Steam On Linux Use Ticked Higher In May, 25% Of Linux Gamers Are Using The Steam Deck

[oiaohm]

oiaohm, is there anything to back it up? You've already shat the bed with "14000 hypervisors for CSGO", now this? I asked you twice to provide citations authored by Valve, you said "I Googled up incorrectly"? Are you serious? Is this a kindergarten?

That is not what I said at all. Lets stop at this point. Quote my lines of text you have based this on and read them this time. You asked for CSGO I said VAC. I never said the answer could be found by google.

"VAC documents at last count 14000 hypervisors they have to check for that cheaters have made all have windows claiming secureboot is enabled. Cheat developers are very active people."

Read this line carefully. Lets say I said "clamav documents x number of a particular type of virus where would you look for the count the signature files right" Yes googling for answer to clamav document x numbers of something would also be a dead end. VAC the program is really a form of locally running anti-virus style program looking for cheats.

Basically you attempted to google something that never had a google answer.

Also, the Windows source code is not licenced out to governments and other parties. It's just shared under a strict NDA: "for reference (e.g. when developing complementary systems), for review and auditing from a security perspective (mostly wanted by some large corporations and governments), and for development (academic institutions, OEMs, individual developers)". More info here: "Source-code modification or distribution is not allowed under these Shared Source programs."

is what you wrote 100 percent correct? sorry its not depends on how much of a weasel you are with legalities..

What license do you need for windows 12 IoT core for embedded usage that need customization to run on platform like you use todo with CE and you email [email protected] to ask about that problem what do you think the answer is?
https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/shar...g-program.aspx << Its this one. The one that allows modification.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_IoT

Yes windows Iot replaced "Windows Embedded Compact" and Microsoft has not updated the license agreement to reflect the change on the website when you come to in fact signing that agreement with microsoft that document is updated. Yes funny that you click on the windows embedded compact link in the contract and today you end up at bing with no results.
Windows IoT core does not have the win32 userspace but you have the ntdll and the core OS kernel. Yes Windows IOT has the same kernel core as your desktop versions.

There is more shared source license agreements than what are documented on the Microsoft website and Microsoft has not kept their shared source public pages 100 percent up to-date.

How would anti-cheat company get able to use a CE License to work on IoT. Simple looking at the possibility of making own game console using windows as core as excuse of course that allows them to submit patches up stream. Of course with the CE license they can submit changes upstream to Microsoft for possible include in new version of windows. Lets just say anti-cheat companies are not the only ones using this licensing loop hole.

err:ntdll:RtlpWaitForCriticalSection <<avis you were only looking at wine. This error shows up under windows event logs when programs don't work under Windows as well.

Its a generic error it can be drivers it can be software to software. You get that error under windows or wine lots of debugging ahead. The Hundreds of bugs reports in wine is not strange with this error.
https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/wi...tion-time-outs That error is a trap in the windows nt design to go off when there is possible a dead lock due to waiting on a critical section for too long.

err:ntdll:RtlpWaitForCriticalSection with timeout after it means nothing that is problem because this has follows windows nt-12 kernel behavior exactly as Microsoft has defined to raise this error. People ask how to fix this. Something has gone wrong before you got to err:ntdll:RtlpWaitForCriticalSection to cause a critical section not to be acquirable in a suitable amount of time because the critical section lock has not been released.

Yes critical section timeout are part of windows design. Microsoft documents how to debug RtlpWaitForCriticalSection time outs under driver section of windows documentation even that you can have problem happen software to software.

err:ntdll:RtlpWaitForCriticalSection with timeout after it=critical-section-time-outs they are the same thing. Wine calls it one thing and windows in the eventlog calls it a critical section time out. Programs operating correctly critical section time outs should not be happening but they are in Windows NT-12 as safe guard against dead lock..

Notice how you said it had nothing do with drivers. Problem is how to debug err:ntdll:RtlpWaitForCriticalSection/critical-section-time-outs is only in the driver section of the Microsoft documentation even that problem just need two userspace threads using a(as in single) critical section and one not releasing as it should.

Get it yet err:ntdll:RtlpWaitForCriticalSection under wine or "critical section time outs" appearing in windows event logs contains nothing useful for how you end up at this point. All it tells you is that you have a deadlock event with a critical section that been caused by something that happened before that point. Neither message is a bug.

It is one of the issues I do have with wine. Messages that are absolutely correct behavior like the err:ntdll:RtlpWaitForCriticalSection timeout messages are mixed with err messages of known broken behavior.

