Ros-dev

ros-dev@reactos.org

2 participants
5791 discussions

RE: [ros-dev] Binary download
by Murphy, Ged (Bolton) 24 Dec '04

24 Dec '04

-----Original Message----- From: Jason Filby [mailto:jason.filby@gmail.com] Sent: 24 December 2004 10:06 To: ReactOS Development List Subject: Re: [ros-dev] Binary download > Sounds good; but what about registry entries that have been created by > applications; would such an update wipe the registry or just add new > entries and modify system entries? That's a good point. I suppose for that to work, it would need someone to write an update script every day to patch the existing system. That doesn't seem viable. It takes M$ a month to do theirs, lol. What would be the best way of updating an existing system without the need to a complete reinstall from a CD. Burning a CD everyday to get the latest binaries would become tedious and expensive. Ged. ************************************************************************ The information contained in this message or any of its attachments is confidential and is intended for the exclusive use of the addressee. The information may also be legally privileged. The views expressed may not be company policy, but the personal views of the originator. If you are not the addressee, any disclosure, reproduction, distribution or other dissemination or use of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please contact postmaster(a)exideuk.co.uk <mailto:postmaster@exideuk.co.uk> and then delete this message. Exide Technologies is an industrial and transportation battery producer and recycler with operations in 89 countries. Further information can be found at www.exide.com

2 1

Binary download
by Jason Filby 24 Dec '04

24 Dec '04

Hi all Do we really need the binary download anymore? The binary is highly downloaded, but I suspect that those that do download it then proceed to the iso/livecd/bochs/qemu downloads which are more usable (if they aren't too frustrated at that point). Should we remove it? Does anyone object to that? Cheers Jason

2 2

RE: [ros-dev] more sharing with Wine?
by Waldo Alvarez Cañizares 23 Dec '04

23 Dec '04

Hi guys: May I suggest something? I believe that the current code flow ros-wine is something like this Let's hope this ASCII drawing won't break on the way ROS developers WINE developers | | | | v v ROS Code <--- merges ---> WINE Code ^ | ---- Here seems that things won't merge quite well sometimes that takes considerable work and also a source of lost work. So what about this? I beleive it will be better for everybody in the long run. ROS developers ------- (ROS + WINE changes) -----><--------------- WINE developers | | | (ROS only changes) | v v ROS code in <--- Automatic Mirroring (scripts?)---- WINE code in cvs server (subversion?) of common code I bet WINE people will be happy with this without doubt (thing won't change too much for them) I guess there will be some friction at the beginning here(maybe) because now ROS developers have to use both systems also ROS code implementing things not present or better than the one in wine will need to be merged into WINE but the good part is that is only once. Also ROS needs to be changed to be able to receive WINE code without changes but again this is only once and also does not needs to be done for all dlls/applications at once. I suggest to do this in small scale to see how it works. Well guys you all know more about this than me so I guess you could improve this. Regards Waldo Alvarez ________________________________ From: ros-dev-bounces(a)reactos.com on behalf of Alex Ionescu Sent: Tue 12/21/2004 1:41 PM To: ReactOS Development List Subject: Re: [ros-dev] more sharing with Wine? Gunnar Dalsnes wrote: > Hi, > > I'm tired of fixing bugs in code ported from wine <x> years ago. In > most cases the bugs has already been fixed in the wine code we ripped > from, but the ros variant is forked so much its impossible to inc. > those fixes into ros, so the only choice is to rip the whole wine > source over again, loosing any possible fixes/improvements we had made > to the ros variant vs. the wine variant. > > Take for example the file lib\kernel32\misc\profile.c. This file is > 99.9% unchanged from wine, and only includes and some prototypes > needed changes. I want to move files like this into wine subdirs. like > lib\kernel32\misc\wine\profile.c and generate an initial diff > lib\kernel32\misc\wine\profile.diff with changes made to make it run > on ros using the wine porting headers. It does not mean that this diff > will contain ERR changed to DPRINT etc. Only the bare changes to make > it compile. Moving files into wine dirs in off course not necesary, > but it makes it clear that this file(s) are shared thus there are > rules to follow when changing them. > > I have made scripts that updates our profile.c, using the profile.diff > and any updated profile.c from wine, and i have made a script for > generating patches that we send to wine. It all seems to work fine. > HELP: where does the winehq2ros.patch files used in comctl32 etc. fit > into this? > > The only problem is wines strange unicode strings, their FIXME, ERR > etc. and indentation. I think its worth it if we can share more, but > dunno if the majority agrees. > > From what i can see, much of kernel32 and ntdll can be shared this > way, and probably much stuff in user32/gdi32 also. > > Regards > Gunnar Personally, what bugs me is that if Wine fixes something, it's our responsability to merge it and cope with it. If we fix something, it's still our responsability. This latter statement bugs me. Of course it's up to us to implement Wine's changes, but why should we be the ones that also send our pathces back to wine, and have them all formatted back into Wine mode. It seems unfair to me that they don't submit their bug fixes to us, and it's up to us to sync and make them proper, while it's ALSO up to us to wineize our patches and send them to Wine. Anyways, whatever tool/script makes importing Wine's code into ROS and making it look nice is 100% OK with me. Best regards, Alex Ionescu _______________________________________________ Ros-dev mailing list Ros-dev(a)reactos.com http://reactos.com:8080/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev

