[ros-dev] found it! the "dce porting" header file

Richard Campbell eek2121 at comcast.net
Sat Sep 17 22:39:55 CEST 2005


Can we like...vote to ban this dude?  he's getting annoying.

Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote:

>http://examples.oreilly.de/english_examples/dce/dce_nt/dceport.h.aug95
>
>o joy o joy.
>
>also, i found _this_!!!
>
>	http://sourceware.org/pthreads-win32/
>
>which is an implementation of pthreads on win32.
>
>_also_ i found - was reminded - by judicious searching on google, that
>of course entegrity.com have "PC-DCE" which is of course a _commercial_
>product that has done exactly the work required: making dce (1.1?
>1.2.2?) compile on Win32.
>
>including exceptions, dealing with mapping the names, blah blahhh.
>
>now.
>
>anyone got any brainy ideas on how to reverse dceport.h - in particular
>the thingy.  wotsit.  TRY/FINALLY/CATCH stuff?
>
>what i'm going to try to do is take a shot at simply compiling
>dcethreads - on win32.
>
>if that _works_ (the tests pass) it'll be great - it will prove two
>things: 1) that pthreads-win32 works 2) that the dce exception handling
>will fly, on win32, and _that_ means pretty much zero (urk! let's hope!)
>work.
>
>for now.
>
>my main goal: "GetItWorking(tm)".
>
>i couldn't care less about binary compatibility for now: i want
>"services" - i want srvsvcd, i want winregd, i want lsarpcd, i want
>samrd - all compiled, all working, using TCP/IP.
>
>i can then work on rewriting freedce's ntlmsspauth.so to be a DLL
>(starting off as my favourite - a stub with username and password of
>"test").
>
>i can then work on writing an "ncalrpc" plugin transport (which is very
>straightforward: a matter of filling in about 25 functions in a vector
>table).
>
>and also on a ncacn_np plugin transport.
>
>
>"working" means that other people will then be able to focus on issues
>like binary compatibility.
>
>guys (wine team) i have to say this.  you were utterly insane to not use
>freedce as your starting point - and i am still bewildered by you not
>even looking at its source code (which is topologically identical in
>almost all areas, to what you've created) or the opengroup's documentation.
>
>i say that with the greatest of respect for what you've achieved without
>freedce.
>
>l.
>
>  
>



More information about the Ros-dev mailing list