I am also in agreement here. And there are some things I'll admit that NT
5.2 doesn't do as well as NT 6.1 does... like for example lack of UIPI and
UAC (may a bird poo on my head such that I do not get shot for saying
that) and the ever so old GINA system for example.
And of course why not a compatibility shim? Maybe we can get the best of
both worlds: the compatibility of NT 5.2 and stability of NT 6.1 (sorry
for sounding like a CEO)
On Sat, 13 Nov 2010 22:02:42 +1100, Aleksey Bragin <aleksey(a)reactos.org>
wrote:
I fully agree with Ged. There is no reason to think
"I won't do
something a better way because it's implemented poorly in Win2k3, and
ROS's official target is Win2k3". All what is said >applies mainly to
the kernel, and ideally in future our Win32 subssytem should have shim
support for compatibility modes, and should share as much nice
arcitectural features from >Win7 as possible.
WBR,
Aleksey Bragin.
From: Ged MurphySent: Saturday, November 13, 2010 1:45 PM
To: ReactOS Development ListSubject: Re: [ros-dev] ReactOS official
compatibility target and the newbuild system
Wine can do that as they only provide usermode. (we actually allow
something slightly along these lines by allowing the user to decide
whether they're running on a server or >workstation. It's an option in
one of the cpl applets)If you did what Wine do then the user would
expect to interface with a Windows 7 kernel too, meaning they would try
to install drivers for said version.
What I meant is that you must advertise as a certain version for the
kernel so the user knows what they're dealing with.
However this does not stop you from adding features of the later
kernels, nor does it stop you from adding services and APIs from later
versions. The more you add the more likely >you are to run more modern
software.
In fact, my point about full win2k3 compatability being up for
discussion at the kernel is directly related to this. I think you
_should_ be adding features from the newer kernels where >possible. This
will greatly reduce the amount of work required if the decision is ever
made to leap to the NT6 kernel. however you must advertise to users that
it's still an NT5.2 kernel >so any drivers required will load.
Ged.
2010/11/13 Jérôme Gardou <jerome.gardou(a)laposte.net>
This policy is inconsistent with the fact that we
advertise reactos as
win2k3 sp1. Otherwise we should as well provide a config applet to let
the user choose that, as wine does.
Le 13/11/2010 03:10, Ged Murphy a écrit :
The target is only win2k3 in the kernel.
Everything else is open to
discussion (in fact, IMO even the kernel compatibility is open to
discussion)
You should, and must, provide as much functionality as possible with
the latest versions of Windows.
You can still provide many of the capabilities of Windows 7 using only
an NT5.2 kernel. It's only the internal architecture which limits
this, and in terms of many win7 >>>capabilities, this kernel isn't a
limiting factor.
2010/11/13 Jérôme Gardou <jerome.gardou(a)laposte.net>
As our target is win2k3 sp1 compatibility,
_______________________________________________
Ros-dev mailing list
Ros-dev(a)reactos.org
http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
_______________________________________________
Ros-dev mailing list
Ros-dev(a)reactos.org
http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
_______________________________________________
Ros-dev mailing list
Ros-dev(a)reactos.org
http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
--
Give a man a fish and he will eat for a day.
Teach a man to fish and he will eat for a lifetime.
Give a man religion and he will die praying for a fish.