3 2

RE: [ros-dev] SYSCALL instruction
by Waldo Alvarez Cañizares 23 Dec '04

23 Dec '04

Hi Martin: Last time I saw it no I haven't checked in a while), but I guess my answer should be not yet since I have not seen any discussion about that on the list until now that you ask. If you want to be sure check ntdll (the interface is machine generated so you need to check the program that builds it, what I remember is that it generated an .asm, you can also check the asm after you build the system). Also the ROS build system needs sub architectures configurable to use this one since this instruction is PII+ hey I bet we all know we are missing a lot of great stuff only implemented in more recent processors, SYSCALL is only one of them. Another thing that could be done is to detect the CPU at some time during initialization and use one of two ntdll (on with SYSCALL an another without it). The question is: should an installed ReactOS resist a CPU downgrade? Probably yes but most of the times is just a waste. regards Waldo ________________________________ From: ros-dev-bounces(a)reactos.com on behalf of Maritn "E.T." Misuth Sent: Wed 12/22/2004 5:10 PM To: ReactOS Development List Subject: [ros-dev] SYSCALL instruction Does ReactOS use optimized SYSCALL instruction on modern processors when invoking kernel functions? _______________________________________________ Ros-dev mailing list Ros-dev(a)reactos.com http://reactos.com:8080/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev

3 2

The hanging after 2nd stage install bug
by art yerkes 23 Dec '04

23 Dec '04

This patch works around the 'hanging after 2nd stage install' bug but I don't really understand what's going on here. Basically, It looks like ProcessData is null on the very last call (the one that would seemingly flush the registry and reboot). If i comment the break, nothing breaks and reactos reboots as expected when i press the reboot button. -- Here's a simple experiment. Stand on a train track between two locomotives which are pushing on you with equal force in opposite directions. You will exhibit no net motion. None the less, you may soon begin to notice that something important is happening. -- Robert Stirniman

2 1

SYSCALL instruction
by Maritn "E.T." Misuth 23 Dec '04

23 Dec '04

Does ReactOS use optimized SYSCALL instruction on modern processors when invoking kernel functions?

