found it! the "dce porting" header file

[Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton]

http://examples.oreilly.de/english_examples/dce/dce_nt/dceport.h.aug95

o joy o joy.

also, i found _this_!!!

http://sourceware.org/pthreads-win32/

which is an implementation of pthreads on win32.

_also_ i found - was reminded - by judicious searching on google, that
of course entegrity.com have "PC-DCE" which is of course a _commercial_
product that has done exactly the work required: making dce (1.1?
1.2.2?) compile on Win32.

including exceptions, dealing with mapping the names, blah blahhh.

now.

anyone got any brainy ideas on how to reverse dceport.h - in particular
the thingy.  wotsit.  TRY/FINALLY/CATCH stuff?

what i'm going to try to do is take a shot at simply compiling
dcethreads - on win32.

if that _works_ (the tests pass) it'll be great - it will prove two
things: 1) that pthreads-win32 works 2) that the dce exception handling
will fly, on win32, and _that_ means pretty much zero (urk! let's hope!)
work.

for now.

my main goal: "GetItWorking(tm)".

i couldn't care less about binary compatibility for now: i want
"services" - i want srvsvcd, i want winregd, i want lsarpcd, i want
samrd - all compiled, all working, using TCP/IP.

i can then work on rewriting freedce's ntlmsspauth.so to be a DLL
(starting off as my favourite - a stub with username and password of
"test").

i can then work on writing an "ncalrpc" plugin transport (which is very
straightforward: a matter of filling in about 25 functions in a vector
table).

and also on a ncacn_np plugin transport.

"working" means that other people will then be able to focus on issues
like binary compatibility.

guys (wine team) i have to say this.  you were utterly insane to not use
freedce as your starting point - and i am still bewildered by you not
even looking at its source code (which is topologically identical in
almost all areas, to what you've created) or the opengroup's documentation.

i say that with the greatest of respect for what you've achieved without
freedce.

l.
-- 
--
<a href="http://lkcl.net">http://lkcl.net</a>
--

[Richard Campbell]

Can we like...vote to ban this dude?  he's getting annoying.

Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote:
> http://examples.oreilly.de/english_examples/dce/dce_nt/dceport.h.aug95
>
> o joy o joy.
>
> also, i found _this_!!!
>
> http://sourceware.org/pthreads-win32/
>
> which is an implementation of pthreads on win32.
>
> _also_ i found - was reminded - by judicious searching on google, that
> of course entegrity.com have "PC-DCE" which is of course a _commercial_
> product that has done exactly the work required: making dce (1.1?
> 1.2.2?) compile on Win32.
>
> including exceptions, dealing with mapping the names, blah blahhh.
>
> now.
>
> anyone got any brainy ideas on how to reverse dceport.h - in particular
> the thingy.  wotsit.  TRY/FINALLY/CATCH stuff?
>
> what i'm going to try to do is take a shot at simply compiling
> dcethreads - on win32.
>
> if that _works_ (the tests pass) it'll be great - it will prove two
> things: 1) that pthreads-win32 works 2) that the dce exception handling
> will fly, on win32, and _that_ means pretty much zero (urk! let's hope!)
> work.
>
> for now.
>
> my main goal: "GetItWorking(tm)".
>
> i couldn't care less about binary compatibility for now: i want
> "services" - i want srvsvcd, i want winregd, i want lsarpcd, i want
> samrd - all compiled, all working, using TCP/IP.
>
> i can then work on rewriting freedce's ntlmsspauth.so to be a DLL
> (starting off as my favourite - a stub with username and password of
> "test").
>
> i can then work on writing an "ncalrpc" plugin transport (which is very
> straightforward: a matter of filling in about 25 functions in a vector
> table).
>
> and also on a ncacn_np plugin transport.
>
> "working" means that other people will then be able to focus on issues
> like binary compatibility.
>
> guys (wine team) i have to say this.  you were utterly insane to not use
> freedce as your starting point - and i am still bewildered by you not
> even looking at its source code (which is topologically identical in
> almost all areas, to what you've created) or the opengroup's documentation.
>
> i say that with the greatest of respect for what you've achieved without
> freedce.
>
> l.

[TwoTailedFox]

I find his posts rather refreshing. Then again, I *am* using Gmail.