Yes by windows NT design you with issues you should have a number of err:ntdll:RtlpWaitForCriticalSection/critical-section-time-outs as part of normal system operations. This is the fun part lot windows systems you check eventlog and you see critical section timeout messages and the computer appears to be operating normally.

Please note issues coming from ntdll with windows the solution more often than not will be in the driver documentation not the win32/win64 documentation because this is windows nt native problem. Native problems fall under drivers by NT design(this is Microsoft windows NT design for you sometimes it head scratching). This is why thinking ntdll is part of win32 is a problem causes you to look wrong place in Microsoft documentation for solutions.

err:ntdll:RtlpWaitForCriticalSection/critical-section-time-outs under wine/windows is a message you can get when program is working perfectly as expected. Debugging is required to work out if this is harmless normal behavior caused by holding critical sections little too long or deadlock. Yes NT design this message appears after the deadlock has possible been happening for 60 seconds. Lot of stuff can happen in 60 seconds.

https://www.howtogeek.com/658194/windows-10s-new-update-is-deleting-peoples-files-again/

Microsoft has had a string of updates that nuked peoples files.

[avis]

The source code of Windows is licensed out to governments and other parties who are able to submit corrections back to Microsoft.

oiaohm, is there anything to back it up? You've already shat the bed with "14000 hypervisors for CSGO", now this? I asked you twice to provide citations authored by Valve, you said "I Googled up incorrectly"? Are you serious? Is this a kindergarten?

Also, the Windows source code is not licenced out to governments and other parties. It's just shared under a strict NDA: "for reference (e.g. when developing complementary systems), for review and auditing from a security perspective (mostly wanted by some large corporations and governments), and for development (academic institutions, OEMs, individual developers)". More info here: "Source-code modification or distribution is not allowed under these Shared Source programs."

I know for a fucking fact that there are people in Microsoft who document everything in regard to their APIs including Win32. I can dig up a ton of posts on blogs.microsoft.com which is an official resource unlike your unsubstantiated statements. There are multiple posts made my Microsoft employees on Twitter and news.ycombinator.com as well.

Sorry, I'm 100% sure you've got nothing and you're just blatantly making things up just like Mr. Weasel who keeps talking about completely tangential things and claims those things are right. They are. They just have zero relationship to what I said.

<offtopic>I say sugar is sweet which is backed up by everything. Mr. Weasel intervenes, screams, swears, "But but but fucking sugar is mostly made of sugar beet which is often fucking acid!!!" (mimicking the style of his posts where he couldn't stop swearing as if it made him right - no, if anything it made him look pathetic and horrible. When you're right, you simply lay out facts to prove your PoV. The problem is he chose the PoV that was again 100% tangential to what I said).</offtopic>

Microsoft major update screw ups like triggering massive self deletes of file systems

Show me screws up in relation to their APIs for Christ's sake. You continue to make stuff up.

Sometimes I respect you for your deep knowledge but in this topic you continue to make statement after statement without a single proof or citation. There's no need to be a buffoon. Mr. Weasel does it so much better.

err:ntdll:RtlpWaitForCriticalSection << attempting to make me laugh. That not win32

This has nothing to do with drivers. Wine barely has any. Please stop. It's not even funny any more. In fact if you Google this error up, actually you don't need to, Wine bugzilla literally has over a hundred open bug reports and many hundreds closed, you'll barely find a single post in relation to "drivers".

It's an issue with proper Win32 emulation under Wine which is "fucking nothing" according to Mr. Weasel and "it just works". Wine does nothing. The kernel doesn't execute anything. Yeah, right.

Unlike you, I've been closely following Wine development for over 25 years now. I'm a very active bug reporter as well. 308 filed bug reports, 58 of them are still open. But of course, I'm a "fucking idiot" as Mr. Weasel said.

You and Weasel put yourself over me. That's not what intelligent people do or even think about.

Don't bother posting a rebuttal or a reply unless you have solid sources to back it up. Not hearsay, not random Internet posts.

I loved your previous posts in regard to X.org/Wayland/etc when you were able to dig up the facts that I'd never known about. Unfortunately in this discussion you don't dig up stuff, you make it up.

Have a nice day.