2 1

more sharing with Wine?
by Gunnar Dalsnes 22 Dec '04

22 Dec '04

Hi, I'm tired of fixing bugs in code ported from wine <x> years ago. In most cases the bugs has already been fixed in the wine code we ripped from, but the ros variant is forked so much its impossible to inc. those fixes into ros, so the only choice is to rip the whole wine source over again, loosing any possible fixes/improvements we had made to the ros variant vs. the wine variant. Take for example the file lib\kernel32\misc\profile.c. This file is 99.9% unchanged from wine, and only includes and some prototypes needed changes. I want to move files like this into wine subdirs. like lib\kernel32\misc\wine\profile.c and generate an initial diff lib\kernel32\misc\wine\profile.diff with changes made to make it run on ros using the wine porting headers. It does not mean that this diff will contain ERR changed to DPRINT etc. Only the bare changes to make it compile. Moving files into wine dirs in off course not necesary, but it makes it clear that this file(s) are shared thus there are rules to follow when changing them. I have made scripts that updates our profile.c, using the profile.diff and any updated profile.c from wine, and i have made a script for generating patches that we send to wine. It all seems to work fine. HELP: where does the winehq2ros.patch files used in comctl32 etc. fit into this? The only problem is wines strange unicode strings, their FIXME, ERR etc. and indentation. I think its worth it if we can share more, but dunno if the majority agrees. From what i can see, much of kernel32 and ntdll can be shared this way, and probably much stuff in user32/gdi32 also. Regards Gunnar

8 12

Re: [ros-cvs] CVS Update: reactos
by Alex Ionescu 22 Dec '04

22 Dec '04

royce(a)cvs.reactos.com wrote: >CVSROOT: /CVS/ReactOS >Module name: reactos >Repository: reactos/ntoskrnl/mm/ >Changes by: royce(a)mok.osexperts.com 04/12/21 21:17:46 > >Modified files: > reactos/ntoskrnl/include/internal/: test.h > reactos/ntoskrnl/ke/i386/: exp.c > reactos/ntoskrnl/mm/: virtual.c > >Log message: > MiQueryVirtualMemory(): created because ZwQueryVirtualMemory() didn't work for me, added cases for memory area types that I needed to walk stack traces. > Stack traces now use MiQueryVirtualMemory to make sure they never step outside the allocated stack they started in ( this prevents page faults at high irql ) - for some reason this patch eliminates the NtW32Callback() crash everybody is seeing with GDI_DEBUG enabled, tho I don't understand why. > > > > Nice fix Royce. Keep it up! Best regards, Alex Ionescu

1 0

Crash in ppool
by Hartmut Birr 20 Dec '04

20 Dec '04

Hi, I've problems with the paged pool routines and if the optimisation is enabled. Ros does crash. It seems that the line numbers for ppool.c are wrong. - Hartmut KeBugCheckWithTf at ke/catch.c:180 Bug detected (code 1e param 0 0 0 0) KMODE_EXCEPTION_NOT_HANDLED Page Fault Exception: 14(0) Processor: 0 CS:EIP 8:80044769 <ntoskrnl.exe: 44769 (mm/ppool.c:292 (RFreeInit))> cr2 4 cr3 29f000 Proc: 805e2068 Pid: 1 <SYSTEM> Thrd: 805e2c40 Tid: 1 DS 10 ES 10 FS 30 GS 10 EAX: 00000004 EBX: 8cdd593c ECX: 00000000 EDX: 00000004 EBP: 800a9a80 ESI: 8cdd593c ESP: 800a9a04 EDI: 00000002 EFLAGS: 00210202 kESP 800a9a04 kernel stack base 800a7000 Frames: <ntoskrnl.exe: 44efc (mm/ppool.c:596 (RFreeSplit))> <ntoskrnl.exe: 4557d (mm/ppool.c:505 (ExAllocatePagedPoolWithTag))> <ntoskrnl.exe: 44019 (mm/pool.c:63 (EiAllocatePool))> <800779EB> <ntoskrnl.exe: b6fc (ke/main.c:863 (KiSystemStartup))> <8007849F> <ntoskrnl.exe: 1140

2 2

rcopy && gcc-3.4.2 on linux
by David Kredba 20 Dec '04

20 Dec '04

Hello, I got : Current date: 2004-12-20 ROS Version : 0.3-CVS (Build 20041220) rcopy.c: In function `copy_file': rcopy.c:90: error: storage size of `ut_buffer' isn't known rcopy.c:132: warning: implicit declaration of function `utime' rcopy.c:90: warning: unused variable `ut_buffer' make[1]: *** [rcopy] Error 1 make: *** [tools] Error 2 Regards, David

2 2

Jump to page:

2026

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

Ros-dev