<?xml version="1.0" ?>
<kc>
<title>ReactOS Traffic</title>
        <author contact="http://www.tong-web.com/splash/index.xml">Zach Tong</author>
        <issue num="2" date="24 Nov 2004 00:00:00 -0800" />
        
		
		
<section title="Ekush Live Again"
                 subject="[ros-dev] Ekush.com up again"
                 archive="http://reactos.com:8080/archives/public/ros-dev/2004-November/000717.html"
                 posts="9"
                 startdate="22 Nov 2004 00:00:00 -0800"
                 enddate="22 Nov 2004 00:00:00 -0800">
                <p>
					Ibrahim Damlaj informed the dev mailing list that Ekush.com was up again, with a much modified message (<a href="http://www.ekush.com">Here</a>).  There were two main opinions on the matter.  1) Accept nothing from the Ekush project, they are not to be trusted and 2) Accept patches carefully.  This in turn led to some interesting discussion about "tainted" code from the leaked Windows 2000 source.  K McI says that by merely looking at the patches to see if they are tainted in fact taints the project: <quote who="K McI">But wouldn't that require to possess said code, which is (I think) illegal, and expose us (Or whoever does this vetting) to the risk of being "tainted" with the MS stuff?</quote>.  
</p>

<p>
This idea, the fact that no members of the ReactOS team can ever see the leaked code (even if checking to make sure it doesn't get patched into ReactOS", led to more discussion in a spinoff thread titled <a href="http://reactos.com:8080/archives/public/ros-dev/2004-November/000725.html">[ros-dev] Idea to protect ReactOS</a>.  The participants decided that a third party would be needed to check the code.  It was suggested that Microsoft do this, which was decided might not be the best idea either: <quote who="Art Yerkes">Right idea, but wrong source I think.  We need a neutral party who is under a microsoft NDA but contributes code neither to microsoft's nor our codebase.</quote>  It was also noted that this would probably be a service that would require payment at some point.  
</p>

<p>Many members felt that Ekush could not be trusted anyhow, and no patches should be added.  While it dismisses Ekush, it does not however dismiss large future patches from other sources that <i>could</i> contain leaked code.  Ibrahim Damlaj brings up a good point about how vulnerable ReactOS is to "tainted" code: <quote who="Ibrahim Damlaj">That's really freaky, since they may give M$ a chance to shut down the Reactos.</quote>
</p>

<p>
An interesting read can be found <a href="http://reactos.com:8080/archives/public/ros-general/2004-November/001327.html">here</a>.  Ge van Geldorp sent the Ekush project a very diplomatic letter explaining the situation.
</p>
</section>


		<section title="Header Organization"
                 subject="[ros-dev] headers suggestion"
                 archive="http://reactos.com:8080/archives/public/ros-dev/2004-November/000667.html"
                 posts="13"
                 startdate="20 Nov 2004 00:00:00 -0800"
                 enddate="21 Nov 2004 00:00:00 -0800">
                <p>Jonathan Wilson made a <a href="http://reactos.com:8080/archives/public/ros-dev/2004-November/000667.html">proposal</a> for sweeping changes in the organization of the headers currently in use by ReactOS.  Basically, there are three different header sets (Wine, ReactOS, MingW).  Jonathan sums up the proposal: <quote who="Jonathan Wilson">Basicly, the idea is that mingw-runtime would become the 'definitive' set of msvcrt.dll headers out there and that ReactOS, MingW and WINE would 
start using it for any case where you are talking to msvcrt.dll from the public side.</quote></p>

<p>
Alex Ionescu said he was <quote who="Alex Ionescu">already working on a complete header system overhaul that's been approved and very much requested by the other developers.</quote> and would be guarnateed to <quote who="Alex Ionescu">support MS PSDK/DDK/IFS</quote>.  Much debate ensued, with several trains of thought emerging.  Jonathan said it would be a good idea to <quote who="Jonathan Wilson">[Keep] the 'undocumented' stuff (i.e. the bits microsoft doesnt document in the Platform SDK) and the 'documented' stuff seperate (i.e. putting the undocumented stuff into seperate headers)</quote>
</p>

<p>
To this Alex Ionescu replied: <quote who="Alex Ionescu">We will do as planned and put undocumented stuff in the NDK"</quote>. Furthermore, Alex recommended to wait for what he was working on, and then <quote who="Alex Ionescu">you can all flame me instead of arguing with each others</quote>.
</p>

