On Wed, 22 Dec 2004 13:29:35 -0800, Steven Edwards wrote:
kernel32 can't be a dependancy on ntoskrnl. We are going to need to redesign Wine if we are going to have a ntoskrnl implementation.
Why not? This isn't ReactOS, ntoskrnl is just another DLL from the SafeDisc perspective. Its implementation details shouldn't matter.
--- Mike Hearn mh@codeweavers.com wrote:
Why not? This isn't ReactOS, ntoskrnl is just another DLL from the SafeDisc perspective. Its implementation details shouldn't matter.
Because if we design things properly from the start we can share more code Wine <-> ReactOS. I am planning on making it a discussion topic at WineConf.
Thanks Steven
__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? The all-new My Yahoo! - Get yours free! http://my.yahoo.com
Because if we design things properly from the start we can share more code Wine <-> ReactOS. I am planning on making it a discussion topic at WineConf.
Well, the reactos code just has hardcoded values for PsGetVersion. I'll send another patch that adds PsGetVersion as a stub in case AJ agrees with you.
Ivan.
On Wed, 22 Dec 2004 14:12:22 -0800, Steven Edwards wrote:
Because if we design things properly from the start we can share more code Wine <-> ReactOS. I am planning on making it a discussion topic at WineConf.
Maybe. I'm not really convinced, they do totally different things. In ReactOS it has to be a kernel, in Wine it just has to be a usermode DLL that exports enough to please SafeDisc. I'd be amazed if much code sharing is possible (or even necessary, how much code does SafeDisc need?)
Maybe. I'm not really convinced, they do totally different things. In ReactOS it has to be a kernel, in Wine it just has to be a usermode DLL that exports enough to please SafeDisc. I'd be amazed if much code sharing is possible (or even necessary, how much code does SafeDisc need?)
I've just sent two patches, AJ can choose, even if I tend to agree that ntoskrnl in wine should be a usermode dll.
Ivan.
--- Mike Hearn mh@codeweavers.com wrote:
Maybe. I'm not really convinced, they do totally different things. In ReactOS it has to be a kernel, in Wine it just has to be a usermode DLL that exports enough to please SafeDisc. I'd be amazed if much code sharing is possible (or even necessary, how much code does SafeDisc need?)
SafeDisk itself really needs very little but in the future we might support more than just this one driver. I admit the amount of code we might be able to share is limited I am just suggesting that we look at it now.
Thanks Steven
__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - Helps protect you from nasty viruses. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
-
Ivan Leo Puoti -
Mike Hearn -
Steven Edwards