a good thing for the kernel source to be tested on multiple
endians as early as possible in its development to ease porting later on.
~ Tristan Miller
(monocasa)
It's all about re-thinking what rosapps is. Initially it was supposed
to be a place for various "app"lications. Right now it turned out to
become a kind of a trashcan, where stuff unapplicable for trunk goes.
Since this is wrong, it's perfectly fine to "force" devs to build
with rosapps (and rostests, if they are interested in thorough
testing) module.
Otherwise, with make/make all, we again end up with rudimentary rosapps.
Also there will be some kind of "unmaintained" module (undecided yet
- discussions are welcome) where some stuff from rosapps is going to
be moved (which is not currently maintained, and not interesting for
devs).
WBR,
Aleksey.
On Mar 9, 2007, at 2:38 AM, Ged Murphy wrote:
> Upon thinking about this, I'm not sure it's such a good idea with
> respect to usermode stability as it will get less testing now from
> non-included apps.
>
> This would allow us to have the best of both world.
> Many of the tests we run at application level rely on the apps which
> have just been moved being easily accessable.
> If these are gone, I suspect less feedback will be collected about the
> status of usermode.
>
> Ged.
Hi,
yes definately. Our project would certainly benefit from a good PR
and spread the word, because it eventually brings new developers and
thus development speed rises.
Thanks a lot, and feel free to email here or me.
With the best regards,
Aleksey Bragin.
On Mar 8, 2007, at 3:20 AM, Sam Banks wrote:
> Hi Guys
>
> I have recently discovered ReactOS through my research for
> Linuxforums.org, I have written an article on ReactOS, which should
> show up online in the near future. Basically I like your work and I
> would be keen to contribute some of my (unfortunately limited) time
> and skills to your project. I cant code but I can write ok.
>
> Could I be of any use to you guys?
>
> Cheers
>
> Sam
ion(a)svn.reactos.org wrote:
> Author: ion
> Date: Thu Mar 8 21:59:45 2007
> New Revision: 26032
>
> URL: http://svn.reactos.org/svn/reactos?rev=26032&view=rev
> Log:
> - Tree cleanups proposed on the mailing list. Move all non-Core OS modules to rosapps. Tests were already moved by Fireball to rostests.
>
This will break 'make bootcd'
Upon thinking about this, I'm not sure it's such a good idea with
respect to usermode stability as it will get less testing now from
non-included apps.
Another idea, instead of moving everything out of the main trunk would
be to give each component a new tag in rbuild.
This tag could be something like core="yes|no". Everything which has
been moved to rosapps could be labeled with a core="no"
2 new build commands would be available, make core and make corebootcd.
This would allow us to have the best of both world.
Many of the tests we run at application level rely on the apps which
have just been moved being easily accessable.
If these are gone, I suspect less feedback will be collected about the
status of usermode.
Ged.
I forgot to mention that I used Ged Murphy's .ppt as a base (design
mostly), and I used some parts of information about the kernel given
by Alex Ionescu.
WBR,
Aleksey Bragin.
On Mar 3, 2007, at 4:18 PM, fireball(a)svn.reactos.org wrote:
> Author: fireball
> Date: Sat Mar 3 16:17:47 2007
> New Revision: 25971
>
> URL: http://svn.reactos.org/svn/reactos?rev=25971&view=rev
> Log:
> ReactOS FOSDEM 2007 talk slides
Setting autoreply while being subscribed to a mailing list - that's
something not good to do.
Unsubscribed...
WBR,
Aleksey Bragin.
On Mar 2, 2007, at 2:02 PM, tim-sobolev wrote:
> В связи с седлительностью сервера ящик обьявлен закрытым
> Адресат переехал на tim тточчка sobolev сссоббаккка gmail ттточчка ком
> _______________________________________________
Hi,
thanks for your interest. Yes, Arty is indeed The Man to contact
regarding the PPC port, but anyway post your questions here if you
can't catch him on irc, and they will be answered sooner or later.
WBR,
Aleksey Bragin.
On Mar 2, 2007, at 12:15 PM, Tristan Miller wrote:
> Hey everyone,
> I'm interested in becoming a kernel developer, especially with
> the PowerPC port. Almost all of my experience comes from
> supervisor code (or embedded systems without MMU's), or from type-
> safe byte-code (and ironically enough, a weird combination of the
> two). However, this would be the first project that I've worked
> with others on. Any idea's where I should start. Those on IRC
> specifically pointed out Arty in regards to the PowerPC.
>
> ~Tristan Miller
