Ros-general

ros-general@reactos.org

1048 discussions

RE: [ros-general] How are most folks running ReactOS?

by Murphy, Ged (Bolton)

Curtis Spivey wrote > I'm curious, what format did you use to install it using VMware? It > doesn't really fit in any of the standard categories. I think that's > the route I may go. It doesn't matter. Just stick it under XP and make sure you use a Fat32 disk. ************************************************************************ The information contained in this message or any of its attachments is confidential and is intended for the exclusive use of the addressee. The information may also be legally privileged. The views expressed may not be company policy, but the personal views of the originator. If you are not the addressee, any disclosure, reproduction, distribution or other dissemination or use of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please contact postmaster(a)exideuk.co.uk <mailto:postmaster@exideuk.co.uk> and then delete this message. Exide Technologies is an industrial and transportation battery producer and recycler with operations in 89 countries. Further information can be found at www.exide.com

18 years, 9 months

How are most folks running ReactOS?

by Curtis Spivey

I'm just curious how most folks are running ReacOS? I mean are you running it on an old laptop or as a secondary boot system or as a stand alone system, ect. I'm just curious. I know it's still in the experimental stages. -- Curtis Nampa, Idaho http://pcs.freepay.com/?r=24984191

18 years, 9 months

0.2.9 RC2 is Out!

by Brandon Turner

I just released 0.2.9 to sf.net. A lot of bug fixes since RC1 so get out there and check it out. File any bugs in in bugzilla or give us any feedback on the ml. Brandon

18 years, 9 months

RE: [ros-general] Why??

by Murphy, Ged (Bolton)

> From: David Hinz > Sounds like a good idea, but I think we should use the existing > ReactOS.xml (if you have one...), so we don't need to create a new > file for this. We have version.h for this. This way it's easily included via the pre-processor I've taken the [ros-dev] out of the subject as my mail filter was getting confused. Ged ************************************************************************ The information contained in this message or any of its attachments is confidential and is intended for the exclusive use of the addressee. The information may also be legally privileged. The views expressed may not be company policy, but the personal views of the originator. If you are not the addressee, any disclosure, reproduction, distribution or other dissemination or use of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please contact postmaster(a)exideuk.co.uk <mailto:postmaster@exideuk.co.uk> and then delete this message. Exide Technologies is an industrial and transportation battery producer and recycler with operations in 89 countries. Further information can be found at www.exide.com

18 years, 9 months

Re: [ros-dev] Why??

by David Hinz

Well, I'm fine with it, but some other people seem to have problems with this system, so I thought of something without any sense, just numbers. Like the build-numbers every MS-product has, e.g. Win XP has the build-number 2600 I would be more for a mix of a lot of different systems. Create daily technology preview, that don't need to be "perfect", if they compile fine, they can be released. This would be the ones with the buildnumbers. Then there were monthly releases, or maybe a release every month with the current numbering system, but also with buildnumbers. And then we have the releases with codenames. So as an example this all could look like this: 02.01.2006: Technology Preview: Build 0001 r20500 09.01.2006: Technology Preview: Build 0002 r20619 16.01.2006: Technology Preview: Build 0003 r20681 23.01.2006: Technology Preview: Build 0004 r20834 30.01.2006: Technology Preview: Build 0005 r21001 ... 20.02.2006: Technology Preview: Build 0008 r21517 27.02.2006: Release 0.2.10: Build 0009 r21687 06.03.2006: Technology Preview: Build 0010 r21755 ... ... 17.04.2006: Technology Preview: Build 0016 r22033 24.04.2006: Release 0.3.0: Build 0017 r22177 Codename God knows 01.05.2006: Technology Preview: Build 0018 r22257 You see, I would choose a weekly release plan. The whole organisation on SVN would look a bit like this: We have trunk, which would be our unstable tree. Then we have our testing tree, which always has to compile fine and should at least boot and install fine too. This branch would be feature freezed for one day every week, and after this the Technology Preview would be released. In addition, the ordinary two monthly releases would be created out of this branch, we would just feature freeze it for a whole week and the last 3 days of the week it would be codefreezed, so on the whole it would be feature freezed for 8 days (including the one day before the last Technology Preview) and of this 8 days it would be code freezed for 3 days (the last 3 days before the release). So an ordinary release would be a Technology Preview, but in the week before its release the branch would be handled a bit differently than in other weeks. I hope I didn't confuse you all too much, but for me this seems like a good idea. Comments are highly appreciated. Greets, David Hinz TwoTailedFox schrieb: > 0.2.9 not good enough as a Version Number? > > On 12/18/05, David Hinz <post.center(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> I was talking about numbering the releases... >> >> TwoTailedFox schrieb: >>> We have SVN Numbers o.o >>> >>> On 12/18/05, David Hinz <post.center(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>>> Why don't we use buildnumbers? >>>> Without any sense, just counting a number up and creating some major >>>> releases with names from time to time. >>>> >>>> Just an idea... >>>> >>>> Greets, >>>> >>>> David Hinz >> _______________________________________________ >> Ros-dev mailing list >> Ros-dev(a)reactos.org >> http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev >> > > > -- > "I had a handle on life, but then it broke" > > _______________________________________________ > Ros-dev mailing list > Ros-dev(a)reactos.org > http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev >

