Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 26th Jan 2006 18:08 UTC, submitted by Sebastian Schildt
ReactOS People visiting the ReactOS website today were in for a shock. "Accusations have been made by some of ReactOS' own developers about certain parts of ReactOS code. The project is suspending development pending legal council. The project will resume once the issue has been rectified." I could not find any more information, as the links to the mailinglist archives are dead.
Order by: Score:
MS ?
by jeanmarc on Thu 26th Jan 2006 18:20 UTC
jeanmarc
Member since:
2005-07-06

Does the accusations have link with Microsoft reclamation ?

Reply Score: 1

Dissapointing
by robojerk on Thu 26th Jan 2006 18:21 UTC
robojerk
Member since:
2006-01-10

I hope this doesn't mean death for the project. I was really looking forward to a stable release.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Disappointing
by glarepate on Fri 27th Jan 2006 20:50 UTC in reply to "Dissapointing"
glarepate Member since:
2006-01-04

There is new info available on the status of the project in the form of a news release at the site. You may find it interesting and possibly reassuring.

http://www.reactos.org/xhtml/en/news_page_14.html

Reply Score: 1

OMFG
by baldomero on Thu 26th Jan 2006 18:23 UTC
baldomero
Member since:
2005-07-26

These are bad news ;)

This is one of the projects that I look more frequently, and I expected too much from it.

I read on the forums, before they were suspended too, that devs had stopped working on ROS and had started to look at code to find that code, and the developer that wrote it.

I hope this suspended state of the project is due to the searching and replacing of the code, so they can start coding again...

Reply Score: 2

guess
by nivenh on Thu 26th Jan 2006 18:33 UTC
nivenh
Member since:
2005-07-06

I don't see on their site what the accusations are, but i suspect it has something to do with copy/pasted code from Microsoft's headers.

Reply Score: 1

Please!
by r_a_trip on Thu 26th Jan 2006 18:33 UTC
r_a_trip
Member since:
2005-07-06

Let it not be about the leaked Windows 2000 code. This project is too promising to be killed by unprofessional tainting.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Please!
by devurandom on Thu 26th Jan 2006 18:47 UTC in reply to "Please!"
devurandom Member since:
2005-07-06

If the problem is tainting, well, I think they could just rewrite the offending parts. Just like BSD did.

I also hope they reopen the project soon. ;)

Reply Score: 1

Oh, geez!
by betson on Thu 26th Jan 2006 18:36 UTC
betson
Member since:
2005-12-17

This was a really great project. Hopefully, it still is.

I wish the developers the best of luck in rooting out the problem and rectifying the situation as quickly as possible.

They've made some really great leaps forward!

Reply Score: 1

WTF ?
by agentj on Thu 26th Jan 2006 18:54 UTC
agentj
Member since:
2005-08-19

Does anyone have downloadable sources + binaries ? Why the hell did they disable download page, many people downloaded it so far, so what's the point ?

Reply Score: 1

Relax
by johndaly on Thu 26th Jan 2006 18:55 UTC
johndaly
Member since:
2006-01-16

The issue is about less then 50 lines of asm in one or two files that are very similar to the related disassembled windows code, the developer that submitted them swears there is no other way to do it, others doubt it. The developer that submitted it also admits to disassembling relevant Windows code to look at the asm.
The argument is about what constitutes valid reverse engineering and what code theft, the main problem before this was taken of the public mailing list was policy, since most developers believe that even if the code was the only valid way to go, the way it was derived violates ReactOS policy and needs to be removed, and so on.

In short, it's not the end of the world or ReactOS, but there probably will be developer fallout.

Reply Score: 5

From the ML
by jjezabek on Thu 26th Jan 2006 19:01 UTC
jjezabek
Member since:
2005-08-07

"Rest assured that the project will live on. Every developer I have
spoken with wants the project to survive and be a success. In the
meantime we are filtering email discussion on this matter because we
do not want rumor and hearsay to be spread."

Thanks Thom...

EDIT: The author of the above text is Steven Edwards, ReactOS's project leader.

Edited 2006-01-26 19:04

Reply Score: 3

RE: From the ML
by Thom_Holwerda on Thu 26th Jan 2006 19:45 UTC in reply to "From the ML"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

"In the
meantime we are filtering email discussion on this matter because we
do not want rumor and hearsay to be spread."

Thanks Thom...


Yeah sure, blame it on me... As if I put that big notice on top of their front page. As if I took down their mailinglists when I tried to check the opinions of the people involved. As if I took down the forums when I tried to get the opinions of the ones involved [1].

Get real. They made a fcuk up, it's their fault, not mine.