On 9/17/05, Richard Campbell [e-mail] wrote:
> Can we like...vote to ban this dude?  he's getting annoying.
>
> Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote:
> > http://examples.oreilly.de/english_examples/dce/dce_nt/dceport.h.aug95
> >
> > o joy o joy.
> >
> > also, i found _this_!!!
> >   http://sourceware.org/pthreads-win32/
> >
> > which is an implementation of pthreads on win32.
> >
> > _also_ i found - was reminded - by judicious searching on google, that
> > of course entegrity.com have "PC-DCE" which is of course a _commercial_
> > product that has done exactly the work required: making dce (1.1?
> > 1.2.2?) compile on Win32.
> >
> > including exceptions, dealing with mapping the names, blah blahhh.
> >
> > now.
> >
> > anyone got any brainy ideas on how to reverse dceport.h - in particular
> > the thingy.  wotsit.  TRY/FINALLY/CATCH stuff?
> >
> > what i'm going to try to do is take a shot at simply compiling
> > dcethreads - on win32.
> >
> > if that _works_ (the tests pass) it'll be great - it will prove two
> > things: 1) that pthreads-win32 works 2) that the dce exception handling
> > will fly, on win32, and _that_ means pretty much zero (urk! let's hope!)
> > work.
> >
> > for now.
> >
> > my main goal: "GetItWorking(tm)".
> >
> > i couldn't care less about binary compatibility for now: i want
> > "services" - i want srvsvcd, i want winregd, i want lsarpcd, i want
> > samrd - all compiled, all working, using TCP/IP.
> >
> > i can then work on rewriting freedce's ntlmsspauth.so to be a DLL
> > (starting off as my favourite - a stub with username and password of
> > "test").
> >
> > i can then work on writing an "ncalrpc" plugin transport (which is very
> > straightforward: a matter of filling in about 25 functions in a vector
> > table).
> >
> > and also on a ncacn_np plugin transport.
> >
> > "working" means that other people will then be able to focus on issues
> > like binary compatibility.
> >
> > guys (wine team) i have to say this.  you were utterly insane to not use
> > freedce as your starting point - and i am still bewildered by you not
> > even looking at its source code (which is topologically identical in
> > almost all areas, to what you've created) or the opengroup's documentation.
> >
> > i say that with the greatest of respect for what you've achieved without
> > freedce.
> >
> > l.
>
> Ros-dev mailing list
> [e-mail]
> http://reactos.com:8080/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
-- 
"I had a handle on life, but then it broke"

[Rick Langschultz]

Why do you want to ban him? If it is because he is trying to  
contribute in some form or fashion and is not flaming I think he  
should be allowed to stay. Some (MOST) of my posts aren't considered  
by reactos so when someone actually stumbles onto a resource they  
find interesting, insightful people want to ban them, wow sounds like  
the sharing of ideas isn't what you are all about. Sharing ideas and  
resources is what opensource is about. I find it frustrating when  
people write those kinds of posts asking someone to be banned. It is  
opensource, he is trying to contribute something, jump off of your  
high horse. Nobody is a programming god, we can all learn something.
On Sep 17, 2005, at 3:39 PM, Richard Campbell wrote:
> Can we like...vote to ban this dude?  he's getting annoying.
>
> Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote:
> > http://examples.oreilly.de/english_examples/dce/dce_nt/ 
> > dceport.h.aug95
> >
> > o joy o joy.
> >
> > also, i found _this_!!!
> > http://sourceware.org/pthreads-win32/
> >
> > which is an implementation of pthreads on win32.
> >
> > _also_ i found - was reminded - by judicious searching on google,  
> > that
> > of course entegrity.com have "PC-DCE" which is of course a  
> > _commercial_
> > product that has done exactly the work required: making dce (1.1?
> > 1.2.2?) compile on Win32.
> >
> > including exceptions, dealing with mapping the names, blah blahhh.
> >
> > now.
> >
> > anyone got any brainy ideas on how to reverse dceport.h - in  
> > particular
> > the thingy.  wotsit.  TRY/FINALLY/CATCH stuff?
> >
> > what i'm going to try to do is take a shot at simply compiling
> > dcethreads - on win32.
> >
> > if that _works_ (the tests pass) it'll be great - it will prove two
> > things: 1) that pthreads-win32 works 2) that the dce exception  
> > handling
> > will fly, on win32, and _that_ means pretty much zero (urk! let's  
> > hope!)
> > work.
> >
> > for now.
> >
> > my main goal: "GetItWorking(tm)".
> >
> > i couldn't care less about binary compatibility for now: i want
> > "services" - i want srvsvcd, i want winregd, i want lsarpcd, i want
> > samrd - all compiled, all working, using TCP/IP.
> >
> > i can then work on rewriting freedce's ntlmsspauth.so to be a DLL
> > (starting off as my favourite - a stub with username and password of
> > "test").
> >
> > i can then work on writing an "ncalrpc" plugin transport (which is  
> > very
> > straightforward: a matter of filling in about 25 functions in a  
> > vector
> > table).
> >
> > and also on a ncacn_np plugin transport.
> >
> > "working" means that other people will then be able to focus on  
> > issues
> > like binary compatibility.
> >
> > guys (wine team) i have to say this.  you were utterly insane to  
> > not use
> > freedce as your starting point - and i am still bewildered by you not
> > even looking at its source code (which is topologically identical in
> > almost all areas, to what you've created) or the opengroup's  
> > documentation.
> >
> > i say that with the greatest of respect for what you've achieved  
> > without
> > freedce.
> >
> > l.
>
> Ros-dev mailing list
> [e-mail]
> http://reactos.com:8080/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev

