On Feb 18, 2010, at 5:14 AM, James Tabor wrote:
We see
the leak due to the compatibility of ReactOS. We use tools from the
Net to examine the GDI handle counts. Might I add a point, these
tools are written for Windows. ;^) How do we really know that the same
leak does not occur with arwinss.
Well a quick overview,
Arwinss is allocating from two places, Gdi32 and Win32k. Most likely
based on what I read from the source, (wine) Gdi32. I'm not sure if
you are passing everything to the
ProcessEnvironmentBlock-GdiSharedHandleTable which originates in
win32k, if not GDIView may not work.
why?
Sent from my iPod
Andrew Faulds (andrewweb)
On 21 Jan 2010, at 18:50, Alwyn Tan alwyn@gmail.com wrote:
I blame andrewweb.
On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 10:31 AM, Aleksey Bragin
alek...@reactos.org wrote:
On Jan 20, 2010, at 11:14 AM, Ged Murphy wrote:
James Tabor wrote:
Although
James Tabor wrote:
Although Jim likes the hyperbole, he is right. Arwinss is a stop gap
solution that should eventually be deprecated except for the X11
module and used as a basis for verifying the 'correct' win32
subsystem.
I'm for both! One will not replace the other... I have no idea
Now that I understand the driver concept behind arwinss I think that arwinss
is the right approach for the project.
Looking at the current development approach win32 user and kernel components
will not be finished anytime soon and will probably never work 100%. We're
just missing specialised
Thanks!
Press as usual likes flashy topics, so of course everyone edited the
news text as he liked, but I like it. ReactOS needed some kick, it
was quite sad to see some kind of stagnation (even though everyone
did their best, it's just lack of human resources for specific tasks).
If we
I gave up on arguing. Instead I'll just use this to push my own ideas.
I also have a secret plan of a Complete rewrite that will bring
ReactOS to the next level not yet sure about the details, but I think
it will incorporate something like virtualization and cloud computing.
*muahahaha*
You sir are what i would call a visionary who makes his dreams work. I wish
you the best of luck.
--
brian
___
Ros-dev mailing list
Ros-dev@reactos.org
http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
Gregor Schneider wrote:
Actually I'm surprised we don't see a big controversial discussion around
this idea like everyone expected.
Maybe because we already had this one in July:
http://www.reactos.org/pipermail/ros-dev/2009-July/011896.html
As I'm not a Win32k dev, I shouldn't argue about
On Tue, Jan 19, 2010 at 3:23 PM, Colin Finck m...@colinfinck.de wrote:
Maybe because we already had this one in July:
http://www.reactos.org/pipermail/ros-dev/2009-July/011896.html
As I'm not a Win32k dev, I shouldn't argue about technical details. But I
still don't believe that all the
I'm all for ARWINSS (and yes, I'm still alive). I think it's good to
have something that's up and running in a near future so that ros
developers can focus on other things.
As for the whole double delopment, I'm not so sure. One will always be
depricated somehow, unless you have a lot of people
On Tue, Jan 19, 2010 at 8:23 PM, Colin Finck m...@colinfinck.de wrote:
Maybe because we already had this one in July:
http://www.reactos.org/pipermail/ros-dev/2009-July/011896.html
As I'm not a Win32k dev, I shouldn't argue about technical details. But I
still don't believe that all the
Technically Arwinss may not be the best possible architecture, but IMHO
right now is the only viable one in order to reach beta in reasonable time.
Sure, we will always see how a more native implementation could be more
efficient at the end, but the reality is that given the current human
Well, you don't have to be unnecessarily sarcastically cruel about it. I use
all three major OSes and I use whatever fits to my needs. Most of the time,
Linux does fit my needs. But, I want to play PC games, which are usually
Windows games and their DRM schemes hook into the system deeper than
performance, and probably compatibility
On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 1:18 AM, Sir Gallantmon ngomp...@gmail.com wrote:
Anyway, you didn't give a reason to NOT use arwinss as the official win32
subsystem...
