Ros-dev

ros-dev@reactos.org

5791 discussions

Please add pcnet.sys to the bootcd.
by WaxDragon 24 Nov '04

24 Nov '04

I noticed yesterday while installing ros from a locally generated bootcd that pcnet.sys is not included. Could someone add it to reactos.dff? Thanks! Andrew -- The cheese stands alone.

2 1

ReactOS and Viruses
by Rick Langschultz 24 Nov '04

24 Nov '04

Sun will be releasing Solaris 10 shortly as a commercial product available for purchase. There is a new file system that is 128-bit, and is protected by md5 checksums, I think this is a great idea for reactos. I think before a program executes there should be a binary verifier that checks this checksum and then allows the program to run. This would help in deterring Windows viruses from attaching themselves to reactos binaries. Since ReactOS is open source it will be harder to protect a binary if there is an attack and a malicious user replaces a dll or an exe. Perhaps this can be done using a small xml file or a txt file called md5sums or something. Please let me know what you think.

5 6

Idea to protect ReactOS
by Jeff Smith 24 Nov '04

24 Nov '04

With the issue of Ekush talking about sending us patches once they publish thier code and what not I as many of you are worried about being tainted, I have an idea, but I don't know how safe it is from a GPL stand point (I know nothing of the GPL) here's the idea, when we get patches that are questionable from *any* source, we send MS a copy of the suggested patch, and request they compare it with thier code to see if it is differant or the same as thier Windows code, if MS comes back and says it's teh same we delete the patch and move on... I know this idea sounds bad but we need to discuss a plan for any potential tainting and how we'd deal with it, please if you don't like my idea then please by all means suggest something else.

12 16

Windows NT architecture
by Maritn "E.T." Misuth 24 Nov '04

24 Nov '04

Hello people, can you post some sources (links etc.) where I can find some info about internal NT kernel structure/architecture/whatever suitable for lamers and newbs like me?

4 3

Ekush.com up again
by Ibrahim Damlaj 23 Nov '04

23 Nov '04

I don't know if anyone has been to ekush.com recently: > " We are also decided to remove all the non-GPL'd code from our source tree and re-publishing the project based on React OS and Wine. All the Ekush sources will be merged to the React OS tree; sources and binary both will be published accordingly under the GNU GPL and EKUSH.COM will be the official web home for Ekush OS. Hope it will eliminate all the confusion and misunderstanding regarding Ekush Operating System. "

7 8

[Fwd: [ros-cvs] CVS Update: reactos] BUG 446 Fixed - NIC Realtek8139
by Gge 23 Nov '04

23 Nov '04

The bug 446 is fixec and can be closed following this commit The nic driver Realtek8139 loads and start successfully Regards Gerard

1 0

core reorg. request
by Gunnar Dalsnes 23 Nov '04

23 Nov '04

Hi, Does anyone object agains: -moving every NtXxx functions into new files under ntoskrnl\nt? -moveing functions related to ob managed types into new files (thrdobj.c, procobj,c, eventobj.c, fileobj.c etc)? This will make it clearer where the functions are and what they do. Gunnar

4 4

Is ROS-CVS ever going to work?
by Richard Campbell 22 Nov '04

22 Nov '04

Is the ROS cvs list ever going to be functional again? Richard

1 0

RE: [ros-diffs] [CVS reactos] fix kernel queues + misc fixes/cleanups
by Casper Hornstrup 21 Nov '04

21 Nov '04

I really would like to see less "Fixed feature X" commit messages. Sometimes a features is "fixed" more than once in a short period of time. Please specify what was changed in the commit message so others have a better chance of knowing what was actually changed (without looking through the whole patch to figure it out). I'm not saying that simple typos or other trivial changes couldn't have a "Fixed X" commit message, just that the non-trivial ones shouldn't. Casper

1 0

headers suggestion
by Jonathan Wilson 21 Nov '04

21 Nov '04

In light of e.g. http://reactos.com:8080/archives/public/ros-dev/2004-November/000658.html I would like to suggest the following header ideas. Currently MingW has: 1.A set of headers that contain a copy of part of the platform SDK 2.Some extra stuff (like that ntdll.h) 3.A set of headers that contain a copy of part of the windows DDK 4.Mabie again some extra stuff MS doesnt have (I dont know) 5.A set of headers that contain a copy of part of the visual C++ runtime library 6.Some extra stuff (mainly bits required to deal with differences between GCC and Visual C I think) WINE has: 1.A set of headers that are supposed to contain a copy of part of the platform SDK (although some things have been claimed to be wrong) 2.A set of headers that are supposed to contain a copy of part of the visual C++ runtime library (although again there may be things that are wrong) and 3.Extra definitions for stuff in both header sets microsoft doesnt define in the platform SDK (e.g. internal bits, functions microsoft doesnt document etc) ReactOS has: w32api (the ROS import of it) include/ddk (the ReactOS version of the windows DDK) include/wine (the WINE windows API headers) include/msvcrt (the MSVCRT headers ROS uses to build and link with msvcrt) include (various misc ReactOS specific headers) What I suggest for ReactOS (and I think some of this is already being done) is as follows: grab any headers from include/* that are public DDK headers (if there are any) and make sure they are all in include/ddk grab everything from the current WINE headers MingW is missing. Check that its all correct and stuff and add it to the ReactOS import of w32api. (if anything is found to be wrong in the wine headers, it should be fixed) grab anything from include itself and add to w32api as needed Get permission to relicence the stuff and contribute back to the main w32api tree. grab contents of include/msvcrt on ReactOS plus include/msvcrt on WINE and also mingw-runtime. Create one set of header files from the 3 sets such that it matches the microsoft headers as closely as possible. Merge w32api DDK headers with ROS DDK headers and create one set that, again, matches the MS headers. For w32api/mingw-runtime, the suggestion is that they look at all the "new stuff" generated by the merging of the 3 sets of msvcrt headers plus the ROS/WINE/w32api merger plus the DDK merger and look at acccepting it. For WINE, I suggest they start using the new "merged" headers if at all possible. Basicly, the idea is that mingw-runtime would become the "definitive" set of msvcrt.dll headers out there and that ReactOS, MingW and WINE would start using it for any case where you are talking to msvcrt.dll from the public side. both ROS and WINE would then have their own internal msvcrt headers as necessary to build their msvcrt* builds Then, w32api would become the "definitive" set of win32 api headers and would contain as much of the Microsoft Platform SDK as people have legally cloned. All userland components of ReactOS (as well as kernel-side bits that need the stuff in the userland headers e.g. win32k.sys) would use this. Be nice if WINE were to use this too but because of what WINE is and how it is built/used, there may be reasons for the WINE team not to use w32api as the build headers used to build WINE. And, there would be one "definitive" set of DDK headers which would be good enough for building ReactOS with. And for building any kernel-side stuff WINE decides to add (e.g. that stuff to load the device drivers for vaerious copy protection systems that was being worked on). And for anyone using MingW and MingW GCC to build kernel-mode stuff. Anything private or project specific would go into a set of private headers as needed for the different projects and sub-sections (dlls etc) within them Anything exported by microsoft but undocumented would go into a set of "undocumented" headers (which could then be shared between ReactOS and WINE since I dont think w32api would accept anything not documented in MSDN) Just suggestions btw, if they are good, say so If they are bad, say so (and say why) If there are issues with my idea, say what they are.

4 12

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