Reply Score: 5

RE[2]: From the ML
by proftv on Thu 26th Jan 2006 19:58 UTC in reply to "RE: From the ML"
proftv Member since:
2006-01-01

Woah, you're being a little apprehensive Thom. I'm sure that wasn't directed at you personally. Anyway, this is just a bump in the road and I'm sure once they get everything straightened out they'll be right back to coding. They are just being very careful to cover they're asses.

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: From the ML
by jjezabek on Thu 26th Jan 2006 20:07 UTC in reply to "RE: From the ML"
jjezabek Member since:
2005-08-07

Yeah sure, blame it on me... As if I put that big notice on top of their front page. As if I took down their mailinglists when I tried to check the opinions of the people involved. As if I took down the forums when I tried to get the opinions of the ones involved [1].

Get real. They made a fcuk up, it's their fault, not mine.


OK, that's fine, you're a journalist, that's your job/hobby/whatever. You aren't obliged to act for the good of a project.
Two more questions: what's their fault? How did they fcuk up? Have they stolen or reverse-engineered your code? Or did you sign a contract with them, or at least donated some money?
And what's the purpose of writing 'fcuk'? It's interesting to see an administrator working around bad language filters...

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: From the ML
by Thom_Holwerda on Thu 26th Jan 2006 20:22 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: From the ML"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

Two more questions: what's their fault? How did they fcuk up? Have they stolen or reverse-engineered your code? Or did you sign a contract with them, or at least donated some money?

They made an error in putting up big signs on their website, while on the other hand they say they didn't want this to get out-- and the only way to know this, was by reading their m-l... Which they took down. So how was I supposed to know? THAT is their error.

And what's the purpose of writing 'fcuk'? It's interesting to see an administrator working around bad language filters...

I'm not working around filters. I write it that way because that's they way I write it on my personal blog, IM, emails, etc. (for some odd reason), and as such it has become a habit.

Reply Score: 5

RE[4]: From the ML
by alcibiades on Thu 26th Jan 2006 20:51 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: From the ML"
alcibiades Member since:
2005-10-12

There is nothing irresponsible in linking to the site and giving the news. Once it has been put up on the site, its in the public domain. The lesson for the team is, give enough information at the time of the announcement, on the site. What has been posted here about the 50 lines of code would have been fine.

They come out of it quite well in terms of managing the issue, but maybe could have handled the initial release of the information a bit better by being more specific. The other thing that usually helps is to have a date when you will release a further bulletin - and then always release that bulletin on that date, even if it is only to say, nothing more to report until x.

Anyway, I'm sure everyone wishes them well.

Reply Score: 4

RE[5]: From the ML
by Nathan O. on Fri 27th Jan 2006 00:12 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: From the ML"
Nathan O. Member since:
2005-08-11

I definitely agree that if they didn't want people to spread rumors, they could have been less conspicuous.

What's funny, though, is Thom's reaction to two simple words. Do you flip out when people tell you to drive safely, or to have a good day?

Funny like eating-a-hippie funny.

I'M NOT FLIPPING OUT!!!!!

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: From the ML
by Googlesaurus on Thu 26th Jan 2006 20:40 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: From the ML"
Googlesaurus Member since:
2005-10-19

Certainly appears they found something pretty damning, or they wouldn't have gone public with the story, temporarily shuttered the project, and removed downloads. Needless to say they are concerned about their own actions and possible liability.

This speaks well for the integrity and honesty of the developers working on this project. Better to correct issues, before they become the target of lawsuits. They will be back.......

Reply Score: 2

Well...
by Sphinx on Thu 26th Jan 2006 19:01 UTC
Sphinx
Member since:
2005-07-09

Now would be a good time to confess.

Reply Score: 1

wow
by Zedicus on Thu 26th Jan 2006 19:31 UTC
Zedicus
Member since:
2005-12-05

yeah they need to hav as clean a slate as possible or there will b no chance at winning all the lawsuits MS comes up with.... asembly is hard but thas not the way to go about finding answers, maybe seek help from the OSS comunity??

Reply Score: 1

JoeBuck
Member since:
2006-01-11

... that if there is tainted code, you remove it, no matter how painful that is. You can't put the project at legal risk.

Reply Score: 2

Welcome to the patent hell
by Joe User on Thu 26th Jan 2006 19:52 UTC
Joe User
Member since:
2005-06-29

This is how things work in the US.

Will WINE and crossover office be next?