Rick Langschultz
[e-mail] (Home)
[e-mail] (Work)
[e-mail] (School)

[Richard Campbell]

He is NOT contributing, he's cross posting on several lists.  Most of 
his posts are just random gibberish that in no way contribute to the 
development of ROS.

Rick Langschultz wrote:
> Why do you want to ban him? If it is because he is trying to  
> contribute in some form or fashion and is not flaming I think he  
> should be allowed to stay. Some (MOST) of my posts aren't considered  
> by reactos so when someone actually stumbles onto a resource they  
> find interesting, insightful people want to ban them, wow sounds like  
> the sharing of ideas isn't what you are all about. Sharing ideas and  
> resources is what opensource is about. I find it frustrating when  
> people write those kinds of posts asking someone to be banned. It is  
> opensource, he is trying to contribute something, jump off of your  
> high horse. Nobody is a programming god, we can all learn something.
> On Sep 17, 2005, at 3:39 PM, Richard Campbell wrote:
> > Can we like...vote to ban this dude?  he's getting annoying.
> >
> > Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote:
> > > http://examples.oreilly.de/english_examples/dce/dce_nt/ dceport.h.aug95
> > >
> > > o joy o joy.
> > >
> > > also, i found _this_!!!
> > > http://sourceware.org/pthreads-win32/
> > >
> > > which is an implementation of pthreads on win32.
> > >
> > > _also_ i found - was reminded - by judicious searching on google,  that
> > > of course entegrity.com have "PC-DCE" which is of course a  
> > > _commercial_
> > > product that has done exactly the work required: making dce (1.1?
> > > 1.2.2?) compile on Win32.
> > >
> > > including exceptions, dealing with mapping the names, blah blahhh.
> > >
> > > now.
> > >
> > > anyone got any brainy ideas on how to reverse dceport.h - in  
> > > particular
> > > the thingy.  wotsit.  TRY/FINALLY/CATCH stuff?
> > >
> > > what i'm going to try to do is take a shot at simply compiling
> > > dcethreads - on win32.
> > >
> > > if that _works_ (the tests pass) it'll be great - it will prove two
> > > things: 1) that pthreads-win32 works 2) that the dce exception  
> > > handling
> > > will fly, on win32, and _that_ means pretty much zero (urk! let's  
> > > hope!)
> > > work.
> > >
> > > for now.
> > >
> > > my main goal: "GetItWorking(tm)".
> > >
> > > i couldn't care less about binary compatibility for now: i want
> > > "services" - i want srvsvcd, i want winregd, i want lsarpcd, i want
> > > samrd - all compiled, all working, using TCP/IP.
> > >
> > > i can then work on rewriting freedce's ntlmsspauth.so to be a DLL
> > > (starting off as my favourite - a stub with username and password of
> > > "test").
> > >
> > > i can then work on writing an "ncalrpc" plugin transport (which is  
> > > very
> > > straightforward: a matter of filling in about 25 functions in a  vector
> > > table).
> > >
> > > and also on a ncacn_np plugin transport.
> > >
> > > "working" means that other people will then be able to focus on  issues
> > > like binary compatibility.
> > >
> > > guys (wine team) i have to say this.  you were utterly insane to  
> > > not use
> > > freedce as your starting point - and i am still bewildered by you not
> > > even looking at its source code (which is topologically identical in
> > > almost all areas, to what you've created) or the opengroup's  
> > > documentation.
> > >
> > > i say that with the greatest of respect for what you've achieved  
> > > without
> > > freedce.
> > >
> > > l.
> >
> > Ros-dev mailing list
> > [e-mail]
> > http://reactos.com:8080/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
>
> Rick Langschultz
> [e-mail] (Home)
> [e-mail] (Work)
> [e-mail] (School)
>
> Ros-dev mailing list
> [e-mail]
> http://reactos.com:8080/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev

[WaxDragon]

On 9/17/05, Richard Campbell [e-mail] wrote:
> Can we like...vote to ban this dude?  he's getting annoying.

Be nice.

