13 Aug
2005
13 Aug
'05
8:01 a.m.
Steven Edwards wrote:
Hi,
If its a Windows System Dll then running it on Wine gains you nothing except people being
lazy and
not coding a proper replacement. Using this logic Wine should implement 8 layers of
abstraction
Linux Kernel Crypto APIs->Ksecdd.sys->emulated syscall
magic->advapi32.systemfunction->crypt.dll->rsabase.dll->???
The best solution would be to follow that, yes, but I concede that it is
not in WINE's best interests. Nevertheless, they will eventually suffer
from not doing it that way. Look at how much stuff had to be done for
apps like Safedisc, which required WINE to implement a completely
emulated kernel-mode driver layer.
If I am a Linux developer trying to make a API
replacement as a migration tool I am going to make
the crypt.dll and rsabase.dll be a wraper for a exported kernel API or use openssl,
tinyssl or
whatever else and save my time. Why? Because I want to have all Linux native applications.
I could
give 2 shits about following the precious Windows design for everything because ultimatly
my end
goal it to have native Linux applications not some bloated compatiblity layer.
Ok, so you're saying that crypt.dll should directly call some linux
native openssl library... that makes sense. Now, what if 5 other
exported, publically used dlls also need to call SystemFunction007? They
will also have to call some linux native openssl library. Now, if that
library is included statically, you've bloated 5 DLLs. If it's simply an
external lib, then how much harder is it to stub SystemFunction007 to
call the openssl library? That is 10 lines of adtionnal code, with the
added benefit that if anyone ever calls that undocumented export, you
can handle it. But in reality, even that would be flawed, because I do
agree that ksecdd.sys should actually be called if needed. Now you're
going to call me crazy and say that's even beyond undocumented, plus
it's kernel mode. Go ahead and laugh... I happen to have a copy of the
WDK, and you'd be "pleased" to know that the KSECDD APIs are becoming
documented. What if some of ksecdd are just regular IOCTLs that a
user-mode app like safedisc would launch? You'd probably hack ksecdd to
use openssl as well... but now you're having a duplicated design, where
crypt is using openssl, advapi006 is not implemented, and ksecdd is also
using openssl. Nice waste! If it would've been done properly since the
start, you assure full compatibility. What happens when MS documents the
SystemFunctionsXXX, like they've done with GdiEntryXXX? You scramble to
implement the functions and tell yourself "Shit, I should've accepted
that patch last year!"
It is a totally different mindset and if we want to
share some code we have to work around that.
Some things might not be shared. Big deal.
Well that's a big problem then, and we should have a serious discussion
with those developers, as well as ensure that we don't allow commits to
WINE libs if we don't see a patch first.
It's not like WINE developers were forced or
had to spend time to write
these functions, one of our developers did (and he submited patches to
WINE). What possible -harm- can it do?
No thats the point. Our developers ARE NOT SENDING PATCHES TO WINE AS A GENERAL RULE.
Right. Show me a real world application that calls all
of the advapi32.systemfunction apis and I
might agree with you. I know of one that does in totally violation of all of the rules and
breaks
on version of Windows to another. Ditto for the undocumented Setupapi functions which by
the way
Change from one version of Windows to another. Compare Windows 2000 setupapi.stringtable*
to
Windows XP/2K3 setupapi.pstringtable functions. They are exported under a totally
different name
and to date I have only found 1 application that uses them and yes it is a OS COMPONATE as
defined
by the EULA.
I concede on that extremly weird and unused API, but you're using that
case as a justification not to implement *ANY* unimplemented APIs,
aren't you?
NtDeleteFile is undocumented too... should we forget about it? My
apologies if you were only referring to setupapi.
Thanks
Steven
Best regards,
Alex Ionescu