Reply Score: 1

RE: Welcome to the patent hell
by tomcat on Thu 26th Jan 2006 20:12 UTC in reply to "Welcome to the patent hell"
tomcat Member since:
2006-01-06

This has nothing to do with patents. It has to do with copyright.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Welcome to the patent hell
by AdamW on Thu 26th Jan 2006 20:13 UTC in reply to "Welcome to the patent hell"
AdamW Member since:
2005-07-06

Put DOWN the crack pipe. This has nothing at all to do with patents.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Welcome to the patent hell
by johndaly on Thu 26th Jan 2006 21:05 UTC in reply to "Welcome to the patent hell"
johndaly Member since:
2006-01-16

The breach was Kernel level, Wine is a lot higher on up, so No this should not affect Wine or Crossover. We should just let it blow over, not blow it up. The issue is more what constitutes correct reverse engineering and how to enforce ReactOS policy, if there weren't problems with some developers not getting along the issue would have long been resolved.

The code issue is minor, very very minor, it's the people issue that needs working out. At the moment Iíd be more concerned about a NetBSD/OpenBSD type split then anything else.

Edited 2006-01-26 21:13

Reply Score: 2

One word...
by witukind on Thu 26th Jan 2006 19:54 UTC
witukind
Member since:
2006-01-26

...Paparazzi

Reply Score: 0

More information will be available soon.
by yawntoo on Thu 26th Jan 2006 20:04 UTC
yawntoo
Member since:
2006-01-04

Just to clear things up a bit.

1) This has nothing to do with Wine. The issues that concern the developers at the moment reside in the kernel. Wine does not use the Reactos Kernel.

2) The project will not end. This is simply a bit of house cleaning by the ROS developers to make sure that thier code base is clean.

3) ROS developers are in a meeting right now to decide on future actions. I'm sure that they will release an announcement when the meeting is over.

Reply Score: 4

RE: Welcome to the patent hell
by gedmurphy on Thu 26th Jan 2006 21:21 UTC
gedmurphy
Member since:
2005-12-23

johndaly. You're making many comments which are based on guess work.

Everyone should wait until the press release is available before speculating.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Welcome to the patent hell
by johndaly on Thu 26th Jan 2006 21:50 UTC in reply to "RE: Welcome to the patent hell"
johndaly Member since:
2006-01-16

Guesswork? No, I'm on the mailing list (as a lurker) and have fallowed the project for more then 5 years. I do not guess, there are two camps right now one that condones the act, believing it to be a valid form of reverse engineering and another condemning the act, believing it to be wrong on multiple levels. The breach is small, that much was clear form the mailing list and if the offending developer can be believed (and at the moment I do believe him on this) he produced most of it before he disassembled the corresponding windows section.

The code in question is the fast call code, and the developer claims that part of it is form Linux. What I would be interested in code wise is a comparison of the ReactOS code with the Linux code, that would show a few things a) are they related as claimed by the developer and b) is there an alternative implementation. Neither have been proven before the discussion went of the mailing list. The problem is that the ReactOS developers don't have the expertise for this. The code is rather esoteric and in asm, So if anybody has the expertise here I would appreciate your opinion.

I claimed the issue to be more a people issue, and I stand by that. The testing coordinator left the project over this (or so it appears from timing and argumentation previously to leaving) the core and old ReactOS developers are all on the clean room track but the project did accumulate lots of people in the last year or so. All we can do about the people issue is let it blow over.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Welcome to the patent hell
by gedmurphy on Thu 26th Jan 2006 21:56 UTC
gedmurphy
Member since:
2005-12-23

ok, your going off the mailing list, which is also an incorrect source of information.

No one besides the developers know the extent of what is happening.

We will release a statement when a resolution has been reached. Shouldn't be too long now ;)

Reply Score: 2

johndaly Member since:
2006-01-16

Know is an abstract idea (sorry you got me on my philosophical foot today) how do you know? Fact is the basis for knowledge (knowing) and how can fact exist for anything but the most basic of ideas. This is helium, that is iron. In anything more complicated personality and opinion figures in. Your hair looks like crap today, you have a nice car.
I will wait for a statement, but it won't change my state of knowing. If the person that supposedly caused the taint did his act out of ignorance and insists he did no wrong what is there to know? It's a people issue and it blows over, always. If you have a fight with another person you either get back together or not.

Reply Score: 1

off the mailing list
by mikesum32 on Thu 26th Jan 2006 22:30 UTC
mikesum32
Member since:
2005-10-22

WTF?

You shouldn't go around deleting people from the mailing list because they told your litte secret.

Mailing lists are public in there nature.

Reply Score: 1

just ignore my last post
by mikesum32 on Thu 26th Jan 2006 22:36 UTC in reply to "off the mailing list"
mikesum32 Member since:
2005-10-22

My fault. I read your as "you're."

"going off" = "going by" not you're going off = being deleted

Just ignore that last post

Reply Score: 1

:)
by gedmurphy on Thu 26th Jan 2006 22:40 UTC
gedmurphy
Member since:
2005-12-23

lol, of course not, that would be obsurd.

my posts are meant as clarification, they aren't meant in and aggressive manner.