[ipkpjersi]

[insert comment about never seeing the survey on linux]

I just got the survey last week, it does happen lol

[oiaohm]

Microsoft is the only entity in this universe that

• Develops Win32 API
• Has all the documentation for Win32 API
• Knows all the quirks of Win32 API calls (and there are a ton of them and those are often not publicly documented)
• Knows how Win32 API calls must interact with the system (that's also too often not documented)
• Knows all the hidden Win32 API calls (game developers and specially anticheat applications love to use them for some reasons)

There is a few problems here. Microsoft is not the only party that develops Win32/Win64. The source code of Windows is licensed out to governments and other parties who are able to submit corrections back to Microsoft. So not everything in Win32 is Microsoft idea. This leads to the next problem. Microsoft does not have all the documentation about win32 API because they did not develop everything.

avis did not out cross you mind that anti-cheat developers have access to windows source code and submit alterations upstream into Windows. There is a reason why anticheat developers know about lots of not well documented functions because they wrote them.

The reality is there no entity in the universe that has the following.
1) all the documentation of the Win32 API
2) Knows all the quirks of Win32 API
3)Knows all the hidden API calls fully.
4)Knows how Win32 API must interact with the system.
This does explain some of Microsoft major update screw ups like triggering massive self deletes of file systems.

Microsoft is the maintainer and the largest developer of Windows but they are not the only developer. The license of windows source code means you can built testing build but you cannot production use it or sell it if you are not Microsoft.

avis sorry you just presumed a stack of things that are not fact.

err:ntdll:RtlpWaitForCriticalSection << attempting to make me laugh. That not win32.

https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows-hardware/drivers/debugger/critical-section-time-outs

That a driver issue that can happen under windows. Not all anti-cheat drivers like being run by winedevice in userspace. Also the RtlpWaitForCriticalSection is what you see a lot when new version of MS windows releases and someone tries running a game that anticheat has not updated to support that version of Windows.

Sorry undefined behavior that not "err:ntdll:RtlpWaitForCriticalSection" that err is exactly to windows documentation behavior with wine. Its not exactly helpful error with windows or wine as both windows and wine equals lot of debugging to try to work out what gone wrong.

[qarium]

qarium
It's astonishing how you've been lying about me and defaming me non-stop for a couple of years now. A person who's "extrem Hostility agaist the Open-Source community" (even heard of spell checking?) has done 1000 times more for Linux and Open Source that you'll ever do.

you have a lot of logical fallacies here in your text.
you claim i "lie" but i am known to be a perfectly honest and truth loving person and i only did write what i think is the truth.
this is by definition not a lie. maybe i do not know the truth and maybe what i said is not the truth but this is by definition not a lie because i am myself i believe that it is the truth. see thats logic at its best and you do not unterstand any logic.
I think most of the people in this forum believe that you can not be defamed because you do this to yourself.

"even heard of spell checking?"
well if thats your argument? i have Dyslexia and i always use spell checking does not cut it for you. thats not a secret.

"has done 1000 times more for Linux and Open Source that you'll ever do."

I doubt that... you always claim you did bugreports and this makes you a holy saint but if you search for my nicknames i also did do bugreports and helped to solve some of them. i do have life-time phoronix premium and i did send additional to that a lot of money to phoronix.com and also i do many stuff to support open-source in general.

"A person who's "extrem Hostility agaist the Open-Source community" (even heard of spell checking?) has done 1000 times more for Linux and Open Source that you'll ever do."

its a logical fallacy you claim you can not be hostil agaist the opensource community because you do "1000 times more" than me for opensource... well thats a logical fallancy because you are the absolut proof that this is possible.
you can life a open hostility agaist opensource and also do a lot for opensource.
nothing could proof that this both charateristics of you can not exist at the same time.

Also, would be great if you showed a single actual community project where I've been caught being "hostile". No, the Phoronix comments section is not a "community" - it's a cesspool of hatred towards everything that's not open source. Most people here openly hate Microsoft and Windows. Yet here we are discussing ways to run Windows software under Linux. Don't you think it's a little bit insincere maybe? No?

Yes i do hate Microsoft and Windows and i also claim it is the Civil Duty of any human to do so. because what they did to humanity in the past.

and i want microsoft to "die" and you claim to run windows software under linux contradicts this thats wrong microsoft and windows will only "die" if opensource/linux becomes better at running windows software than windows does this will make sure windows dies and microsoft dies.

"Don't you think it's a little bit insincere maybe? No?"

absolutly not. if opensource and linux does not becomes better at running windows apps than windows itself then microsoft and windows will never die and they deserve to die because of this linux needs to run windows software better than microsoft windows.

"the Phoronix comments section is not a "community" - it's a cesspool of hatred towards everything that's not open source"

this is a very good thing. i support this.