18 years, 9 months

RE: Why??

by Ge van Geldorp

> From: David Hinz > > Why don't we use buildnumbers? > Without any sense, just counting a number up and creating > some major releases with names from time to time. [moved from ros-dev] OSnews headline: "ReactOS project released build r20273". Doesn't have the same ring to it as "ReactOS project released 0.2.9". I still fail to see what the problem is with the current system. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. GvG

18 years, 9 months

Re: [ros-dev] dealing with insecure-by-inattention Windows software

by Michael B. Trausch

On Sun, 2005-12-18 at 11:50 +0100, Jasper van de Gronde wrote: > Michael B. Trausch wrote: > > On Fri, 2005-12-16 at 17:19 +0100, Jasper van de Gronde wrote: > > > >>Are you saying that with Vista it's possible to give a program its own > >>virtual view of the system which it can read and modify to its heart's > >>content without affecting other programs? That would be simply divine. > > > > Yes, although IME, it doesn't work out so well, yet. > > > > I just posted on that in this thread, as well. There are more bad > > things that happen as a result. > > Apart from obvious problems with giving users enough rights to do common > tasks, which isn't something I'm terribly worried about in my situation > (I'm pretty much the only one who should be doing anything mildly > advanced anyway), could you point out something that goes wrong? I'd > assume that if an application has its own virtual view of the filesystem > and registry (that it could read and potentially modify) that most > applications would work reasonably well. Well, for starters: * Applications which previously had settings in other places didn't work so well because of the new "virtualization" technique. * Things like Nero didn't work at all without new software (similar to a sudo sort of thing for Windows, but a bigger pain in the ass to install and manage). * Computer Administrators weren't administrators, so the Control Panels didn't work. * Trying to run anything that requested a low-level access of any type didn't work very well. This included the special config programs that came with my video board and sound card. The programs would load, but none of their functionality would work. In addition: * Some programs are now 'hard-wired' to use locations like C:\Documents and Settings\current_user. This is not present any longer in Vista. This should probably be a bug against the application, however, since % USERHOME% (I think) is defined stating where the user's home area is. The new area is %SYSTEMDRIVE%\Users\current_user, or something like that. * Vista is most assuredly not well versed in the upgrade from "legacy" Windows (e.g., XP) to itself. It didn't work. It didn't virtualize the registry as it should've. This is something that hopefully they fix soon. * Something changed in the way you can store temp files, even. This was fairly evident by the fact that some things (such as program installers) failed to run as anything but the Administrator. That was HIGHLY annoying. * I couldn't uninstall programs that I'd installed under my user account in XP, under Vista. It's almost like having no rights, whatsoever. At least with UNIX, it's all good game if you stay in your home directory and don't exceed your disk quota, and play by the rules of the system set by the SA. - Mike -- Michael B. Trausch fd0man(a)gmail.com "Why geeks like computers: unzip, strip, touch, finger, grep, mount, fsck, more, yes,fsck,fsck,fsck,umount, sleep." :-)

18 years, 9 months

Re: [ros-dev] dealing with insecure-by-inattention Windows software

by David Hinz

Michael B. Trausch schrieb: > In any case, I'm not sure if its very feasible to have a monitor look > for low-level requests and audit them saying "x requests are permitted > and the rest aren't" - but I'm not sure. That could probably be > something akin to a network firewall, but only for internal system I/O. I don't know, if this is possible, but afaik Windows denies access to some things for ordinary users. This is good so far (okay, it's not restrictive enough...) but Windows is laking the dialog asking you for a password. Comments on this by some of the devs would be very appreciated... Greets, David Hinz

18 years, 9 months

DOSBox 0.63

by David Ianno

Someone now needs to install Win3.1Here you go. ;) No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.371 / Virus Database: 267.13.13/199 - Release Date: 12/13/2005

18 years, 9 months

DOSBox 0.63

by James Tabor

Hi all, Quip has reported from IRC that DOSBox 0.63 does install and runs. I'm posting Quip's pic. Thanks, James

18 years, 9 months

Jump to page:

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

Ros-general