17 Feb
2006
17 Feb
'06
2:50 p.m.
theUser BL wrote:
Hi!
I am now very confused.
It seems for me, that the current informations about ReactOS´s
situation is poor. And if there existing informations, they are IMHO
contradictorily.
On 27.1.2006 Steven Edwards wrote "Reset, Reboot, Restart, legal
issues and the long road to 0.3"
http://www.reactos.org/xhtml/de/news_page_14.html
In this text there is no word about leaked Windows-code. So it seems,
that the main problem is revers engineering, which is not clean room
rev. eng.
One day later a developer says in the forum
http://www.reactos.org/forum/viewtopic.php?p=13239&highlight=#13239
"The biggest problem isn't disassembled code. The fact is that 4 of
the developers have had a copy of the leaked Windows source."
So, the biggest problem is, that some ROS-developer have looked in
leaked code.
I think this was when GvG thought that Alex had seen some of the stolen
NT Kernel Code. However, Alex did not see it, and this has been
clairfied with all parties, so really leaked code isnt a problem.
He have said that, and nobody have contradicted it.
But at
http://www.reactos.org/archives/public/ros-dev/2006-February/007832.html
a developer says to me
"The leaked source code was never an issue here, that was an
escalation of
the mail which was posted on the public list. The rumours which
materialized
from that were unfounded and untrue."
and the cvs tree will be completly re-opend.
In an other mail, I don't find it at the moment, anybody says, that
there is still no Microsoft-Code found in ROS. All is clean.
On the following
http://www.reactos.org/pipermail/ros-dev/2006-February/007717.html
a developer says
"I am told that the sources for FreeLdr are all okay, except for the
some of the bootsectors having been pretty much just disassembled from
MS's. Is this true?"
The answer comes from an other developer
http://www.reactos.org/pipermail/ros-dev/2006-February/007722.html
"crashfourit has posted a patch here:"
That means, that it is possible, that MS-bootsector-code have found
the way in ROS, if I understood it right.
And at
http://www.reactos.org/archives/public/ros-general/2006-February/002128.html
somebody cite something where a Codewaever chef says, that in ROS is
stolen code.
I have at the current no links, but I have the feeling, that there
existing a lot of more comments like these, which me all confused very
much.
And then ReactOS gives for me more questions then answers.
What does the Audit-process mean?
You have - as somebody says - already seen, that no Windows-Code is in
ReactOS.
But you want with the audit look for code, which are integrated by
(not clean room) reverse engineering.
But how do you want to find it?
The clean room inverse enginering is like re-writing an existing book,
without reading the existing book itself. Only reading review,
critiques and summaries about the book are alowed to read.
But there existing some people who have reverse enginered, but not
clean room. This is like someone, who have completly read the book
itself and tries to write the book what he read then down in mind.
But how do you want to become out, who have read the original book and
who not?
Steve Edwars have written "and the long road to 0.3". Is it still
true, that it needs now longer, until 0.3 comes out? The tree will
already be opend. Does it mean, that 0.3 comes only after the end of
the audit-progess out? If this is true, comes then before the end of
the audit other releases out (0.2.10, 0.2.11, .... etc) ?
You see. I am very confused.
I don't expect that you answer to my mail here.
I only want, that your public clarification,
http://www.reactos.org/archives/public/ros-dev/2006-February/007832.html
Murphy have written "The whole tree will be reopened in the state it
was in before it closed.
More details will follow when this happens.", will really clarify all.
So that no longer confuseness for anyone exists.
Greatings
theuserbl
_______________________________________________
Ros-dev mailing list
Ros-dev(a)reactos.org
http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
As for the rest, I dont know a lot of the answers but I dont think there
is any solid answer. We are still shifting through maybe ideas and
going back on things we orginally planned. Hopfully we come up with a
plan and stick with it soon.
Brandon