Looks like the audit...

Here you can discuss ReactOS related topics.

Moderator: Moderator Team

Jawmht
Posts: 14
Joined: Tue Jul 18, 2006 1:37 am

Post by Jawmht » Tue Sep 18, 2007 4:20 am

If I understood correctly, the audit isn't over until this list is cleared.

Jay_Walker
Posts: 11
Joined: Sat Mar 24, 2007 5:20 am

Post by Jay_Walker » Tue Sep 18, 2007 9:37 pm

when the audit is completed, does that mean reactos development might speed up?

frik85
Developer
Posts: 829
Joined: Fri Nov 26, 2004 7:48 pm
Location: Austria, Europe
Contact:

Post by frik85 » Wed Sep 19, 2007 1:41 pm


HyTeK
Posts: 7
Joined: Mon Nov 27, 2006 1:12 am

Post by HyTeK » Thu Sep 20, 2007 2:56 am

Thanks for both links. I couldn't remember where I found the locked files link. ;)

I do like Bragin's thoughts on removing the bar.

So thanks for clearing it up.

Cheers.

Cristan
Posts: 170
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 11:41 am
Location: The Netherlands

Audit progress

Post by Cristan » Tue Nov 20, 2007 11:02 am

For anyone who is curious about the audit: it's 99% complete with only 15 files still locked! It's nice to see that the devs haven't forgotten the audit now it is no longer on the front page.

Ged
Developer
Posts: 925
Joined: Thu Sep 29, 2005 3:00 pm
Location: UK

Post by Ged » Wed Nov 21, 2007 1:48 am

that's wrong, ignore it.
The audit is dead, there was an announcment a while ago

Z98
Release Engineer
Posts: 3379
Joined: Tue May 02, 2006 8:16 pm
Contact:

Post by Z98 » Wed Nov 21, 2007 3:43 am

The audit isn't "dead", it's just that all of the current public accessible information on it is out of date or incorrect.

shevegen
Posts: 59
Joined: Tue Aug 15, 2006 9:25 pm

Post by shevegen » Wed Nov 21, 2007 2:46 pm

I surely don't want that and I'm certain that millions like me
don't want this either.
Yeah agreed to you. I dont like at all that companies have such a huge influence on Linux - key developers, commercial interests and so on.
You know, it gets tough to argue with gcc developers, or even harder with the diehards that maintain glibc (which is to most parts decided by one guy alone, and Red Hat has him on the payroll. I dont like people with huge egos like that glibc guy .... this is why i will never use OpenBSD btw, i dont like the lead dev there or rather, his attitude & ego.
FreeBSD and NetBSD attitude is MUCH better imho, but i am offtopic.)

Personally I am too tired of fighting people to change their thinking patterns in (and on) the linux world. I think Linux as a whole is pretty good, but there are also too many problems ... I wonder why so many devs do not acknowledge it. It has been pointed out so many times ... Acknowledging is a first step to improvement and my experience shows that people who can not acknowledge weaknesses, will never change.
(I use Linux since 2003 and tried most distributions... burned really many CDs. Gobolinux has the most beautiful design but it has some other weaknesses... SLAX is fantastic but it does not have the Gobolinux design ... Linux from Scratch is flexible and nice but it covers not enough, because everyone these days needs a GUI really, and this is covered by BLFS which is too often outdated, plus there is not really a big community within)

Anyway, this is a reason why I hope ReactOS will be a success.
Different to Linux, switching to ReactOS would be super easy for all the people I know, and after that, if ReactOS is good as a DEVELOPMENT platform, then it will become very popular among Linux people too (not
among the Linux hardcore fanatics, but they need to go to h... anyway)

The audit isn't "dead", it's just that all of the current public accessible information on it is out of date or incorrect.
I understand all the concerns for possible litigation and similar, and I believe that several parties could be interested to use every weakness in projects they dont like. But from my point of view, the whole audit is not really that interesting to watch or "know about".
I am not saying it is not important. I am just saying that I dont really care about it. I more care about progress of the ReactOS Kernel, GUI works and so on, all the things that move it closer to become "ready" :)

Cristan
Posts: 170
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 11:41 am
Location: The Netherlands

Post by Cristan » Mon Dec 24, 2007 6:47 pm

Yeah! The audit is now (rounded up) 100% because only 3 files are still locked :D

florian
Posts: 453
Joined: Tue Nov 01, 2005 2:19 am
Location: Germany

Post by florian » Tue Dec 25, 2007 9:47 pm

I am a little bit excited in the face of its result(s).

Z98
Release Engineer
Posts: 3379
Joined: Tue May 02, 2006 8:16 pm
Contact:

Post by Z98 » Wed Dec 26, 2007 3:00 am

The audit's been basically done for a while now. Most of the public information keeping track of it is either completely out of date, incomplete, or just plain wrong. If you want accurate information on it, you're going to have to ask Fireball directly.

anyedge
Posts: 16
Joined: Wed Nov 14, 2007 3:17 am

Post by anyedge » Mon Jan 14, 2008 6:55 am

I have to agree with shevegen. Gobolinux DEFINITELY has the best design out of any distro I have ever tried or read about. It's a shame they have so little support.

I know it's a ways off, but I figured I would throw out a suggestion. Lacking any programming skills and going by what I have read in this thread, it sounds like .net(mono, gnu.net, etc.) seems to be one of the best options out there for drivers/software. If that doesn't seem like a path the ReactOS team wants to take yet(once the OS is STABLE), then might I suggest a design structure similar to Gobolinx(http://www.gobolinux.org/?page=k5).

Just a thought. Thanks for your time.

Haos
Test Team
Posts: 2954
Joined: Thu Mar 22, 2007 5:42 am
Contact:

Post by Haos » Mon Jan 14, 2008 12:36 pm

This thread is not about which Linux distro is the best... but since you mentioned it... What exactly from Gobolinux design structure would you like us to adopt?

anyedge
Posts: 16
Joined: Wed Nov 14, 2007 3:17 am

Post by anyedge » Mon Jan 14, 2008 1:28 pm

That is true. I just figured I would drop in a comment since it had been brought up, but I guess I should AT LEAST make a comment about the status of the audit.

I think it is great that the audit is nearly complete. I imagine once it is officially complete, there will be some more time for the developers(whoever is working on the audit) to put elsewhere.

To answer your question Haos, I like how their system is designed so that every program has its own directory). This allows for multiple versions of the same program to exist simultaneously on the system without conflicts. With that, they have a System/Links folder where can can go to any specific program and it will show you what other programs depend on that one particular program's(and it's version).

I don't know how well that could be incorporated into the ReactOS system, seeing as how they plan on using the registry system(am I right in that?). After reading some of the conflicts that were brought up concerning drivers breaking due to different kernel/compiler versions--I thought it might be a good idea to throw that suggestion out there since shevegen brought it up.

If there is anything I am wrong on, please let me know. Thanks.

Haos
Test Team
Posts: 2954
Joined: Thu Mar 22, 2007 5:42 am
Contact:

Post by Haos » Mon Jan 14, 2008 7:27 pm

You are ofc aware of compatibility issues? It is not that Windows needs to act this way it does now, but often are the applications that force us to.

Several apps bring their own dlls, that need to be put into the system32 folder. Sometimes the new dll versions may not work well with older version apps. Still, thhis is the app issue, not the OS.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests