Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 29th Nov 2006 20:49 UTC, submitted by frik85
ReactOS ReactOS, the open source implementation of a Windows XP/2003 compatible operating system, just published a new interview in their series of interviews with ReactOS developers. Today's interview features the main DirectX implementation developer Magnus Olsen.
Order by: Score:
Mixed feelings
by ameasures on Wed 29th Nov 2006 21:21 UTC
ameasures
Member since:
2006-01-09

These great people are working hard and doing high quality work which will hopefully bear great fruit.

On the other hand; Windows has had many hundreds of person years of effort poured into backward compatibility. Reactos just isn't really going to get that attention because it is really dull and unrewarding for volunteer developers.

So at the end Reactos will run most of the better behaved apps and some of the popular ones. It will have stable drivers for most of the better documented components and a few others. It will still run too many of the viruses and other malware from MSFT.

I salute their ambition and admire the dedication but it leaves a picture of being another minority sport for geeks. (And yes, I hope I am wrong).

Reply Score: 1

GreatLord Member since:
2006-07-26

HI

you have not follow ReactOS at all if u have, you will found it was never talk about "leaked Windows source code", it was about how some devloper use IDA and wich metof that should be use and how. And do not insult me or ReactOS. An do not belive the FUD some people trying do. It exists few people that trying take down ReactOS and it seam you are one of them. Go to our website and read before you comment anything,

Then About Frik85 he is one importen person in ReactOS and he is maintain ReactOS website and doing some project that we have plan allong time, Firk85 also worte some code for ReactOS but allmost all time going to all new cool featuer that we are planing for our website. Again you you insult one of our great devloper.

It seam you are mike_m you are using a new nick again that is low of you. and insult thing. I wich people like you reading on fact and do not come with FUD.

I normal do not comment thing on osnews, but you make me mad.

Reply Score: 5

predictor Member since:
2006-11-30

Magnus, I agree. Bad insult. ReactOS r0xr and kudos is due.

That said, you seriously need to work on your english. No insult intended ;)

Reply Score: 2

EmuandCo
Member since:
2006-07-16

Well said GreatLord, I fully agree with you.

Reply Score: 1

Reverse Engineering
by kjn9 on Thu 30th Nov 2006 16:25 UTC
kjn9
Member since:
2006-01-17

http://www.reactos.org/wiki/index.php/Audit
states:

1. A function is deemed to have been implemented in a non-clean manner if
* "unknown" arguments given values
* functions for which there is NO DOCUMENTATION
* functions with no test cases available either in ReactOS or somewhere on the internet
* functions with undocumented magic numbers
* functions with excessive gotos
NO DOCUMENTATION means it cannot be found on MSDN, Google, sysinternals, osronline, any book published by Microsoft Press or any other publication.

This may be sufficient for a first pass, but is not likely to stand up in court. If developers are accused of using disassembled Windows code, an audit should compare ReactOS code with disassembled Windows code.

ReactOS should learn from Linux - the FUD from SCO had a positive outcome, which was the documentation of the provenance of the entire Linux kernel.

Reply Score: 3

Reverse Engineering
by kjn9 on Thu 30th Nov 2006 22:08 UTC
kjn9
Member since:
2006-01-17

The modded-down posts include the text of a message purportedly from a well-known ReactOS dev to the ros-dev mailing list.

The message was at
http://www.reactos.org/archives/public/ros-dev/2006-January/007472....
but has been removed from that list. It's no surprise - if the message was not spoofed, it is so damning that it destroys the credibility of ReactOS as an original piece of work.

It's a real shame, because ReactOS is a really promising project, and along with many others I was watching the progress of the project with keen anticipation. The ReactOS team must somehow resolve the accusations of copying. Until it does, we should take the view that there's nothing to see here.

Reply Score: 3

RE: Reverse Engineering
by predictor on Fri 1st Dec 2006 09:15 UTC in reply to "Reverse Engineering"
predictor Member since:
2006-11-30

Hm, so the post was real? That sucks :-(

Reply Score: 2

RE: Reverse Engineering
by againstFUD on Fri 1st Dec 2006 17:33 UTC in reply to "Reverse Engineering"
againstFUD Member since:
2006-11-22

ReactOS devs probably heard you, because they started an audit of their code. See http://www.reactos.org/wiki/index.php/Audit for details.
According to their home page, most of the code has been audited, without finding anything suspect.

Reply Score: 0

RE[2]: Reverse Engineering
by 2th_noname on Fri 1st Dec 2006 19:09 UTC in reply to "RE: Reverse Engineering"
2th_noname Member since:
2006-11-24

ReactOS devs probably heard you, because they started an audit of their code. See http://www.reactos.org/wiki/index.php/Audit for details. According to their home page, most of the code has been audited, without finding anything suspect.

According to their 'Intellectual Property Policy', a developer which had access to the 'leaked windows source code' cannot be a developer for ReactOS (see section C on www.reactos.org/en/dev_legalreview.html ).

At least 4 developers including Alex had or have access to the 'leaked windows source code'. If the ReactOS developers don't follow theirs one policy, which value has then their statements or the audit? It's simply a fake.

And looking to the first comment from Magnus:
you have not follow ReactOS at all if u have, you will found it was never talk about "leaked Windows source code", it was about how some devloper use IDA and wich metof that should be use and how.

Magnus is one of the ReactOS developers, which has got the original 'Open Letter' with all names. Now he has some 'memory gaps'.

Reply Score: 1

Reverse Engineering
by fireball on Fri 1st Dec 2006 21:32 UTC
fireball
Member since:
2006-07-15

This message was a provocation, due to a personal conflict between one developer and another. And when that developer decided to quit, he wanted to "close the door very loudly" (this is typical for FOSS projects, unfortunately).

We decided to use this occasion and in order to be sure all our code is valid, an audit is being conducted by our own developers, and 3rd party code auditing (auditing of the whole codebase + any coming patches) will be setup when ReactOS switches to beta state.

Further details (who will conduct 3rd party audit, when and how) will be published when possible in form of news.

I kindly ask to not react to these continuos comments of, maybe, one person under different nicks spamming ReactOS news entries with these lies.

Thanks,

Reply Score: 4

RE: Reverse Engineering
by predictor on Sat 2nd Dec 2006 10:16 UTC in reply to "Reverse Engineering"
predictor Member since:
2006-11-30

IANAL, but I don't think any amount of auditing helps here. Even if the code is free from Microsoft code, the code may have been written using the illegally obtained code. And what to audit against? The MS code? But you can't possibly have that, legally(?)

I'm currently more than dubious about this project...

Reply Score: 0

RE[2]: Reverse Engineering
by fireball on Sat 2nd Dec 2006 13:58 UTC in reply to "RE: Reverse Engineering"
fireball Member since:
2006-07-15

predictor - the goal of our audit is to establish origins of the code - find authors, documentation, GPL-compatible code (on which ours is based), and of course to find errors in the code, and fix what is wrong (errors, code with unclean/unknown origins, etc).

To summarise:
1) Giving credits to those who did the work (people, orgs, etc)
2) Finding errors
3) Finding code which has no legal documentation sources behind it - such code must be either just deleted, or (if it is in a critical place), the following procedure applies: one person creates a thorough code-less documentation from the existing code, and sends it to another person (who have never seen that code), and he implements it (so-called clean implementation, tested in court - works).

Edited 2006-12-02 14:00

Reply Score: 2

RE: Reverse Engineering
by 2th_noname on Sat 2nd Dec 2006 14:17 UTC in reply to "Reverse Engineering"
2th_noname Member since:
2006-11-24

...spamming ReactOS news entries with these lies.

Aleksey, what is a lie? Was the 'Open Letter' a lie? It was written by a ReactOS developer and published to the list by another one. It was deleted from the list archive. All other mails, which refer to this mail were also deleted. If the 'Open letter' or its contents was a lie, why do I not find such statements in the following mails? I found another mail
http://www.reactos.org/archives/public/ros-dev/2006-January/007478....
which repeats some things from the 'Open Letter':
We know of four developers who have had access to leaked sources...

The 'Open Letter' was not intended for the public, but it gives an interesting view, how ReactOS is developed.

It is time, to give clarification about this letter and its contents.

Reply Score: 0

RE[2]: Reverse Engineering
by predictor on Sat 2nd Dec 2006 15:47 UTC in reply to "RE: Reverse Engineering"
predictor Member since:
2006-11-30

Infringments or not...

I guess 2-3 years from now, most folks use Vista client/Longhorn server and doesn't care about obscure XP/2003 clones anyways (since noone will have the interest), thus no reasons for MS to take action.

Or does ReactOS plan to play catchup as new Windows versions arrive?

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Reverse Engineering
by fireball on Sat 2nd Dec 2006 22:50 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Reverse Engineering"
fireball Member since:
2006-07-15

I didn't really heard *any* good opinion about Vista in general (yes, the kernel has some technologic advances certainly, from technical point of view only), and I really doubt in 2-3 years everyone is going to switch to that OS.


Many people (=="most folks" term you use) still care about and use Windows 2000, and that was 7 years ago, and they still use it.

The world needs a good opensource alternative to the Windows platform - commercial Windows and MacOSX vs. FOSS Linux (and a few minor, incompatible with everything OSes) is not the fair situation for a general user to be.

The world still has LOTS of computers, which just can't afford an overhaul of Vista, but would gladly run a FOSS OS, which is compatible with Windows applications, and compatible with device drivers that particular PC uses.

ReactOS definately does catch up, but not "infinite" way, like - "let's kick out our XYZ support because it's implemented completely differently in Vista", but reasonably. Reasonably means we can afford taking only what's best in Vista (say, some architectural decisions, or kernel features) and incorporate it into ReactOS.

This is where the beauty of opensource is!

Reply Score: 1