[Weasel]

A metric ton of Win32 API calls have no direct alternatives in POSIX and Linux specific syscalls (though Wine strives to be POSIX compatible). I'd even venture to say the vast majority of them and Wine does a metric ton of work to make those calls run in Linux. If that's not emulation/translation/whatever, then yes, I'm a fucking moron. You've won the argument. Take a cookie and be happy.

"A metric ton" of Win32 API calls have no need to ever interact with the unix system in the first place. They're fully implemented by Wine in the fucking DLL directly. How many times must I say this?

Excluding drivers (which are kernel-mode on Windows as well, so they're special in Wine also), the DLLs that have unixlib components are about a dozen. All others are pure DLL files just like on Windows.

Here's an example: XAudio, which is implemented using PE FAudio on Wine (which btw is a static library and fully userspace with no Unix interaction), has no unix components or calls to unix libraries. Well, unix libraries will still be involved lower level when it calls into the APIs that use the driver (like mmdevapi), but that's standard stuff: software is built on layers. Same on Windows.

All the XAudio API is implemented in pure DLL files (many of them, versioned, to match Windows' model). It's just a fucking library, like any Linux library.

In fact, kernel32 or even kernelbase on Windows are not special, they're just libraries. Standard libraries. The magic happens down the layers, deeper, into ntdll. That's where the syscalls happen. kernel32 is just a "compatibility" library built on top of lower level library like ntdll. This is on Windows. And Wine follows this model as well.

Likewise DXVK is not magic. It translates D3D11 into Vulkan. But by itself, it's a pure DLL file. It works on Windows if you want to, since Windows supports Vulkan too. The "non-native" part happens in the Vulkan driver, which is much lower level than DXVK.

Microsoft already implement DirectDraw on top of newer D3D. I expect Microsoft to implement D3D11 on top of D3D12 in the far future, just for compatibility, when D3D11 drivers will be gone. It's the same with DXVK. It's not any less "native".

WTF is your problem?

I've never meant CPU emulation. The hell are you dragging this completely unrelated point to our argument for the second time now?? I perfectly know what [CPU] "emulation" is, and we're not dealing with it here. It's not limited to CPU translation either, in fact CPU emulation is exceedingly rare because it's super ineffective. What people usually mean by emulation is normally OS emulation within the same CPU uArch, aka ISA (whoa, did you know I know such words?) - VirtualBox, kvm, VMWare WS/ESXi, etc. But Win32 API is completely alien to Linux and forever will be. No amount of weaseling is going to change it.

Remember how you claimed that Direct3D is more native (no, you just said "it is native") to Linux than it is to Windows. Another piece of pristine baloney. I wonder why DXVK is ~100KLOC if Direct3D in Linux is so fucking native.

Wine is over SIX MILLION lines of code, that's how Win32 API is native to Linux. Just don't tell this to Alexandre Julliard - he'll have a heart attack.

Linux userland libraries are native to you, right? Those are millions of lines of code too, or maybe even more, inside of those libraries. Why is Wine less native?

Does that make them more native than Wine? Why?

Wine is mostly a collection of compatibility libraries, a loader for the libraries' format (PE), and some non-native parts, but those are few as I said. That's why you can fucking do 32-on-64 these days, because the amount of modules that need to care about this is in the few tens at most, while it has hundreds otherwise. Those 32-bit DLLs you built never interact with any 64-bit shit. All of their fucking implementation is inside of themselves.


Have you looked at a "native" game on Linux? The executable is like 60 MB. Even on Windows. Can you imagine how much code that is? And you think Wine has a lot of code? Amount of code has nothing to do with it being native or not. For you, if it doesn't use standard Linux libraries, it's not "native", whatever the fuck that means.

So games are not native on Windows either, considering they ship tens of DLLs and libraries and are insanely large executables!!! That means they ship a lot of "non native" code and don't use the Windows API enough!!! Case closed.

[avis]

Aren't you exhausted from playing with the terms?

Microsoft is the only entity in this universe that

• Develops Win32 API
• Has all the documentation for Win32 API
• Knows all the quirks of Win32 API calls (and there are a ton of them and those are often not publicly documented)
• Knows how Win32 API calls must interact with the system (that's also too often not documented)
• Knows all the hidden Win32 API calls (game developers and specially anticheat applications love to use them for some reasons)

No one bloody cares if there are "redirections", "abstraction layers", etc. etc. etc. I was not talking about that for Christ's sake! You seem to love to see what you want and rush to argue with that like there's no tomorrow.