On Tue, Jan 19, 2010 at 5:11 PM, James Tabor jimtabor.ros...@gmail.comwrote:
The same
On Tue, Jan 19, 2010 at 6:11 PM, James Tabor jimtabor.ros...@gmail.com wrote:
The same thing with the kernel, we can use Linux instead! Create a
distribution with it and call it Lindows! Oh wait! That ship has set
sail and moved on~!
Although Jim likes the hyperbole, he is right. Arwinss is a
Good catch!
On Tue, Jan 19, 2010 at 7:05 PM, Steven Edwards winehac...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Jan 19, 2010 at 6:11 PM, James Tabor jimtabor.ros...@gmail.com
wrote:
The same thing with the kernel, we can use Linux instead! Create a
distribution with it and call it Lindows! Oh wait! That
I'm not a developer, so I have no say in the matter, but if you want an
outsider's opinion, I
would suggest implementing Arwinss for the near-term, so we have better
software
compatibility. Software compatibility brings publicity, since people will
actually be able to
do things with ReactOS
I would agree it would be a nice idea to choose which at install-time,
then it would be easy to test both, and would allow any arwinss-haters
to get what they want.
Sent from my iPod
Andrew Faulds (andrewweb)
On 20 Jan 2010, at 04:42, Joshua Bailey raptorempe...@yahoo.com wrote:
I'm not a
Because there still exists some features of D3D that OpenGL has not or
that some manufacturers implement in their D3D drivers but not in their
opengl ICD.
The funny side of it is that I use wineD3D on my laptop, because intel
drivers suck!
Jérôme.
Kamil Horníček a écrit :
What would be the
.
Kamil
- Original Message -
From: Jérôme Gardou jerome.gar...@laposte.net
To: ReactOS Development List ros-dev@reactos.org
Sent: Sunday, January 17, 2010 2:31 AM
Subject: Re: [ros-dev] Arwinss presentation
Could this be pushed to write a rosd3d driver? Take all d3d dlls from
wine
On Jul 30, 2009, at 12:49 AM, James Tabor wrote:
If I'm not mistaken, we already imported wine code at the beginning
did we not? I'm looking at the commit logs and it does look we
started with wine. We need to keep it separated before it is too late.
Oh it's already too late. Ah, we missed
Stay out of ReactOS! Go ahead and work on ArWinSS,
James
Man, why so scared? :) Arwinss doesn't even run Firefox2 yet and
everyone went crazy.
So far Timo provided an extensive answer to my questions, thanks.
WBR,
Aleksey Bragin.
___
Ros-dev
Oh, c'mon, people.
This diagram says nothing.
Has anyone of you even a clue of how it would look like for Windows?
The only difference to Windows design that can be seen from this diagram
is the addition of the NT driver and X11 driver.
What it doesn't show is where which parts of the subsystem
List
Subject: Re: [ros-dev] Arwinss architecture
Oh, c'mon, people.
This diagram says nothing.
Has anyone of you even a clue of how it would look like for Windows?
The only difference to Windows design that can be seen from this
diagram is the addition of the NT driver and X11 driver.
What
war is here 3:
On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 7:30 PM, James Tabor jimtabor.ros...@gmail.comwrote:
No, not even, not in the light of day, shall this ever be part of trunk!
Separate project maybe, perhaps or will be a new project altogether!
Leave our trunk alone and keep working on ArWinSS where
...@gmail.com]
Sent: 29 July 2009 18:30
To: ReactOS Development List
Subject: Re: [ros-dev] Arwinss architecture
No, not even, not in the light of day, shall this ever be part of trunk!
Separate project maybe, perhaps or will be a new project altogether!
