hbirr(a)svn.reactos.com wrote:
>Print more informations on a BSOD by enabling the debug prints to the screen.
>
>
>
>Updated files:
>trunk/reactos/ntoskrnl/ke/bug.c
>
>
>
Hi...
Erm...I don't understand this change. BSOD data is already printed on
screen during a crash.
The only thing that's not printed is ROS-Specific Debug Data, because
that's part of "debug output" and not of an official BSOD.
At least that's how it's fundamentaly defined... I really don't like
this hack, although I know you'll probably say you want the debug data
on screen, but my question is why don't you use /DEBUGPORT=SCREEN for
this? You're hacking the kernel to display debug data when debugging is
off... And I hate the #if 0 #else #endif stuff you've added, it makes
this hack even nastier! If you *really* want to bypass the debuging
design and force debug-data to be printed when it shouldn't, at least
make a nicer hack please (ie, modify KeDumpStackFrames to use
InbvDisplayString). I'm sorry but this patch is unacceptable to me...it
makes the code look like shit.
Best regards,
Alex Ionescu
I've implemented the module_depends targets as a substitute for make module_clean && make module. This is much faster than the
depends target since it only checks the dependencies for a single module.
Casper
ion(a)svn.reactos.com wrote:
>Support QEMU Hardware Acceleration
>
>
>Updated files:
>trunk/reactos/bootdata/hivesys.inf
>
>
I will provide a working binary soon. It hits some bugs in our BitBlt
code, maybe due to the recent optimizations.
However a rosperf gives me 1600 fills/sec vs 232 fills/sec on the same
machine with the same testing setup. That's a 8x improvement!
Best regards,
Alex Ionescu
Hi...
I'm from BetaComp Team and I with all team members are making new
operating system that will be compatible with Windows NT. It will also
have Posix and its own sybsystems. It's based on knowed for most people
project named ReactOS and our previously project named WinuxOS. More
about HostiliX you can read on www.betacomp.info web page in Our
projects sections.
Actually we're working on v0.1. When we done do it we will publish
binary version and all source code.
Currently we're looking for people who knows C/C++ or Assembler and
wants to help us. If you have a free time, please help us and join to
our team!
Contact: rafkup(a)gmail.com
On Sat, Jun 04, 2005 at 12:03:48PM -0500, Rick
Langschultz wrote:
>
> I use Outlook XP to compose mail to my boss and to a
support team. I
> have to use HTML formatting in my mail messages.
Sorry for the
> inconvenience I have caused. If people want to get
picky about the mail
> format and not the content of the message, they
should re-evaluate their
> purposes involved in developing code, and material
for computers.
>
If you've ever tried to read an XML/HTML message in a
plain-text reader
(such as mutt, which is my client of choice), you
would understand why
folks complain.
To draw an analogy as to how silly your claim is (that
the formatting
should be ignored completely), consider the following
scenarios:
1. A huge C program that works, but has no comments
and obfuscated code.
"If you can't understand it without comments, you
should re-evaluate
your programming ability."
2. A patch that has thousands of formatting changes
intermixed with
bugfixes.
"If you can't appreciate the functionality of a
freely offered patch
that seems to fix a bug, you should re-evaluate
your stance as a
community-based project."
3. Documentation provided in rendered PS (or another
opaque format).
"If you can't appreciate the accuracy and
user-friendliness of the
documentation, you should re-evaluate your position
on having a
well-documented system."
See, these are all silly. It's easy for one side to
just ignore the
other -- yes, you may need whatever formatting HTML
provides you for
work correspondence; it's easy for you to forget that
it's even there.
Likewise, it's easy for those of us who edit and send
raw text to ignore
how engrained HTML can be in some mail front-ends. But
at the end of the
day, the lowest common denominator is plain-text --
and that's something
folks will expect you to conform to.
Just like a patch with a thousand formatting changes,
now matter how
many bugs it fixes, it will be rejected. So to with
your mails -- no
matter how good the merit is, if we have to mind-parse
the gibberish,
it's just going to be outright rejected.
Thanks for understanding,
-- Travis
> Rick Langschultz
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ros-dev-bounces(a)reactos.com
[mailto:ros-dev-bounces@reactos.com]
> On Behalf Of Mike Nordell
> Sent: Saturday, June 04, 2005 9:19 AM
> To: ReactOS Development List
> Subject: Re: [ros-dev] PowerPC arcitecture?
>
> Rick Langschultz wrote:
>
> > <html
xmlns:o=3D"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" =
> > xmlns:w=3D"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word"
=
> > xmlns=3D"http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
>
> [lots and lots of useless XML tags mixed in an
unholy cesspool with HTTP
> snipped]
>
> Could you please trim that crap? I am, as I hope the
majority of list
> subscribers are too, not especially interested in
that you wrote an
> e-mail
> in MSWord and that your "SpellingState" is "Clean".
>
> Please use plain-text only.
>
> Thank you for your cooperation.
>
> /Mike
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ros-dev mailing list
> Ros-dev(a)reactos.com
> http://reactos.com:8080/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ros-dev mailing list
> Ros-dev(a)reactos.com
> http://reactos.com:8080/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
>
__________________________________
Discover Yahoo!
Stay in touch with email, IM, photo sharing and more. Check it out!
http://discover.yahoo.com/stayintouch.html