While even I find the tone of his messages to be a little irritating,
I've known worse, and he *is* on topic.  Luke is doing reasearch for
us, and his ideas seem pretty well thought out.

WD
-- 
<arty> don't question it ... it's clearly an optimization

[Saveliy Tretiakov]

Richard Campbell wrote:
> Can we like...vote to ban this dude?  he's getting annoying.

I'm against this! He is doing a good job.

[Saveliy Tretiakov]

Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote:
> guys (wine team) i have to say this.  you were utterly insane to not use
> freedce as your starting point - and i am still bewildered by you not
> even looking at its source code (which is topologically identical in
> almost all areas, to what you've created) or the opengroup's documentation.
>
> i say that with the greatest of respect for what you've achieved without
> freedce.

And what is freedce's idl compiler status? Is it better than widl? (widl 
has a lack of many features)
Is it possible to use it in reactos?

[Wesley Parish]

On Sun, 18 Sep 2005 17:43, Saveliy Tretiakov wrote:
> Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote:
> > guys (wine team) i have to say this.  you were utterly insane to not use
> > freedce as your starting point - and i am still bewildered by you not
> > even looking at its source code (which is topologically identical in
> > almost all areas, to what you've created) or the opengroup's
> > documentation.
> >
> > i say that with the greatest of respect for what you've achieved without
> > freedce.
>
> And what is freedce's idl compiler status? Is it better than widl? (widl
> has a lack of many features)
> Is it possible to use it in reactos?

I've just checked the license details.  FreeDCE's backend is licensed under a 
form of MIT/BSD License, so nobody'll mind - from the Copying file:

The DCE/RPC backend:

(c) Copyright 1994 OPEN SOFTWARE FOUNDATION, INC.
 (c) Copyright 1994 HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY
 (c) Copyright 1994 DIGITAL EQUIPMENT CORPORATION
 To anyone who acknowledges that this file is provided "AS IS"
 without any express or implied warranty:
                 permission to use, copy, modify, and distribute this
 file for any purpose is hereby granted without fee, provided that
 the above copyright notices and this notice appears in all source
 code copies, and that none of the names of Open Software
 Foundation, Inc., Hewlett-Packard Company, or Digital Equipment
 Corporation be used in advertising or publicity pertaining to
 distribution of the software without specific, written prior
 permission.  Neither Open Software Foundation, Inc., Hewlett-
 Packard Company, nor Digital Equipment Corporation makes any
 representations about the suitability of this software for any
 purpose.

The DCE compatible threads library:

GNU GENERAL PUBLIC LICENSE
    	       Version 2, June 1991
//

I haven't checked the idl though.
<snip>

Wesley Parish
-- 
Clinersterton beademung, with all of love - RIP James Blish
-----
Mau e ki, he aha te mea nui?
You ask, what is the most important thing?
Maku e ki, he tangata, he tangata, he tangata.
I reply, it is people, it is people, it is people.

[KJKHyperion]

Wesley Parish wrote:
> The DCE compatible threads library:

can I have a look at this one? I'll try coding a replacement that 
doesn't involve POSIX threads nor silly licenses

[Wesley Parish]

On Sun, 18 Sep 2005 22:12, KJKHyperion wrote:
> Wesley Parish wrote:
> > The DCE compatible threads library:
>
> can I have a look at this one? I'll try coding a replacement that
> doesn't involve POSIX threads nor silly licenses

http://freedce.sourceforge.net/
http://sourceforge.net/projects/freedce

This one may or may not have any relation to the previous.
http://www.advogato.org/proj/FreeDCE/

Wesley Parish
> Ros-dev mailing list
> [e-mail]
> http://reactos.com:8080/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
-- 
Clinersterton beademung, with all of love - RIP James Blish
-----
Mau e ki, he aha te mea nui?
You ask, what is the most important thing?
Maku e ki, he tangata, he tangata, he tangata.
I reply, it is people, it is people, it is people.

[KJKHyperion]

Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote:
> if that _works_ (the tests pass) it'll be great - it will prove two things: 1) that pthreads-win32 works

oh, it works. But my recommendation is to do without POSIX threads. Make 
me a list of the pthread_xxx symbols occuring in DCE, would you? and 
I'll tell you how hard it will be to remove that dependency
> that the dce exception handling will fly, on win32, and _that_ means pretty much zero (urk! let's hope!) work.

nope, no way, forget about it, please try to code around it instead. It 
can be implemented in the usual way that makes baby Jesus cry (i.e. with 
setjmp & switch), but it's so non-portable it makes me scream in pain. 
Please also don't even consider using C++ exceptions for it, because you 
can't be serious about something like that