I'll use more smilies ;)

Reply Score: 1

What's a "fast call"?
by Quietleaf on Thu 26th Jan 2006 22:42 UTC
Quietleaf
Member since:
2005-11-11

I've done a lot of x86 assembly programming in my day, but I'm wondering what "fast call" means. To me a call is CALL <proc> (or INT xx, which is anything but fast, and you wouldn't want to do that in Windows -- grin). I understand the idea of protected-mode calls that involve the CPU performing a lookup into the global and/or local descriptor tables (and I've done some neat things with them back in the old EMM386.EXE days). Does the fast call concept have to do with this?

Reply Score: 1

RE: What's a "fast call"?
by agentj on Fri 27th Jan 2006 11:03 UTC in reply to "What's a "fast call"?"
agentj Member since:
2005-08-19

It's probably function call with some of arguments put in the CPU registers instead of stack.

Reply Score: 1

What's a "fast call"?
by gedmurphy on Thu 26th Jan 2006 22:49 UTC
gedmurphy
Member since:
2005-12-23

It's in reference to fastcall entry point code

Reply Score: 1

Still curious
by Quietleaf on Thu 26th Jan 2006 23:08 UTC
Quietleaf
Member since:
2005-11-11

This has piqued my curiosity. I did some Yahoo! searching and found this article from 2001. Is this closer to the issue?

http://www.informit.com/articles/article.asp?p=22445&redir=1

Reply Score: 1

RE: Still curious
by GvG_ on Thu 26th Jan 2006 23:38 UTC in reply to "Still curious"
GvG_ Member since:
2005-07-07

Normally you enter the kernel by executing an INT. Newer (actually, non-ancient) processors have a special instruction, SYSENTER, which make the transition to kernelmode much faster. The "fastcall" stuff refers to the handling of this SYSENTER instructions.

Reply Score: 1

Smoked idea... :P
by Marco Ravich on Thu 26th Jan 2006 23:17 UTC
Marco Ravich
Member since:
2006-01-01

Why not move to OS/2 ?
Wanna remember all of you that today Windows comes from NT that was something a "backdoor into IBM's a$$".
Many petitions (mine too) and a little little baby: os3ree (www.osfree.org)

Microsoft has just released their code, so ReactOS goal now sounds like "reinventing the weel".

If i remember well, IBM can't relese 'some parts of the code' so: why don't we 'revive the phoenix' ?

(I think that IBM would be proud to 'open a backdoor' into a MicroSoft "world"...)

Edited 2006-01-26 23:20

Reply Score: 1

RE: Smoked idea... :P
by BluenoseJake on Fri 27th Jan 2006 17:31 UTC in reply to "Smoked idea... :P"
BluenoseJake Member since:
2005-08-11

MS did not release thier code to the average OSS programmer, they released to people willing/able to pay thier fees, and you know that won't be cheap.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Smoked idea... :P
by rcsteiner on Fri 27th Jan 2006 19:02 UTC in reply to "Smoked idea... :P"
rcsteiner Member since:
2005-07-12

Moving to wouldn't gain you much if your focus is to reproduce NT internals or the Win32 API, since OS/2 and NT diverged almost completely around 1992 (IBM wrote its own 32-bit OS/2 kernel, and NT was made more VMS-like by Cutler and associates when MS hired them from DEC).

Reply Score: 1

ms did this?
by viator on Fri 27th Jan 2006 00:02 UTC
viator
Member since:
2005-10-11

When i first read this on the ROS forums this is what i said.

Ms could havepaid a developer just to say tho code is in there

Ms could pay a developer to actually put the code in there

Ms probably pays devs to take their time coding so that by time a stable release is out it will be irrelavant compared to the new ms os ie vista 64bit or a newer os

Ms Probably pays devs not to code at all one way todo so is to give them jobs....

think about it would MS allow a product to become fast secure and stable that will take billions of dollars from their pockets i highly doubt it Look at what theyre doing to linux over the years and ROS is a DIRECT competitor so they will do every underhanded thing they can. Call this a conspiracy theory or whatever you like but while you do look at ms track record look at the holloween documents etc...

Reply Score: 1

Linux sysenter code
by saxiyn on Fri 27th Jan 2006 00:41 UTC
saxiyn
Member since:
2005-07-08

For anyone curious, Linux code for system call on x86 using sysenter instruction is here:

http://lxr.linux.no/source/arch/i386/kernel/vsyscall-sysenter.S

Reply Score: 1

On their blog.
by Eric Martin on Fri 27th Jan 2006 01:37 UTC
Eric Martin
Member since:
2005-11-11
On their blog.
by Valhalla on Fri 27th Jan 2006 02:08 UTC
Valhalla
Member since:
2006-01-24

good, looks like reactos is in no danger, though this will likely make it progress slower for quite some time.

Reply Score: 1