Hi all,
I copied it from the negotiate.c In other places like ntlm.c, its like that only. Im not the one who actually designed secur32 ;) :P If i did anything worng please correct me. bye, Vijay
On 2/15/06, Marcus Meissner marcus@jet.franken.de wrote:
On Tue, Feb 14, 2006 at 11:22:09PM +0100, Detlef Riekenberg wrote:
Am Dienstag, den 14.02.2006, 17:34 +0530 schrieb Vijay Kiran Kamuju:
Add InitializeSecurityContext for schannel in secur32.dll
+static SECURITY_STATUS SEC_ENTRY schan_InitializeSecurityContextW(
- PCredHandle phCredential, PCtxtHandle phContext, SEC_WCHAR
*pszTargetName,
- ULONG fContextReq, ULONG Reserved1, ULONG TargetDataRep,
- PSecBufferDesc pInput,ULONG Reserved2, PCtxtHandle phNewContext,
- PSecBufferDesc pOutput, ULONG *pfContextAttr, PTimeStamp ptsExpiry)
+{
I Remembered a statement from fefe (diet-libc => www.fefe.de) about "Writing Small and Fast Software":
It is still clear, what each Argument does, when you remove the Variable-Names from the Declaration?
- Yes: Efficient Design.
- No: Your Interface is to generic == bloated
static SECURITY_STATUS SEC_ENTRY schan_InitializeSecurityContextW( PCredHandle, PCtxtHandle, SEC_WCHAR *, ULONG, ULONG, ULONG, PSecBufferDesc, ULONG, PCtxtHandle, PSecBufferDesc, ULONG, PTimeStamp) {
We all should thank the People who did such a Design :-)
However, this only works in newer C compilers as far as I know... ;)
Ciao, Marcus
* Vijay Kiran Kamuju infyquest@gmail.com [15/02/06, 09:06:42]:
Hi all,
I copied it from the negotiate.c In other places like ntlm.c, its like that only. Im not the one who actually designed secur32 ;) :P If i did anything worng please correct me.
I think this was more like a general rant against the SSPI API. That is the way InitializeSecurityContext has to be called.
Cheers, Kai
Hi all
- Vijay Kiran Kamuju infyquest@gmail.com [15/02/06, 09:06:42]:
Im not the one who actually designed secur32 ;) :P
I know.
If i did anything worng please correct me.
nothing wrong. You do a great job for wine, as all Developer do.
I think this was more like a general rant against the SSPI API.
Yep.
The better Design from spoolss.dll: LPWSTR AllocSplStr(LPCWSTR);
Easy to understand, even without Parameter-Names.