Linux/POSIX:

• Wine is a reverse engineering project for Win32 based on public documentation with all the issues stated above.
• Wine tries to emulate/translate/map (whatever you wanna call it) Win32 API calls as best as it can under a whole different API call system but that's not always as effective and fast and often results in an undefined behavior (Google for err:ntdll:RtlpWaitForCriticalSection - you'll find literally tens of thousands of pages).

"Native" bloody API to Linux. Just like Direct3D. That's just laughable.

Wine loader, my ass. A few lines of code they said:

ls -la wine-8.9/dlls/ntdll/loader.c
-rw-rw-r--. 1 root root 165749 May 26 20:23 wine-8.9/dlls/ntdll/loader.c

The Linux kernel executes PE files directly they said.

No one seems to be even remotely embarrassed.

[oiaohm]

A metric ton of Win32 API calls have no direct alternatives in POSIX and Linux specific syscalls (though Wine strives to be POSIX compatible).

There is a problem here.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_Windows_library_files

NTDLL is not part of Win32. Win32 does not have syscalls and that is by design.

Wine is over SIX MILLION lines of code, that's how Win32 API is native to Linux. Just don't tell this to Alexandre Julliard - he'll have a heart attack.

No you need to speak to Alexandre.

Win32 API can in fact be done Linux as native as windows.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Native_API

Windows Native API is not Win32. Applications can use Windows Native API and Win32 API at same time. Just like you can us windows NT os/2 and posix subsystems and windows native API at the same time.

Wine implements Win32 API and sections of Windows Native API and sections of windows 9x API/ABI.

avis this is one of those fun things. Win32 is technically not native to MS Windows and win32 was designed not to be native from day one. No matter the platform Win32 is a big complex abstraction layer. Remember how back in time you had Windows Nt and Windows 95 with totally different kernels running win32 applications. Really win32 on Linux by wine is really no different to Win32 on Windows Nt based or 9x based OS.

Yes there are a lot of cases in the win32 API/ABI where windows NT kernel designs(as you find in windows 11/12) don't line up because it functionality from 9x. So yes a metric ton of stuff that does not line up with win32 no matter the platform because it is abstraction layer.

Windows has a Native API get use to. Every version of Windows has a native API. 9x and NT native API is very different. Win32 was designed that Microsoft could change kernel designs any time they want to while hopefully not breaking too many applications.

[oiaohm]

First things first, what "VAC documents"? URL please. Authored by Valve please.

Its not a public url. VAC does have signature lists and how to abstract and list the contents the signature list is also on sites how to bipass VAC.(basically how to know if your cheat has been added to VAC detection by watching the VAC signature list) Yes the signature lists has entries for what type each signature is and when it was added. Does include flags for what feature the hypervisor detected by signature has. This is documented just not in a easy to access location.

https://www.google.com/search?q=CSGO+VAC+hypervisor finds nothing, nada, zero, zilch.

This found nothing because its not how it done.

https://github.com/IAmTapped/HyperVisor-Injector

Take this party they are selling a hypervisor solution to defeat particular anti-cheat solution not to cheat a particular game.

Game Cheat development is a multi billion dollar industry.
So how this works.
Person developing a cheat for a game goes and buys anti-cheat bypass solution this include hypervisors yes like the github that party doing hypervisor will do custom code. the packaged up cheat given to parties to sell.
This is not a new path either this started being well known in 2017.

Think about when you bought a game did it bother to tell that it was made with X version of MSVC of course not. Cheat developed for CSGO using a hypervisor to defeat VAC detection is not going to mention it is description it using a hypervisor. Customer wants to know what cheats the cheat allows and that it so called undetectable not the finer details how it done.

Vacnet was developed for CSGO in 2018 for server side detection of cheating.

There is VAC that like anti-virus runs on client computer using signature lists to detect stuff that should not be there this includes a huge number of hypervisors.
Vacnet runs server side looking for actions a human could not or should not be performing. Like tracking target though a wall kind of gives away that you have wall hacks. Hypervisor does not help against Vacnet.

[avis]

qarium

It's astonishing how you've been lying about me and defaming me non-stop for a couple of years now. A person who's "extrem Hostility agaist the Open-Source community" (even heard of spell checking?) has done 1000 times more for Linux and Open Source that you'll ever do.

Also, would be great if you showed a single actual community project where I've been caught being "hostile". No, the Phoronix comments section is not a "community" - it's a cesspool of hatred towards everything that's not open source. Most people here openly hate Microsoft and Windows. Yet here we are discussing ways to run Windows software under Linux. Don't you think it's a little bit insincere maybe? No?