</section>

		<section title="PuTTY Display Problems"
                 subject="[ros-dev] A call for help getting putty working"
                 archive="http://reactos.com:8080/archives/public/ros-dev/2004-November/000673.html"
                 posts="8"
                 startdate="18 Nov 2004 00:00:00 -0800"
                 enddate="20 Nov 2004 00:00:00 -0800">
                <p>Art Yerkes made a request to the dev mailing list to help get PuTTY working under windows.  Casper Hornstrup points out that an earlier version (later determined to be 0.53b official) worked fine on ReactOS.  Art replies with a very interesting point about ReactOS and the expectations we all place on what it can and can't do:</p>

<quote who="Art Yerkes">

<p>

<ol>

<li>My thoughts are twofold; putty works on wine and windows, and so a compatible system such as reactos ought to be able to the same.  I think having CreateDialog work right is not so much to ask.</li>

<li>We get no credibility having to port apps to run on reactos.  Sometimes I do patch an app so i can get past a known problem by my goal is always
ultimately to run the app unpatched.  My guess is that an eventual end user will expect the author's version to work.</li>

</ol>

</p>

</quote>

<p>Ge van Geldorp determined that the problem was ReactOS's handling of the WM_SETREDRAW message.  PuTTY's main dialog window is sent the message twice in windlg.c, first with a FALSE parameter, then later with a TRUE parameter.  The second call is the call that makes the window display on Windows and Wine, but was not working on ReactOS.  GvG fixed the problem, and PuTTY was restored to working condition (regarding its UI).</p>

        </section>
		
		<section title="Header Merging"
                 subject="[ros-dev] headers in reactos/w32api/include and reactos/include/wine"
                 archive="http://reactos.com:8080/archives/public/ros-dev/2004-November/000657.html"
                 posts="11"
                 startdate="18 Nov 2004 00:00:00 -0800"
                 enddate="19 Nov 2004 00:00:00 -0800">
                <p>Steven Edwards wanted to merge the duplicate headers in reactos/include/wine into the headers of reactos/w32api/include.  Since ReactOS had i'ts own w32api it didn't need most of the headers that used #include_next.  Magnus said that it would be a problem due to compatability reasons with Wine and MinGW, <quote who="Magnus">Some wine header are wrong. It will only work for wine. Until some fix wine compatible with mingw headers.</quote></p>

<p>It was brought up ( by James Tabor) that Wine does not appear to be helping the situation by using things that not compatable.  Steven reminds everyone that Wine's goals are different from ReactOS's.  Mainly, they do not care if things are done the "Windows Way", as long as the end product works.  ReactOS on the other hand, must implement things the same way Windows does.</p>

<p>
Steven Edwards makes an interesting point: <quote who="Steven Edwards">One problem that we face is that some of the headers such as FDI.h and
FCI.h mingw wont accept because Microsoft only publishes the specs in a package you have to accept a EULA to read.</quote>
</p>
</section>

        <section title="Recent CVS Activity"
                 startdate="17 Nov 2004 00:00:00 -0800"
                 enddate="24 Nov 2004 00:00:00 -0800">
                <mention>Thomas Weidenmueller</mention>

<p>This section contains nothing more than interesting CVS comments that I personally like. There are more CVS comments then listed
                here, and many more actual commits.</p>
                <p>
                        <ul>
                                <li>Patch to correct multiple adapter bind from protocols.  There were two	bugs here:
							<ol>
								<li>The loop in protocol.c was wrong and was rewritten by Andrew Munger with help from Thomas Weidenmueller</li>
								<li>MiniLocateAdapter never zeroed Adapter if the adapter didn't match,	and never actually ever matched a name.  It always returned the 	last adapter in the list (spotted and fixed after the above fixes).</li>
							</ol>
						</li>
						<li>Rewrote most of the DPC Code to take advantage of the CPU/Importance "laws".</li>
						<li>Fixed sending FIN from a dying socket and receiving SEL_FIN on one in tcpip, by adding an additional way to lookup sockets.</li>
						<li>Small speedup: don't need to redo checksum in tcp_input.  It's already done	in our ip defrag code.</li>
						<li>apps/utils/Makefile (UTIL_NET_APPS): Add arp, finger, ipconfig,	netstat, ping, telnet, and whois.</li>
						<li>Use PnP DMA interface instead of the HAL one</li>
						<li>Implement NdisMQueryAdapterResources, NdisMGetDmaAlignment and NdisMReadDmaCounter, NdisMPciAssignResources.</li>
						<li>reactos/hal/halx86/: adapter.c - Fix call to RtlInitializeBitMap</li>
						<li>Add PCNET driver to the boot CD.</li>
						<li>Fix pointer arithmetic on FileName variable in NtCreateProcess.</li>
						<li>rosapps/tests/gethostbyname/: Simple gethostbyname test case</li>
                        </ul>
					<br />
					And my favorite:
					<ul><li>Removed even more spew.</li></ul>
                </p>
        </section>
</kc>