Leave our trunk alone and keep working on ArWinSS
: James Tabor [mailto:jimtabor.ros...@gmail.com]
Sent: 29 July 2009 18:30
To: ReactOS Development List
Subject: Re: [ros-dev] Arwinss architecture
No, not even, not in the light of day, shall this ever be part of trunk!
Separate project maybe, perhaps or will be a new project altogether!
Leave
]
Sent: 29 July 2009 18:30
To: ReactOS Development List
Subject: Re: [ros-dev] Arwinss architecture
No, not even, not in the light of day, shall this ever be part of trunk!
Separate project maybe, perhaps or will be a new project altogether!
Leave our trunk alone and keep working on ArWinSS
Why would we need the X server for remote access if we have terminal
services?
___
Ros-dev mailing list
Ros-dev@reactos.org
http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
-
From: James Tabor [mailto:jimtabor.ros...@gmail.com]
Sent: 29 July 2009 18:30
To: ReactOS Development List
Subject: Re: [ros-dev] Arwinss architecture
No, not even, not in the light of day, shall this ever be part of
trunk!
Separate project maybe, perhaps or will be a new project
On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 3:09 PM, Zachary Gordendrakekaizer...@gmail.com wrote:
Why would we need the X server for remote access if we have terminal
services?
We don't have terminal services though. I mean we should of course,
and I should also have a pony. I'm not saying it should go in trunk
King InuYasha wrote:
Ok, a little more confused now. You said that the idea that Wine code is
better than ReactOS code needs to die, but you turn around and basically
state that Wine code IS better than ReactOS code. Did you mean that the
idea that ReactOS code is better than Wine code?
I did
-
From: King InuYasha
To: ReactOS Development List
Sent: Tuesday, July 21, 2009 4:56 PM
Subject: Re: [ros-dev] Arwinss
On Mon, Jul 20, 2009 at 10:47 AM, KJK::Hyperion hackbu...@reactos.org
wrote:
Timo Kreuzer wrote:
Wine emulates the kernel through a server. Of cause we don't use
On Mon, Jul 20, 2009 at 8:15 AM, Steven Edwards winehac...@gmail.comwrote:
2009/7/20 Javier Agustìn Fernàndez Arroyo elh...@gmail.com:
support of remote sessions via X Windows
what the
Does it mean some GUI Linux apps would be able to run into ROS with that
new
Win32 subsystem??
On Mon, Jul 20, 2009 at 9:31 AM, King InuYashangomp...@gmail.com wrote:
Would it also mean that an X11 API library could be plugged in so that X
based applications can be more easily ported to Windows/ReactOS while still
providing the transparency to view on another machine through X11
Hi,
Some people might have already noticed that I have a strong opinion
regarding this rewrite. So let me explain my point of view here.
Aleksey, thanks for clarification and confirming a lot of what I already
thought. I hope you don't feel offended (at least not more than I was,
when browsing
Aleksey Bragin has huge balls of fire. Go ahead, madman
___
Ros-dev mailing list
Ros-dev@reactos.org
http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
Timo Kreuzer wrote:
Wine emulates the kernel through a server. Of cause we don't use it,
because it has a totally different design.
Says who? So far, and only counting official implementations, Win32 has
been implemented as:
- a shared-memory user mode subsystem (Windows 95, 98)
- a RPC user
: [ros-dev] Arwinss
Sent: Jul 20, 2009 8:47 AM
Timo Kreuzer wrote:
Wine emulates the kernel through a server. Of cause we don't use it,
because it has a totally different design.
Says who? So far, and only counting official implementations, Win32 has
been implemented as:
- a shared-memory user
.
--Original Message--
From: KJK::Hyperion
Sender: ros-dev-boun...@reactos.org
To: ReactOS Development List
ReplyTo: ReactOS Development List
Subject: Re: [ros-dev] Arwinss
Sent: Jul 20, 2009 8:47 AM
Timo Kreuzer wrote:
Wine emulates the kernel through a server. Of cause we don't use
41 matches
Mail list logo
