[ros-dev] ReactOS official compatibility target and the newbuild system
geekdundee at gmail.com
Sat Nov 13 11:09:16 UTC 2010
I am also in agreement here. And there are some things I'll admit that NT
5.2 doesn't do as well as NT 6.1 does... like for example lack of UIPI and
UAC (may a bird poo on my head such that I do not get shot for saying
that) and the ever so old GINA system for example.
And of course why not a compatibility shim? Maybe we can get the best of
both worlds: the compatibility of NT 5.2 and stability of NT 6.1 (sorry
for sounding like a CEO)
On Sat, 13 Nov 2010 22:02:42 +1100, Aleksey Bragin <aleksey at reactos.org>
> I fully agree with Ged. There is no reason to think "I won't do
> something a better way because it's implemented poorly in Win2k3, and
> ROS's official target is Win2k3". All what is said >applies mainly to
> the kernel, and ideally in future our Win32 subssytem should have shim
> support for compatibility modes, and should share as much nice
> arcitectural features from >Win7 as possible.
> Aleksey Bragin.
> From: Ged MurphySent: Saturday, November 13, 2010 1:45 PM
> To: ReactOS Development ListSubject: Re: [ros-dev] ReactOS official
> compatibility target and the newbuild system
> Wine can do that as they only provide usermode. (we actually allow
> something slightly along these lines by allowing the user to decide
> whether they're running on a server or >workstation. It's an option in
> one of the cpl applets)If you did what Wine do then the user would
> expect to interface with a Windows 7 kernel too, meaning they would try
> to install drivers for said version.
> What I meant is that you must advertise as a certain version for the
> kernel so the user knows what they're dealing with.
> However this does not stop you from adding features of the later
> kernels, nor does it stop you from adding services and APIs from later
> versions. The more you add the more likely >you are to run more modern
> In fact, my point about full win2k3 compatability being up for
> discussion at the kernel is directly related to this. I think you
> _should_ be adding features from the newer kernels where >possible. This
> will greatly reduce the amount of work required if the decision is ever
> made to leap to the NT6 kernel. however you must advertise to users that
> it's still an NT5.2 kernel >so any drivers required will load.
> 2010/11/13 Jérôme Gardou <jerome.gardou at laposte.net>
>> This policy is inconsistent with the fact that we advertise reactos as
>> win2k3 sp1. Otherwise we should as well provide a config applet to let
>> the user choose that, as wine does.
>> Le 13/11/2010 03:10, Ged Murphy a écrit :
>>> The target is only win2k3 in the kernel. Everything else is open to
>>> discussion (in fact, IMO even the kernel compatibility is open to
>>> You should, and must, provide as much functionality as possible with
>>> the latest versions of Windows.
>>> You can still provide many of the capabilities of Windows 7 using only
>>> an NT5.2 kernel. It's only the internal architecture which limits
>>> this, and in terms of many win7 >>>capabilities, this kernel isn't a
>>> limiting factor.
>>> 2010/11/13 Jérôme Gardou <jerome.gardou at laposte.net>
>>>> As our target is win2k3 sp1 compatibility,
>>> Ros-dev mailing list
>>> Ros-dev at reactos.org
>> Ros-dev mailing list
>> Ros-dev at reactos.org
> Ros-dev mailing list
> Ros-dev at reactos.org
Give a man a fish and he will eat for a day.
Teach a man to fish and he will eat for a lifetime.
Give a man religion and he will die praying for a fish.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Ros-dev