Hi! On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 7:51 AM, King InuYasha<ngomp...@gmail.com> wrote: > Arwinss resembles the NT3/Vista/7 architecture for Win32k, while the > implementation that some people are saying is "right" is more in line with > the NT4-WinXP. In the strictest sense of the definition, both arwinss and > the current default implementation styles are "correct." Both > implementations work and allow Windows NT drivers to work with it, so that's > not the problem. It also adds in RDP-esque support through X, which is > pretty cool too.
Nothing close at all~ We have a list of books for you to read, media/doc/books.txt, but that list looks very short, someone removed some book about win32k in there..... > I guess some of these people don't like Wine code. The problem with that is > that without Wine code, ReactOS would probably take ten times as long to > actually get to a usable state. Using Wine code for win32k seems to cross > some sort of line for them. I heard some of them saying the Wine code for > win32k is "ugly." What does ugliness have to do with it? Being able to share > more with Wine saves a lot of hard work from ReactOS devs. They can focus > more on bringing the NT kernel up to scratch, rather than spending more time > with the Win32k code. They could even work on adding in other subsystems, if > they wanted to. > > Do some research with our project, go back and read our emails and correlate them with our commit logs to get a more precise picture on what happen and why and where. Understanding our history will help you understand where we are today. Thanks, James _______________________________________________ Ros-dev mailing list Ros-dev@reactos.org http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
