On 7 Sep 2002 at 18:42, Patrik Stridvall wrote:
As of Microsoft SDKs August 2002 there is a brand new header called winternl.h that contains a part of the relased information.
For me this header looks like they copyed some informations from the ntddk in hurry into one file to release it. It's definitely not covering a complete api. We should leave this informations in ntddk.h and replace the winternl.h with a file containing only #include "ntddk.h" if there is some additional information in wintenl.h it shouldn't hurt to merge it into the aprobiate headers.
The problem is that we don't (and shouldn't) install ntdef.h and ntddk.h but we should do that with wintrnl.h since it is an official header and might be used by a Winelib application.
Of course since it first appear a few weeks ago not many application are likely to use it yet...
Unfortunetly it can't be included at the same time as ntdef.h and ntddk.h because it partly defines the same information.
The problem is we need a mix between sdk and ddk headers in our include directory. We could separate it but I don't know if its worth the work.
I'm not sure either.
Now, I have the full Microsoft SDK August 2002 contains over 1000 .h files!!! But ntdef.h and ntddk.h is not among them. They doesn't seem to be offical headers or at least not any more.
They are in the ddk.
Of course, I should I guessed from the name ntddk.h, that it is from the DDK after all... :-)
So I'm a little unsure on how the headers should be organised. winternl.h contains to little information to fully replace ntdef.h/ntddk.h in fact in some cases of the enums in winternl.h is incomplete but the full enum exists in ntddk.h!!!
Yes see abouve. This file is a mess!
Agreed. :-)
Futhermore some of the functions and data structures in ntddk.h is defined in no header in the offical Microsoft SDKs!!!
DDK ;-)
While we probably should include winternl.h because its an offical header I'm a little unsure on how or whether we should use it ourselves and what we should do with ntdef.h/ntddk.h.
We don't should us it at all.
Any suggestions?
Keep cool ;-)
And do what? As I said above wintrnl.h can't include ntddk.h.
Of course we can just include it as it is and don't use it...
And do what? As I said above wintrnl.h can't include ntddk.h.
Of course we can just include it as it is and don't use it...
I would do nothing as long as nobody needs it. There are many *.h files in the SDK that we don't have and nobody missed them till today.
juergen --- juergen.schmied@debitel.net
On Sun, 8 Sep 2002, Jürgen Schmied wrote:
And do what? As I said above wintrnl.h can't include ntddk.h.
Of course we can just include it as it is and don't use it...
I would do nothing as long as nobody needs it. There are many *.h files in the SDK that we don't have and nobody missed them till today.
Missing headers are making the lives of Winelib users pretty hard: the first time they try to compile their application they get tons of errors. They first wonder what they are doing wrong, then why Wine does things differently from Windows, is there a hidden reason, and then how the hell they are going to fix the headers and their messy dependencies and whether they should not rather completely give up.
Now, I'm not saying we should spend all our time trying to make sure our headers are perfect rather than improving binary emulation. As with everything this is a question of balance.
Now concerning this header, since it's so new (and quite useless) it certainly isn't going to be a problem soon and as you pointed out we definitely have other header issues to tackle first. Still if we can find an easy nice solution, let's go for it (unfortunately that does not appear to be the case).
-- Francois Gouget fgouget@free.fr http://fgouget.free.fr/ A particle is an irreducible representation of the Poincaré Group - Eugene Wigner
-
Francois Gouget -
Jürgen Schmied -
Patrik Stridvall